Gatifloxacin versus ceftriaxone for uncomplicated enteric fever in Nepal: an open-label, two-centre, randomised controlled trial. Issue 5 (May 2016)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Gatifloxacin versus ceftriaxone for uncomplicated enteric fever in Nepal: an open-label, two-centre, randomised controlled trial. Issue 5 (May 2016)
- Main Title:
- Gatifloxacin versus ceftriaxone for uncomplicated enteric fever in Nepal: an open-label, two-centre, randomised controlled trial
- Authors:
- Arjyal, Amit
Basnyat, Buddha
Nhan, Ho Thi
Koirala, Samir
Giri, Abhishek
Joshi, Niva
Shakya, Mila
Pathak, Kamal Raj
Mahat, Saruna Pathak
Prajapati, Shanti Pradhan
Adhikari, Nabin
Thapa, Rajkumar
Merson, Laura
Gajurel, Damodar
Lamsal, Kamal
Lamsal, Dinesh
Yadav, Bharat Kumar
Shah, Ganesh
Shrestha, Poojan
Dongol, Sabina
Karkey, Abhilasha
Thompson, Corinne N
Thieu, Nga Tran Vu
Thanh, Duy Pham
Baker, Stephen
Thwaites, Guy E
Wolbers, Marcel
Dolecek, Christiane - Abstract:
- Summary: Background: Because treatment with third-generation cephalosporins is associated with slow clinical improvement and high relapse burden for enteric fever, whereas the fluoroquinolone gatifloxacin is associated with rapid fever clearance and low relapse burden, we postulated that gatifloxacin would be superior to the cephalosporin ceftriaxone in treating enteric fever. Methods: We did an open-label, randomised, controlled, superiority trial at two hospitals in the Kathmandu valley, Nepal. Eligible participants were children (aged 2–13 years) and adult (aged 14–45 years) with criteria for suspected enteric fever (body temperature ≥38·0°C for ≥4 days without a focus of infection). We randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) without stratification to 7 days of either oral gatifloxacin (10 mg/kg per day) or intravenous ceftriaxone (60 mg/kg up to 2 g per day for patients aged 2–13 years, or 2 g per day for patients aged ≥14 years). The randomisation list was computer-generated using blocks of four and six. The primary outcome was a composite of treatment failure, defined as the occurrence of at least one of the following: fever clearance time of more than 7 days after treatment initiation; the need for rescue treatment on day 8; microbiological failure (ie, blood cultures positive for Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi, or Paratyphi A, B, or C) on day 8; or relapse or disease-related complications within 28 days of treatment initiation. We did the analyses in theSummary: Background: Because treatment with third-generation cephalosporins is associated with slow clinical improvement and high relapse burden for enteric fever, whereas the fluoroquinolone gatifloxacin is associated with rapid fever clearance and low relapse burden, we postulated that gatifloxacin would be superior to the cephalosporin ceftriaxone in treating enteric fever. Methods: We did an open-label, randomised, controlled, superiority trial at two hospitals in the Kathmandu valley, Nepal. Eligible participants were children (aged 2–13 years) and adult (aged 14–45 years) with criteria for suspected enteric fever (body temperature ≥38·0°C for ≥4 days without a focus of infection). We randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) without stratification to 7 days of either oral gatifloxacin (10 mg/kg per day) or intravenous ceftriaxone (60 mg/kg up to 2 g per day for patients aged 2–13 years, or 2 g per day for patients aged ≥14 years). The randomisation list was computer-generated using blocks of four and six. The primary outcome was a composite of treatment failure, defined as the occurrence of at least one of the following: fever clearance time of more than 7 days after treatment initiation; the need for rescue treatment on day 8; microbiological failure (ie, blood cultures positive for Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi, or Paratyphi A, B, or C) on day 8; or relapse or disease-related complications within 28 days of treatment initiation. We did the analyses in the modified intention-to-treat population, and subpopulations with either confirmed blood-culture positivity, or blood-culture negativity. The trial was powered to detect an increase of 20% in the risk of failure. This trial was registered atClinicalTrials.gov, numberNCT01421693, and is now closed. Findings: Between Sept 18, 2011, and July 14, 2014, we screened 725 patients for eligibility. On July 14, 2014, the trial was stopped early by the data safety and monitoring board because S Typhi strains with high-level resistance to ciprofloxacin and gatifloxacin had emerged. At this point, 239 were in the modified intention-to-treat population (120 assigned to gatifloxacin, 119 to ceftriaxone). 18 (15%) patients who received gatifloxacin had treatment failure, compared with 19 (16%) who received ceftriaxone (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04 [95% CI 0·55–1·98]; p=0·91). In the culture-confirmed population, 16 (26%) of 62 patients who received gatifloxacin failed treatment, compared with four (7%) of 54 who received ceftriaxone (HR 0·24 [95% CI 0·08–0·73]; p=0·01). Treatment failure was associated with the emergence of S Typhi exhibiting resistance against fluoroquinolones, requiring the trial to be stopped. By contrast, in patients with a negative blood culture, only two (3%) of 58 who received gatifloxacin failed treatment versus 15 (23%) of 65 who received ceftriaxone (HR 7·50 [95% CI 1·71–32·80]; p=0·01). A similar number of non-serious adverse events occurred in each treatment group, and no serious events were reported. Interpretation: Our results suggest that fluoroquinolones should no longer be used for treatment of enteric fever in Nepal. Additionally, under our study conditions, ceftriaxone was suboptimum in a high proportion of patients with culture-negative enteric fever. Since antimicrobials, specifically fluoroquinolones, are one of the only routinely used control measures for enteric fever, the assessment of novel diagnostics, new treatment options, and use of existing vaccines and development of next-generation vaccines are now a high priority. Funding: Wellcome Trust and Li Ka Shing Foundation. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Lancet infectious diseases. Volume 16:Issue 5(2016:May)
- Journal:
- Lancet infectious diseases
- Issue:
- Volume 16:Issue 5(2016:May)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 16, Issue 5 (2016)
- Year:
- 2016
- Volume:
- 16
- Issue:
- 5
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2016-0016-0005-0000
- Page Start:
- 535
- Page End:
- 545
- Publication Date:
- 2016-05
- Subjects:
- Communicable diseases -- Periodicals
Infection -- Periodicals
Communicable Diseases -- Periodicals
Infection -- Periodicals
Maladies infectieuses -- Périodiques
Infection -- Périodiques
Communicable diseases
Infection
Periodicals
616.905 - Journal URLs:
- http://www.mdconsult.com/public/search?search_type=journal&j_sort=pub_date&j_issn=1473-3099 ↗
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/14733099 ↗
http://www.elsevier.com/journals ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00530-7 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 1473-3099
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 5146.082000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 8081.xml