Ertapenem clinical studies: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "__NOTOC__ {{Ertapenem}}{{CMG}} ====Adults==== Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infe...") |
Gerald Chi (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
{{Ertapenem}} | |||
{{CMG}}; {{AE}} {{SS}} | |||
==Clinical Studies== | |||
====Adults==== | ====Adults==== | ||
Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections | ======Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections====== | ||
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections in a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours) for 5 to 14 days and enrolled 665 patients with localized complicated appendicitis, and any other complicated intra-abdominal infection including colonic, small intestinal, and biliary infections and generalized peritonitis. The combined clinical and microbiologic success rates in the microbiologically evaluable population at 4 to 6 weeks posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 83.6% (163/195) for ertapenem and 80.4% (152/189) for piperacillin/tazobactam. | Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections in a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours) for 5 to 14 days and enrolled 665 patients with localized complicated appendicitis, and any other complicated intra-abdominal infection including colonic, small intestinal, and biliary infections and generalized peritonitis. The combined clinical and microbiologic success rates in the microbiologically evaluable population at 4 to 6 weeks posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 83.6% (163/195) for ertapenem and 80.4% (152/189) for piperacillin/tazobactam. | ||
Complicated Skin and Skin Structure Infections | ======Complicated Skin and Skin Structure Infections====== | ||
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections in a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours) for 7 to 14 days and enrolled 540 patients including patients with deep soft tissue abscess, posttraumatic wound infection and cellulitis with purulent drainage. The clinical success rates at 10 to 21 days posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 83.9% (141/168) for ertapenem and 85.3% (145/170) for piperacillin/tazobactam. | Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections in a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours) for 7 to 14 days and enrolled 540 patients including patients with deep soft tissue abscess, posttraumatic wound infection and cellulitis with purulent drainage. The clinical success rates at 10 to 21 days posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 83.9% (141/168) for ertapenem and 85.3% (145/170) for piperacillin/tazobactam. | ||
Diabetic Foot Infections | ======Diabetic Foot Infections====== | ||
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of diabetic foot infections without concomitant osteomyelitis in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours). Test-of-cure was defined as clinical response between treatment groups in the clinically evaluable population at the 10-day posttherapy follow-up visit. The trial included 295 patients randomized to ertapenem and 291 patients to piperacillin/tazobactam. Both regimens allowed the option to switch to oral amoxicillin/clavulanate for a total of 5 to 28 days of treatment (parenteral and oral). All patients were eligible to receive appropriate adjunctive treatment methods, such as debridement, as is typically required in the treatment of diabetic foot infections, and most patients received these treatments. Patients with suspected osteomyelitis could be enrolled if all the infected bone was removed within 2 days of initiation of study therapy, and preferably within the prestudy period. Investigators had the option to add open-label vancomycin if enterococci or methicillin-resistantStaphylococcus aureus (MRSA) were among the pathogens isolated or if patients had a history of MRSA infection and additional therapy was indicated in the opinion of the investigator. Two hundred and four (204) patients randomized to ertapenem and 202 patients randomized to piperacillin/tazobactam were clinically evaluable. The clinical success rates at 10 days posttherapy were 75.0% (153/204) for ertapenem and 70.8% (143/202) for piperacillin/tazobactam. | Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of diabetic foot infections without concomitant osteomyelitis in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours). Test-of-cure was defined as clinical response between treatment groups in the clinically evaluable population at the 10-day posttherapy follow-up visit. The trial included 295 patients randomized to ertapenem and 291 patients to piperacillin/tazobactam. Both regimens allowed the option to switch to oral amoxicillin/clavulanate for a total of 5 to 28 days of treatment (parenteral and oral). All patients were eligible to receive appropriate adjunctive treatment methods, such as debridement, as is typically required in the treatment of diabetic foot infections, and most patients received these treatments. Patients with suspected osteomyelitis could be enrolled if all the infected bone was removed within 2 days of initiation of study therapy, and preferably within the prestudy period. Investigators had the option to add open-label vancomycin if enterococci or methicillin-resistantStaphylococcus aureus (MRSA) were among the pathogens isolated or if patients had a history of MRSA infection and additional therapy was indicated in the opinion of the investigator. Two hundred and four (204) patients randomized to ertapenem and 202 patients randomized to piperacillin/tazobactam were clinically evaluable. The clinical success rates at 10 days posttherapy were 75.0% (153/204) for ertapenem and 70.8% (143/202) for piperacillin/tazobactam. | ||
Community Acquired Pneumonia | ======Community Acquired Pneumonia====== | ||
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of community acquired pneumonia in two randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trials. Both trials compared ertapenem (1 g parenterally once a day) with ceftriaxone (1 g parenterally once a day) and enrolled a total of 866 patients. Both regimens allowed the option to switch to oral amoxicillin/clavulanate for a total of 10 to 14 days of treatment (parenteral and oral). In the first trial the primary efficacy parameter was the clinical success rate in the clinically evaluable population and success rates were 92.3% (168/182) for ertapenem and 91.0% (183/201) for ceftriaxone at 7 to 14 days posttherapy (test-of-cure). In the second trial the primary efficacy parameter was the clinical success rate in the microbiologically evaluable population and success rates were 91% (91/100) for ertapenem and 91.8% (45/49) for ceftriaxone at 7 to 14 days posttherapy (test-of-cure). | Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of community acquired pneumonia in two randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trials. Both trials compared ertapenem (1 g parenterally once a day) with ceftriaxone (1 g parenterally once a day) and enrolled a total of 866 patients. Both regimens allowed the option to switch to oral amoxicillin/clavulanate for a total of 10 to 14 days of treatment (parenteral and oral). In the first trial the primary efficacy parameter was the clinical success rate in the clinically evaluable population and success rates were 92.3% (168/182) for ertapenem and 91.0% (183/201) for ceftriaxone at 7 to 14 days posttherapy (test-of-cure). In the second trial the primary efficacy parameter was the clinical success rate in the microbiologically evaluable population and success rates were 91% (91/100) for ertapenem and 91.8% (45/49) for ceftriaxone at 7 to 14 days posttherapy (test-of-cure). | ||
Complicated Urinary Tract Infections Including Pyelonephritis | ======Complicated Urinary Tract Infections Including Pyelonephritis====== | ||
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections including pyelonephritis in two randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trials. Both trials compared ertapenem (1 g parenterally once a day) with ceftriaxone (1 g parenterally once a day) and enrolled a total of 850 patients. Both regimens allowed the option to switch to oral ciprofloxacin (500 mg twice daily) for a total of 10 to 14 days of treatment (parenteral and oral). The microbiological success rates (combined trials) at 5 to 9 days posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 89.5% (229/256) for ertapenem and 91.1% (204/224) for ceftriaxone. | Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections including pyelonephritis in two randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trials. Both trials compared ertapenem (1 g parenterally once a day) with ceftriaxone (1 g parenterally once a day) and enrolled a total of 850 patients. Both regimens allowed the option to switch to oral ciprofloxacin (500 mg twice daily) for a total of 10 to 14 days of treatment (parenteral and oral). The microbiological success rates (combined trials) at 5 to 9 days posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 89.5% (229/256) for ertapenem and 91.1% (204/224) for ceftriaxone. | ||
Acute Pelvic Infections Including Endomyometritis, Septic Abortion and Post-Surgical Gynecological Infections | ======Acute Pelvic Infections Including Endomyometritis, Septic Abortion and Post-Surgical Gynecological Infections====== | ||
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of acute pelvic infections in a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours) for 3 to 10 days and enrolled 412 patients including 350 patients with obstetric/postpartum infections and 45 patients with septic abortion. The clinical success rates in the clinically evaluable population at 2 to 4 weeks posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 93.9% (153/163) for ertapenem and 91.5% (140/153) for piperacillin/tazobactam. | Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of acute pelvic infections in a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours) for 3 to 10 days and enrolled 412 patients including 350 patients with obstetric/postpartum infections and 45 patients with septic abortion. The clinical success rates in the clinically evaluable population at 2 to 4 weeks posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 93.9% (153/163) for ertapenem and 91.5% (140/153) for piperacillin/tazobactam. | ||
Prophylaxis of Surgical Site Infections Following Elective Colorectal Surgery | ======Prophylaxis of Surgical Site Infections Following Elective Colorectal Surgery====== | ||
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for prophylaxis of surgical site infection following elective colorectal surgery in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared a single intravenous dose of ertapenem (1 g) versus cefotetan (2 g) administered over 30 minutes, 1 hour before elective colorectal surgery. Test-of-prophylaxis was defined as no evidence of surgical site infection, post-operative anastomotic leak, or unexplained antibiotic use in the clinically evaluable population up to and including at the 4-week posttreatment follow-up visit. The trial included 500 patients randomized to ertapenem and 502 patients randomized to cefotetan. The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population consisted of 451 ertapenem patients and 450 cefotetan patients and included all patients who were randomized, treated, and underwent elective colorectal surgery with adequate bowel preparation. The clinically evaluable population was a subset of the MITT population and consisted of patients who received a complete dose of study therapy no more than two hours prior to surgical incision and no more than six hours before surgical closure. Clinically evaluable patients had sufficient information to determine outcome at the 4-week follow-up assessment and had no confounding factors that interfered with the assessment of that outcome. Examples of confounding factors included prior or concomitant antibiotic violations, the need for a second surgical procedure during the study period, and identification of a distant site infection with concomitant antibiotic administration and no evidence of subsequent wound infection. Three-hundred forty-six (346) patients randomized to ertapenem and 339 patients randomized to cefotetan were clinically evaluable. The prophylactic success rates at 4 weeks posttreatment in the clinically evaluable population were 70.5% (244/346) for ertapenem and 57.2% (194/339) for cefotetan (difference 13.3%, [95% C.I.: 6.1, 20.4], p<0.001). Prophylaxis failure due to surgical site infections occurred in 18.2% (63/346) ertapenem patients and 31.0% (105/339) cefotetan patients. Post-operative anastomotic leak occurred in 2.9% (10/346) ertapenem patients and 4.1% (14/339) cefotetan patients. Unexplained antibiotic use occurred in 8.4% (29/346) ertapenem patients and 7.7% (26/339) cefotetan patients. Though patient numbers were small in some subgroups, in general, clinical response rates by age, gender, and race were consistent with the results found in the clinically evaluable population. In the MITT analysis, the prophylactic success rates at 4 weeks posttreatment were 58.3% (263/451) for ertapenem and 48.9% (220/450) for cefotetan (difference 9.4%, [95% C.I.: 2.9, 15.9], p=0.002). A statistically significant difference favoring ertapenem over cefotetan with respect to the primary endpoint has been observed at a significance level of 5% in this trial. A second adequate and well-controlled trial to confirm these findings has not been conducted; therefore, the clinical superiority of ertapenem over cefotetan has not been demonstrated. | Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for prophylaxis of surgical site infection following elective colorectal surgery in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared a single intravenous dose of ertapenem (1 g) versus cefotetan (2 g) administered over 30 minutes, 1 hour before elective colorectal surgery. Test-of-prophylaxis was defined as no evidence of surgical site infection, post-operative anastomotic leak, or unexplained antibiotic use in the clinically evaluable population up to and including at the 4-week posttreatment follow-up visit. The trial included 500 patients randomized to ertapenem and 502 patients randomized to cefotetan. The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population consisted of 451 ertapenem patients and 450 cefotetan patients and included all patients who were randomized, treated, and underwent elective colorectal surgery with adequate bowel preparation. The clinically evaluable population was a subset of the MITT population and consisted of patients who received a complete dose of study therapy no more than two hours prior to surgical incision and no more than six hours before surgical closure. Clinically evaluable patients had sufficient information to determine outcome at the 4-week follow-up assessment and had no confounding factors that interfered with the assessment of that outcome. Examples of confounding factors included prior or concomitant antibiotic violations, the need for a second surgical procedure during the study period, and identification of a distant site infection with concomitant antibiotic administration and no evidence of subsequent wound infection. Three-hundred forty-six (346) patients randomized to ertapenem and 339 patients randomized to cefotetan were clinically evaluable. The prophylactic success rates at 4 weeks posttreatment in the clinically evaluable population were 70.5% (244/346) for ertapenem and 57.2% (194/339) for cefotetan (difference 13.3%, [95% C.I.: 6.1, 20.4], p<0.001). Prophylaxis failure due to surgical site infections occurred in 18.2% (63/346) ertapenem patients and 31.0% (105/339) cefotetan patients. Post-operative anastomotic leak occurred in 2.9% (10/346) ertapenem patients and 4.1% (14/339) cefotetan patients. Unexplained antibiotic use occurred in 8.4% (29/346) ertapenem patients and 7.7% (26/339) cefotetan patients. Though patient numbers were small in some subgroups, in general, clinical response rates by age, gender, and race were consistent with the results found in the clinically evaluable population. In the MITT analysis, the prophylactic success rates at 4 weeks posttreatment were 58.3% (263/451) for ertapenem and 48.9% (220/450) for cefotetan (difference 9.4%, [95% C.I.: 2.9, 15.9], p=0.002). A statistically significant difference favoring ertapenem over cefotetan with respect to the primary endpoint has been observed at a significance level of 5% in this trial. A second adequate and well-controlled trial to confirm these findings has not been conducted; therefore, the clinical superiority of ertapenem over cefotetan has not been demonstrated. | ||
====Pediatric Patients==== | ====Pediatric Patients==== | ||
Ertapenem was evaluated in pediatric patients 3 months to 17 years of age in two randomized, multicenter clinical trials. | Ertapenem was evaluated in pediatric patients 3 months to 17 years of age in two randomized, multicenter clinical trials. | ||
| Line 41: | Line 43: | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{Reflist}} | {{Reflist}} | ||
Latest revision as of 22:22, 5 January 2014
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Sheng Shi, M.D. [2]
Clinical Studies
Adults
Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections in a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours) for 5 to 14 days and enrolled 665 patients with localized complicated appendicitis, and any other complicated intra-abdominal infection including colonic, small intestinal, and biliary infections and generalized peritonitis. The combined clinical and microbiologic success rates in the microbiologically evaluable population at 4 to 6 weeks posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 83.6% (163/195) for ertapenem and 80.4% (152/189) for piperacillin/tazobactam.
Complicated Skin and Skin Structure Infections
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections in a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours) for 7 to 14 days and enrolled 540 patients including patients with deep soft tissue abscess, posttraumatic wound infection and cellulitis with purulent drainage. The clinical success rates at 10 to 21 days posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 83.9% (141/168) for ertapenem and 85.3% (145/170) for piperacillin/tazobactam.
Diabetic Foot Infections
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of diabetic foot infections without concomitant osteomyelitis in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours). Test-of-cure was defined as clinical response between treatment groups in the clinically evaluable population at the 10-day posttherapy follow-up visit. The trial included 295 patients randomized to ertapenem and 291 patients to piperacillin/tazobactam. Both regimens allowed the option to switch to oral amoxicillin/clavulanate for a total of 5 to 28 days of treatment (parenteral and oral). All patients were eligible to receive appropriate adjunctive treatment methods, such as debridement, as is typically required in the treatment of diabetic foot infections, and most patients received these treatments. Patients with suspected osteomyelitis could be enrolled if all the infected bone was removed within 2 days of initiation of study therapy, and preferably within the prestudy period. Investigators had the option to add open-label vancomycin if enterococci or methicillin-resistantStaphylococcus aureus (MRSA) were among the pathogens isolated or if patients had a history of MRSA infection and additional therapy was indicated in the opinion of the investigator. Two hundred and four (204) patients randomized to ertapenem and 202 patients randomized to piperacillin/tazobactam were clinically evaluable. The clinical success rates at 10 days posttherapy were 75.0% (153/204) for ertapenem and 70.8% (143/202) for piperacillin/tazobactam.
Community Acquired Pneumonia
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of community acquired pneumonia in two randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trials. Both trials compared ertapenem (1 g parenterally once a day) with ceftriaxone (1 g parenterally once a day) and enrolled a total of 866 patients. Both regimens allowed the option to switch to oral amoxicillin/clavulanate for a total of 10 to 14 days of treatment (parenteral and oral). In the first trial the primary efficacy parameter was the clinical success rate in the clinically evaluable population and success rates were 92.3% (168/182) for ertapenem and 91.0% (183/201) for ceftriaxone at 7 to 14 days posttherapy (test-of-cure). In the second trial the primary efficacy parameter was the clinical success rate in the microbiologically evaluable population and success rates were 91% (91/100) for ertapenem and 91.8% (45/49) for ceftriaxone at 7 to 14 days posttherapy (test-of-cure).
Complicated Urinary Tract Infections Including Pyelonephritis
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections including pyelonephritis in two randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trials. Both trials compared ertapenem (1 g parenterally once a day) with ceftriaxone (1 g parenterally once a day) and enrolled a total of 850 patients. Both regimens allowed the option to switch to oral ciprofloxacin (500 mg twice daily) for a total of 10 to 14 days of treatment (parenteral and oral). The microbiological success rates (combined trials) at 5 to 9 days posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 89.5% (229/256) for ertapenem and 91.1% (204/224) for ceftriaxone.
Acute Pelvic Infections Including Endomyometritis, Septic Abortion and Post-Surgical Gynecological Infections
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for the treatment of acute pelvic infections in a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared ertapenem (1 g intravenously once a day) with piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g intravenously every 6 hours) for 3 to 10 days and enrolled 412 patients including 350 patients with obstetric/postpartum infections and 45 patients with septic abortion. The clinical success rates in the clinically evaluable population at 2 to 4 weeks posttherapy (test-of-cure) were 93.9% (153/163) for ertapenem and 91.5% (140/153) for piperacillin/tazobactam.
Prophylaxis of Surgical Site Infections Following Elective Colorectal Surgery
Ertapenem was evaluated in adults for prophylaxis of surgical site infection following elective colorectal surgery in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. This trial compared a single intravenous dose of ertapenem (1 g) versus cefotetan (2 g) administered over 30 minutes, 1 hour before elective colorectal surgery. Test-of-prophylaxis was defined as no evidence of surgical site infection, post-operative anastomotic leak, or unexplained antibiotic use in the clinically evaluable population up to and including at the 4-week posttreatment follow-up visit. The trial included 500 patients randomized to ertapenem and 502 patients randomized to cefotetan. The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population consisted of 451 ertapenem patients and 450 cefotetan patients and included all patients who were randomized, treated, and underwent elective colorectal surgery with adequate bowel preparation. The clinically evaluable population was a subset of the MITT population and consisted of patients who received a complete dose of study therapy no more than two hours prior to surgical incision and no more than six hours before surgical closure. Clinically evaluable patients had sufficient information to determine outcome at the 4-week follow-up assessment and had no confounding factors that interfered with the assessment of that outcome. Examples of confounding factors included prior or concomitant antibiotic violations, the need for a second surgical procedure during the study period, and identification of a distant site infection with concomitant antibiotic administration and no evidence of subsequent wound infection. Three-hundred forty-six (346) patients randomized to ertapenem and 339 patients randomized to cefotetan were clinically evaluable. The prophylactic success rates at 4 weeks posttreatment in the clinically evaluable population were 70.5% (244/346) for ertapenem and 57.2% (194/339) for cefotetan (difference 13.3%, [95% C.I.: 6.1, 20.4], p<0.001). Prophylaxis failure due to surgical site infections occurred in 18.2% (63/346) ertapenem patients and 31.0% (105/339) cefotetan patients. Post-operative anastomotic leak occurred in 2.9% (10/346) ertapenem patients and 4.1% (14/339) cefotetan patients. Unexplained antibiotic use occurred in 8.4% (29/346) ertapenem patients and 7.7% (26/339) cefotetan patients. Though patient numbers were small in some subgroups, in general, clinical response rates by age, gender, and race were consistent with the results found in the clinically evaluable population. In the MITT analysis, the prophylactic success rates at 4 weeks posttreatment were 58.3% (263/451) for ertapenem and 48.9% (220/450) for cefotetan (difference 9.4%, [95% C.I.: 2.9, 15.9], p=0.002). A statistically significant difference favoring ertapenem over cefotetan with respect to the primary endpoint has been observed at a significance level of 5% in this trial. A second adequate and well-controlled trial to confirm these findings has not been conducted; therefore, the clinical superiority of ertapenem over cefotetan has not been demonstrated.
Pediatric Patients
Ertapenem was evaluated in pediatric patients 3 months to 17 years of age in two randomized, multicenter clinical trials.
The first trial enrolled 404 patients and compared ertapenem (15 mg/kg intravenous (IV) every 12 hours in patients 3 months to 12 years of age, and 1 g IV once a day in patients 13 to 17 years of age) to ceftriaxone (50 mg/kg/day IV in two divided doses in patients 3 months to 12 years of age and 50 mg/kg/day IV as a single daily dose in patients 13 to 17 years of age) for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infection (UTI), skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI), or community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Both regimens allowed the option to switch to oral amoxicillin/clavulanate for a total of up to 14 days of treatment (parenteral and oral). The microbiological success rates in the evaluable per protocol (EPP) analysis in patients treated for UTI were 87.0% (40/46) for ertapenem and 90.0% (18/20) for ceftriaxone. The clinical success rates in the EPP analysis in patients treated for SSTI were 95.5% (64/67) for ertapenem and 100% (26/26) for ceftriaxone, and in patients treated for CAP were 96.1% (74/77) for ertapenem and 96.4% (27/28) for ceftriaxone.
The second trial enrolled 112 patients and compared ertapenem (15 mg/kg IV every 12 hours in patients 3 months to 12 years of age, and 1 g IV once a day in patients 13 to 17 years of age) to ticarcillin/clavulanate (50 mg/kg for patients <60 kg or 3.0 g for patients >60 kg, 4 or 6 times a day) up to 14 days for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections (IAI) and acute pelvic infections (API). In patients treated for IAI (primarily patients with perforated or complicated appendicitis), the clinical success rates were 83.7% (36/43) for ertapenem and 63.6% (7/11) for ticarcillin/clavulanate in the EPP analysis. In patients treated for API (post-operative or spontaneous obstetrical endomyometritis, or septic abortion), the clinical success rates were 100% (23/23) for ertapenem and 100% (4/4) for ticarcillin/clavulanate in the EPP analysis.[1]
References
- ↑ "http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2005/021337s018lbl.pdf" (PDF). External link in
|title=(help)
Adapted from the FDA Package Insert.