4.7 Article

Ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Journal

JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY
Volume 71, Issue 4, Pages 862-870

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkv415

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. AstraZeneca

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We conducted a meta-analysis of clinical trials of adults hospitalized with pneumonia outcomes research team (PORT) risk class 3-4 community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) receiving ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone. Three Phase III trials (clinicaltrials.gov registration numbers NCT00621504, NCT00509106 and NCT01371838) including 1916 hospitalized patients with CAP randomized 1:1 to empirical ceftaroline fosamil (600 mg every 12 h) or ceftriaxone (1-2 g every 24 h) for 5-7 days were included in the meta-analysis. Primary outcome was clinical response at the test-of-cure visit (8-15 days after end of treatment) in the PORT risk class 3-4 modified ITT (MITT) and clinically evaluable (CE) populations. Data were tested for heterogeneity (chi(2) test) and, if not significant, results were pooled and OR and 95% CI constructed. A logistic regression analysis assessed factors impacting cure rate and treatment interactions. Clinical cure rates in each trial consistently favoured ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone, with no evidence of heterogeneity. In the meta-analysis, ceftaroline fosamil was superior to ceftriaxone in the MITT (OR: 1.66; 95% CI 1.34, 2.06; P<0.001) and CE (OR: 1.65; 95% CI 1.26, 2.16; P < 0.001) populations. Results were consistent across various patient- and disease-related factors including patients' age and PORT score. Prior antimicrobial use within 96 h of starting study treatment was associated with diminished differences in cure rates between treatments. Ceftaroline fosamil was superior to ceftriaxone for empirical treatment of adults hospitalized with CAP. Receipt of prior antimicrobial therapy appeared to diminish the observed treatment effect.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available