Post Hoc Assessment of Time to Clinical Response Among Adults Hospitalized with Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia Who Received Either Lefamulin or Moxifloxacin in 2 Phase III Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Clinical Trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lodise T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7240345 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Post Hoc Assessment of Time to Clinical Response Among Adults Hospitalized with Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia Who Received Either Lefamulin or Moxifloxacin in 2 Phase III Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Clinical Trials.
Lodise Thomas T Colman Sam S Stein Daniel S DS Fitts David D Goldberg Lisa L Alexander Elizabeth E Scoble Patrick J PJ Schranz Jennifer J
Open forum infectious diseases 20200424 5
Time to clinical response, a proxy for hospital "discharge readiness," was compared between CABP inpatients who received lefamulin or moxifloxacin in the Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP) trials. The analysis included 926 inpatients. A short and comparable median time to clinical response (4 days) was observed in both treatment groups. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundInterest in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as part of benefit-risk assessment for new drug approvals is increasing. Lefamulin is the first intravenous (IV) and oral pleuromutilin antibiotic for treatment of adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). Assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was prospectively incorporated in its CABP trials (Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia [LEAP] 1 and 2) via the 12-Item Short-Form Survey (SF-12), a widely used PRO that measures general health status in 8 domains.MethodsHRQoL was evaluated by SF-12 at baseline and test of cure (TOC; 5-10 days after the last study drug dose) in patients who received lefamulin or moxifloxacin in LEAP 1 (IV/oral treatment) and LEAP 2 (oral-only treatment). SF-12 outcomes included the 8 domains, physical component and mental component summary scores, and the Short-Form Six-Dimension health utility score.ResultsAnalysis included 1215 patients (lefamulin: n = 607; moxifloxacin: n = 608). At baseline, all mean SF-12 scores in both treatment groups were well below the United States reference mean. Clinically meaningful and significant improvements from baseline to TOC were observed in all SF-12 scores. No significant differences in mean score improvements from baseline to TOC between treatment groups were observed. SF-12 score improvements at TOC across predefined subgroups were comparable between treatment groups.ConclusionsResults indicate that adults with CABP experienced comparable HRQoL improvements with lefamulin relative to moxifloxacin, and treatment with either agent resulted in returns to population norm HRQoL levels. These data suggest that lefamulin is a potential alternative to moxifloxacin for treatment of adults with CABP.
| S-EPMC7314585 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceNew antibacterials are needed to treat community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) because of growing antibacterial resistance and safety concerns with standard care.ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of a 5-day oral lefamulin regimen in patients with CABP.Design, setting, and participantsA phase 3, noninferiority randomized clinical trial conducted at 99 sites in 19 countries that included adults aged 18 years or older with a Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk class of II, III, or IV; radiographically documented pneumonia; acute illness; 3 or more CABP symptoms; and 2 or more vital sign abnormalities. The first patient visit was on August 30, 2016, and patients were followed up for 30 days; the final follow-up visit was on January 2, 2018.InterventionsPatients were randomized 1:1 to receive oral lefamulin (600 mg every 12 hours for 5 days; n = 370) or moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 hours for 7 days; n = 368).Main outcomes and measuresThe US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) primary end point was early clinical response at 96 hours (within a 24-hour window) after the first dose of either study drug in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (all randomized patients). Responders were defined as alive, showing improvement in 2 or more of the 4 CABP symptoms, having no worsening of any CABP symptoms, and not receiving any nonstudy antibacterial drug for current CABP episode. The European Medicines Agency coprimary end points (FDA secondary end points) were investigator assessment of clinical response at test of cure (5-10 days after last dose) in the modified ITT population and in the clinically evaluable population. The noninferiority margin was 10% for early clinical response and investigator assessment of clinical response.ResultsAmong 738 randomized patients (mean age, 57.5 years; 351 women [47.6%]; 360 had a PORT risk class of III or IV [48.8%]), 707 (95.8%) completed the trial. Early clinical response rates were 90.8% with lefamulin and 90.8% with moxifloxacin (difference, 0.1% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -4.4% to ∞]). Rates of investigator assessment of clinical response success were 87.5% with lefamulin and 89.1% with moxifloxacin in the modified ITT population (difference, -1.6% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -6.3% to ∞]) and 89.7% and 93.6%, respectively, in the clinically evaluable population (difference, -3.9% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -8.2% to ∞]) at test of cure. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were gastrointestinal (diarrhea: 45/368 [12.2%] in lefamulin group and 4/368 [1.1%] in moxifloxacin group; nausea: 19/368 [5.2%] in lefamulin group and 7/368 [1.9%] in moxifloxacin group).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with CABP, 5-day oral lefamulin was noninferior to 7-day oral moxifloxacin with respect to early clinical response at 96 hours after first dose.Trial registrationsClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02813694; European Clinical Trials Identifier: 2015-004782-92.
| S-EPMC6865224 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLefamulin, a first-in-class pleuromutilin antibiotic approved for intravenous and oral use in adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP), was noninferior to moxifloxacin in the Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP) 1 intravenous-to-oral switch study and the LEAP 2 oral-only study. Using pooled LEAP 1/2 data, we examined lefamulin efficacy/safety overall and within subgroups of patients presenting with comorbidities typical in CABP management.MethodsIn LEAP 1, adults with CABP were randomized to receive intravenous lefamulin (150 mg every 12 h) for 5‒7 days or moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 h) for 7 days, with optional intravenous-to-oral switch if predefined improvement criteria were met. In LEAP 2, adults with CABP were randomized to receive oral lefamulin (600 mg every 12 h) for 5 days or moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 h) for 7 days. Both studies assessed early clinical response (ECR) at 96 ± 24 h after first study drug dose and investigator assessment of clinical response (IACR) at test-of-cure (5‒10 days after last dose). Pooled analyses of the overall population used a 10% noninferiority margin.ResultsLefamulin (n = 646) was noninferior to moxifloxacin (n = 643) for ECR (89.3% vs 90.5%, respectively; difference - 1.1%; 95% CI - 4.4 to 2.2); IACR success rates at test-of-cure were similarly high (≥ 85.0%). High efficacy with both lefamulin and moxifloxacin was also demonstrated across all well-represented patient subgroups, including those with advanced age, diabetes mellitus, a history of cardiovascular diseases (e.g., hypertension, congestive heart failure, or arrhythmia) or chronic lung diseases (e.g., asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), elevated liver enzymes, or mild-to-moderate renal dysfunction. No new safety signals were identified.ConclusionsLefamulin may provide a valuable intravenous/oral monotherapy alternative to fluoroquinolones or macrolides for empiric treatment of patients with CABP, including cases of patients at risk for poor outcomes due to age or various comorbidities.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov LEAP 1 (NCT02559310; Registration Date: 24/09/2015) and LEAP 2 (NCT02813694; Registration Date: 27/06/2016).
| S-EPMC8105923 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Abstract Background Lefamulin, a first in class pleuromutilin, is being developed as an IV and oral formulation for treating CABP. The second of 2 phase 3 Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia studies, LEAP 2 (NCT02813694; EudraCT 2015-004782-92) evaluating an oral 5-day regimen, is presented here. LEAP 2 complements the positive results from LEAP 1, an IV-to-oral switch study in patients with PORT Risk Class III-V. Methods In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double dummy study, patients with CABP were randomized to oral lefamulin 600 mg q12h for 5 days or moxifloxacin 400 mg q24h for 7 days. Adults with PORT Risk Class II–IV were eligible (?50% were to have PORT Risk Class III or IV). The US FDA primary endpoint was early clinical response (ECR) (96 ± 24 h after first dose) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. The EMA coprimary endpoints (FDA secondary endpoints) were investigator assessment of clinical response (IACR) at test of cure (TOC) (5–10 days after last dose) in the modified ITT (mITT) and clinically evaluable (CE) TOC populations. For FDA and EMA endpoints, noninferiority was concluded if the lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI was greater than –10% (Figure 1). Results A total of 738 patients were randomized (n = 370 lefamulin, n = 368 moxifloxacin). Five days of lefamulin was noninferior to 7 days of moxifloxacin for both FDA and EMA primary endpoints (Figure 2). Lefamulin was efficacious regardless of PORT Risk Class (ECR responder rates for PORT II, III, and IV: 91.8% [168/183], 91.0% [132/145], and 85.0% [34/40] for lefamulin; 93.1% [176/189], 90.2% [120/133], and 85.7% [36/42] for moxifloxacin, respectively). Both agents demonstrated similar ECR responder and IACR success rates across baseline CABP pathogens. Rates of serious adverse events (AEs) and AEs leading to discontinuation were low and similar between groups. Most frequently reported AEs were gastrointestinal, the majority of mild severity with few discontinuations. Conclusion Five-day oral lefamulin demonstrated noninferiority for both FDA and EMA efficacy endpoints vs. 7-day oral moxifloxacin. Both agents were safe and generally well tolerated. Lefamulin shows promise as an oral monotherapy with a complete spectrum of antibacterial activity against CABP pathogens. Disclosures E. Alexander, Nabriva: Employee and Shareholder, Salary and Stock Options. L. Goldberg, Nabriva: Employee, Employee Stock Options and Salary. A. Das, Achaogen: Consultant, Consulting fee. Cempra: Consultant, Consulting fee. Contrafect: Consultant, Consulting fee. Paratek: Consultant, Consulting fee. Tetraphase: Consultant, Consulting fee. Wockhardt: Consultant, Consulting fee. Theravance: Consultant, Consulting fee. Zavante: Consultant, Consulting fee. Utility: Consultant, Consulting fee. Former Employee of Nabriva: Employee, Salary. Nabriva: Consultant, Consulting fee. G. J. Moran, Nabriva: Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee. C. Sandrock, Nabriva: Consultant, Consulting fee. L. B. Gasink, Former Employee of Nabriva: Employee, Salary. P. Spera, Nabriva: Employee and Shareholder, Salary. C. Sweeney, Nabriva: Employee, Employee Stock Options and Salary. S. Paukner, Nabriva: Employee and Shareholder, Salary. W. W. Wicha, Nabriva: Employee and Shareholder, Salary. J. Schranz, Nabriva: Employee and Shareholder, Salary.
| S-EPMC6253245 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Lefamulin, a pleuromutilin antibiotic, is active against pathogens commonly causing community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). The Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP 1) study was a global noninferiority trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lefamulin for the treatment of CABP. METHODS:In this double-blind study, adults with CABP of Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team risk class ?III were randomized 1:1 to receive lefamulin at 150 mg intravenously (IV) every 12 hours or moxifloxacin at 400 mg IV every 24 hours. After 6 doses, patients could be switched to an oral study drug if prespecified improvement criteria were met. If methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus was suspected, either linezolid or placebo was added to moxifloxacin or lefamulin, respectively. The US Food and Drug Administration primary endpoint was an early clinical response (ECR) 96 ± 24 hours after the first dose of the study drug in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (noninferiority margin, 12.5%). The European Medicines Agency co-primary endpoints were an investigator assessment of clinical response (IACR) 5-10 days after the last dose of the study drug in the modified ITT (mITT) and clinically evaluable (CE) populations (noninferiority margin, 10%). RESULTS:There were 551 patients randomized (n = 276 lefamulin; n = 275 moxifloxacin). Lefamulin was noninferior to moxifloxacin for ECR (87.3% vs 90.2%, respectively; difference -2.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] g -8.5 to 2.8) and IACR (mITT, 81.7% vs 84.2%, respectively; difference -2.6%, 95% CI -8.9 to 3.9; CE, 86.9% vs 89.4%, respectively; difference -2.5%, 95% CI -8.4 to 3.4). Rates of study drug discontinuation due to treatment-emergent adverse events were 2.9% for lefamulin and 4.4% for moxifloxacin. CONCLUSIONS:Lefamulin was noninferior to moxifloxacin for the primary efficacy endpoints and was generally safe and well tolerated. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION:NCT02559310.
| S-EPMC6853694 | biostudies-literature
Project description:When antimicrobials are used empirically, pathogen MICs equal to clinical breakpoints or epidemiological cutoff values must be considered. This is to ensure that the most resistant pathogen subpopulation is appropriately targeted to prevent emergence of resistance. Accordingly, we determined the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of moxifloxacin at 400 mg/day in 18 patients treated empirically for community-acquired pneumonia. We developed a population pharmacokinetic model to assess the potential efficacy of moxifloxacin and to simulate the maximal MICs for which recommended pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) estimates are obtained. Moxifloxacin plasma concentrations were determined the day after therapy initiation using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography. Peak drug concentrations (Cmax) and area under the free drug concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (fAUC0-24) values predicted for each patient were evaluated against epidemiological cutoff MIC values for Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, and Legionella pneumophila. PK-PD targets adopted were a Cmax/MIC of ?12.2 for all pathogens, an fAUC0-24/MIC of >34 for S. pneumoniae, and an fAUC0-24/MIC of >75 for H. influenzae and L. pneumophila. Individual predicted estimates for Cmax/MIC and fAUC0-24/MIC as well as simulated maximal MICs resulting in target attainment for oral and intravenous administration of the drug were suitable for S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae but not for L. pneumophila. These results indicate that caution must be taken when moxifloxacin is used as monotherapy to treat community-acquired pneumonia caused by L. pneumophila. In conclusion, this report reveals key information relevant to the empirical treatment of community-acquired pneumonia while highlighting the robust and flexible nature of this population pharmacokinetic model to predict therapeutic success. (Clinical Trials Registration no. NCT01983839.).
| S-EPMC4356773 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A new quinolone, zabofloxacin, has now been developed; hence, a non-inferiority trial is needed to compare this new compound with another widely used quinolone to examine its efficacy and safety for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. This was a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, controlled, parallel-group, Phase III, non-inferiority clinical trial designed to compare oral zabofloxacin (367 mg once daily for 5 days) with moxifloxacin (400 mg once daily for 7 days) for the treatment of patients with COPD exacerbation. In all, 345 COPD patients with a moderate COPD exacerbation were enrolled in the study via the outpatient clinics at 31 university hospitals. Clinical per protocol analysis revealed that the clinical cure rate for zabofloxacin was 86.7% and that for moxifloxacin was 86.3% (the rate difference, 0.4%; 95% confidence interval, -7.7%-8.6%). Intention-to-treat analysis revealed clinical cure rates of 77.1% and 77.3% (difference, -0.2%; 95% confidence interval, -9.0%-8.8%), respectively. These results confirm that zabofloxacin is not inferior to moxifloxacin. The favorable microbiological response rate for zabofloxacin was 67.4% and that for moxifloxacin was 79.5% (P=0.22). Patients in the zabofloxacin group showed better patient-oriented outcomes, as measured by EXAcerbations of Chronic Pulmonary Disease Tool-Patient-Reported Outcome and the COPD assessment test scores, than patients in the moxifloxacin group. Adverse drug reactions related to zabofloxacin occurred in 9.7% of cases and those related to moxifloxacin occurred in 9.6% of cases (P=0.97). The dropout rate due to adverse events was 0% (0/175) in the zabofloxacin group and 1.8% (3/167) in the moxifloxacin group (P=0.12). Oral zabofloxacin (367 mg once daily for 5 days) was not inferior to oral moxifloxacin (400 mg once daily for 7 days) for the treatment of patients with COPD exacerbation.
| S-EPMC4622522 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Moxifloxacin and levofloxacin are currently recommended as empirical initial treatment options for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in China by clinical guidelines and widely used in clinical settings. Several clinical outcomes comparing the efficacy and safety profiles of moxifloxacin versus levofloxacin through a meta-analysis were reported in paper 'Clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of moxifloxacin as initial treatment for community-acquired pneumonia: a meta-analysis and economic evaluation'. In this dataset, we aimed at investigating more clinical endpoints comparing the efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin and levofloxacin in the treatment of CAP.
| S-EPMC8455983 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGuidelines recommend macrolides and fluoroquinolones in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), but their use has been associated with cardiac events. We quantified associations between macrolide and fluoroquinolone use and cardiac events in patients hospitalized with CAP in non-ICU wards.MethodsThis was a post-hoc analysis of a cluster-randomized trial as a cohort study; including patients with a working diagnosis of CAP admitted to non-ICU wards without a cardiac event on admission. We calculated cause-specific hazard ratio's (HR's) for effects of time-dependent macrolide and fluoroquinolone exposure as compared to beta-lactam monotherapy on cardiac events, defined as new or worsening heart failure, arrhythmia, or myocardial ischemia during hospitalization.ResultsCardiac events occurred in 146 (6.9%) of 2107 patients, including heart failure (n = 101, 4.8%), arrhythmia (n = 53, 2.5%), and myocardial ischemia (n = 14, 0.7%). These occurred in 11 of 207 (5.3%), 18 of 250 (7.2%), and 31 of 277 (11.2%) patients exposed to azithromycin, clarithromycin, and erythromycin for at least one day, and in 9 of 234 (3.8%), 5 of 194 (2.6%), and 23 of 566 (4.1%) exposed to ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and moxifloxacin, respectively. HR's for erythromycin, compared to beta-lactam monotherapy, on any cardiac event and heart failure were 1.60 (95% CI 1.09;2.36) and 1.89 (95% CI 1.22;2.91), respectively. HR's for levofloxacin and moxifloxacin, compared to beta-lactam monotherapy, on any cardiac event were 0.40 (95% CI 0.18;0.87)and 0.56 (95% CI 0.36;0.87), respectively. Findings remained consistent after adjustment for confounders and/or in a sensitivity analysis of radiologically confirmed CAP (n = 1604, 76.1%).ConclusionsAmong patients with CAP hospitalized to non-ICU wards, erythromycin use was associated with a 68% increased risk of hospital-acquired cardiac events, mainly heart failure. Levofloxacin and moxifloxacin were associated with a lower risk of heart failure. Although our study does not fully exclude confounding bias, findings remained largely unchanged in crude, adjusted, and sensitivity analyses. These findings may caution the use of erythromycin as empirical therapy in these patients.Trial registrationThe original trial was retrospectively registered under ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01660204 on August 8th, 2012.
| S-EPMC6322338 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRhinoviruses (RVs) are ubiquitous respiratory pathogens that often cause mild or subclinical infections. Molecular detection of RVs from the upper respiratory tract can be prolonged, complicating etiologic association in persons with severe lower respiratory tract infections. Little is known about RV viremia and its value as a diagnostic indicator in persons hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).MethodsSera from RV-positive children and adults hospitalized with CAP were tested for RV by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. Rhinovirus species and type were determined by partial genome sequencing.ResultsOverall, 57 of 570 (10%) RV-positive patients were viremic, and all were children aged <10 years (n = 57/375; 15.2%). Although RV-A was the most common RV species detected from respiratory specimens (48.8%), almost all viremias were RV-C (98.2%). Viremic patients had fewer codetected pathogens and were more likely to have chest retractions, wheezing, and a history of underlying asthma/reactive airway disease than patients without viremia.ConclusionsMore than 1 out of 7 RV-infected children aged <10 years hospitalized with CAP were viremic. In contrast with other RV species, RV-C infections were highly associated with viremia and were usually the only respiratory pathogen identified, suggesting that RV-C viremia may be an important diagnostic indicator in pediatric pneumonia.
| S-EPMC5724377 | biostudies-literature