4.5 Article

Effect and Safety of Meropenem-Vaborbactam versus Best-Available Therapy in Patients with Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Infections: The TANGO II Randomized Clinical Trial

Journal

INFECTIOUS DISEASES AND THERAPY
Volume 7, Issue 4, Pages 439-455

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s40121-018-0214-1

Keywords

Best available therapy; Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae; Meropenem-vaborbactam; Randomized clinical trial; TANGO II

Funding

  1. Medicines Company
  2. Department of Health and Human Services
  3. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response
  4. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) [HHSO100201400002C]
  5. Rempex Pharmaceuticals
  6. Medicines Company [HHSO100201600026C]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Treatment options for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections are limited and CRE infections remain associated with high clinical failure and mortality rates, particularly in vulnerable patient populations. A Phase 3, multinational, open-label, randomized controlled trial (TANGO II) was conducted from 2014 to 2017 to evaluate the efficacy/safety of meropenem-vaborbactam monotherapy versus best available therapy (BAT) for CRE. Methods: A total of 77 patients with confirmed/suspected CRE infection (bacteremia, hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal infection, complicated urinary tract infection/acute pyelonephritis) were randomized, and 47 with confirmed CRE infection formed the primary analysis population (microbiologic-CRE-modified intent-to-treat, mCRE-MITT). Eligible patients were randomized 2:1 to meropenem-vaborbactam (2g/2g over 3h, q8h for 7-14days) or BAT (mono/combination therapy with polymyxins, carbapenems, aminoglycosides, tigecycline; or ceftazidime-avibactam alone). Efficacy endpoints included clinical cure, Day-28 all-cause mortality, microbiologic cure, and overall success (clinical cure+microbiologic eradication). Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs) and laboratory findings. Results: Within the mCRE-MITT population, cure rates were 65.6% (21/32) and 33.3% (5/15) [95% confidence interval (CI) of difference, 3.3% to 61.3%; P=0.03)] at End of Treatment and 59.4% (19/32) and 26.7% (4/15) (95% CI of difference, 4.6% to 60.8%; P=0.02) at Test of Cure;.Day-28 all-cause mortality was 15.6% (5/32) and 33.3% (5/15) (95% CI of difference, - 44.7% to 9.3%) for meropenem-vaborbactam versus BAT, respectively. Treatment-related AEs and renal-related AEs were 24.0% (12/50) and 4.0% (2/50) for meropenem-vaborbactam versus 44.0% (11/25) and 24.0% (6/25) for BAT. Exploratory risk-benefit analyses of composite clinical failure or nephrotoxicity favored meropenem-vaborbactam versus BAT (31.3% [10/32] versus 80.0% [12/15]; 95% CI of difference, - 74.6% to - 22.9%; P<0.001). Conclusions: Monotherapy with meropenem-vaborbactam for CRE infection was associated with increased clinical cure, decreased mortality, and reduced nephrotoxicity compared with BAT.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available