Efficacy and safety of tigecycline monotherapy vs. imipenem/cilastatin in Chinese patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections: a randomized controlled trial
Open Access
- 21 July 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Infectious Diseases
- Vol. 10 (1), 217
- https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-10-217
Abstract
Tigecycline, a first-in-class broad-spectrum glycylcycline antibiotic, has broad-spectrum in vitro activity against bacteria commonly encountered in complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs), including aerobic and facultative Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and anaerobic bacteria. In the current trial, tigecycline was evaluated for safety and efficacy vs. imipenem/cilastatin in hospitalized Chinese patients with cIAIs. In this phase 3, multicenter, open-label study, patients were randomly assigned to receive IV tigecycline or imipenem/cilastatin for ≤2 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoints were clinical response at the test-of-cure visit (12-37 days after therapy) for the microbiologic modified intent-to-treat and microbiologically evaluable populations. Because the study was not powered to demonstrate non-inferiority between tigecycline and imipenem/cilastatin, no formal statistical analysis was performed. Two-sided 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the response rates in each treatment group and for differences between treatment groups for descriptive purposes. One hundred ninety-nine patients received ≥1 dose of study drug and comprised the modified intent-to-treat population. In the microbiologically evaluable population, 86.5% (45 of 52) of tigecycline- and 97.9% (47 of 48) of imipenem/cilastatin-treated patients were cured at the test-of-cure assessment (12-37 days after therapy); in the microbiologic modified intent-to-treat population, cure rates were 81.7% (49 of 60) and 90.9% (50 of 55), respectively. The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 80.4% for tigecycline vs. 53.9% after imipenem/cilastatin therapy (P < 0.001), primarily due to gastrointestinal-related events, especially nausea (21.6% vs. 3.9%; P < 0.001) and vomiting (12.4% vs. 2.0%; P = 0.005). Clinical cure rates for tigecycline were consistent with those found in global cIAI studies. The overall safety profile was also consistent with that observed in global studies of tigecycline for treatment of cIAI, as well as that observed in analyses of Chinese patients in those studies; no novel trends were observed. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00136201Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Tigecycline activity tested against 11808 bacterial pathogens recently collected from US medical centersDiagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, 2008
- Empiric treatment options in the management of complicated intra-abdominal infections.Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, 2007
- Tigecycline: A Critical AnalysisClinical Infectious Diseases, 2006
- In vitro activity of tigecycline against 6792 Gram-negative and Gram-positive clinical isolates from the global Tigecycline Evaluation and Surveillance Trial (TEST Program, 2004)Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, 2005
- Effect of inappropriate initial empiric antibiotic therapy on outcome of patients with community-acquired intra-abdominal infections requiring surgeryEuropean Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, 2004
- Guidelines for the Selection of Anti-infective Agents for Complicated Intra-abdominal InfectionsClinical Infectious Diseases, 2003
- Intensive care unit management of intra-abdominal infectionCritical Care Medicine, 2003
- The Surgical Infection Society Guidelines on Antimicrobial Therapy for Intra-Abdominal Infections: Evidence for the RecommendationsSurgical Infections, 2002
- New developments in tetracycline antibiotics: glycylcyclines and tetracycline efflux pump inhibitorsDrug Resistance Updates, 2002
- Tertiary Peritonitis: Clinical Features of a Complex Nosocomial InfectionWorld Journal of Surgery, 1998