4.6 Article

Ciprofloxacin dry powder for inhalation in non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis: a phase II randomised study

期刊

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
卷 41, 期 5, 页码 1107-1115

出版社

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD
DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00071312

关键词

Antibiotic; bacteria; chronic lung infection; exacerbation; inflammation; Pseudomonas aeruginosa

资金

  1. Bayer Pharma AG, Germany
  2. National Institute for Health Research (NEW) infrastructure in the form of NIHR Biomedical Research Unit (Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK)
  3. Comprehensive Local Research Networks

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This phase II, randomised, double-blind, multicentre study (NCT00930982) investigated the safety and efficacy of ciprofloxacin dry powder for inhalation (DPI) in patients with non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis. Adults who were culture positive for pre-defined potential respiratory pathogens (including Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Haemophilus influenzae) were randomised to ciprofloxacin DPI 32.5 mg or placebo administered twice daily for 28 days (with 56 days of follow-up). Bacterial density in sputum (primary end-point), pulmonary function tests, health-related quality of life and safety were monitored throughout the study. 60 subjects received ciprofloxacin DPI 32.5 mg and 64 received placebo. Subjects on ciprofloxacin DPI had a significant reduction (p<0.001) in total sputum bacterial load at the end of treatment (-3.62 log(10) CFU.g(-1) (range -9.78-5.02 log(10) CFU.g(-1))) compared with placebo (-0.27 log(10) CFU.g(-1) (range -7.96-5.25 log(10) CFU.g(-1))); the counts increased thereafter. In the ciprofloxacin DPI group, 14 (35%) out of 40 subjects reported pathogen eradication at end of treatment versus four (8%) out of 49 in the placebo group (p=0.001). No abnormal safety results were reported and rates of bronchospasm were low. Ciprofloxacin DPI 32.5 mg twice daily for 28 days was well tolerated and achieved significant reductions in total bacterial load compared with placebo in subjects with non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据