MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.5414/cp201880

Медицинская библиотека · International journal of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2013

Posaconazole vs. fluconazole as invasive fungal infection prophylaxis in China: a multicenter, randomized, open-label study.

Shen Yang, Huang Xiao-Jun, Wang Jian-Xiang, Jin Jie, Hu Jian-Da, Yu Kang, Wu De-Pei, Wang Shu-Jie, Yu Li, Chen Xie-Qun, Liu Ting, Liang Ying-Ming, Chen Fang-Ping, Li Yan, Shen Zhi-Xiang

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Invasive fungal infection (IFI) is common in neutropenic patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Posaconazole is a broad-spectrum triazole antifungal drug with efficacy in prevention of IFI; however, it has not been previously studied as prophylaxis in a Chinese population.

METHODS

This multicenter, randomized study in China enrolled AML and MDS patients with persistent chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. Prophylaxis with posaconazole or fluconazole was administered for a maximum of 12 weeks, or until patients recovered from neutropenia and achieved complete remission or an IFI occurred. The primary endpoint was incidence of proven, probable, or possible IFI during treatment. Clinical failure rate, all-cause mortality and time to first systemic antifungal treatment were secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

Patients were randomized to receive posaconazole (n = 129) or fluconazole (n = 123); 117 patients in each group were included in the statistical analysis. The incidence of proven, probable or possible IFI was 9.4% (11/117) and 22.2% (26/117) in the posaconazole and fluconazole groups, respectively (p = 0.0114). The clinical failure rate was numerically lower in the posaconazole group (37/117 (31.6%; 95%CI: 23.3 - 40.9)) than in the fluconazole group (49/117 (41.88%; 95% CI: 32.8 - 51.4)) (p = 0.168). Patients receiving posaconazole had a later onset of first systematic antifungal treatment than those receiving fluconazole (p = 0.0139). The most common important adverse events were liver function abnormalities (11 patients (8.8%) on posaconazole and 6 (5.0%) on fluconazole (p = 0.221)).

CONCLUSIONS

Posaconazole demonstrates efficacy as prophylaxis against IFI in high-risk neutropenic Chinese patients and is well tolerated during long-term use (ClinicalTrials. gov number, NCT00811928).

Для цитирования: Shen Yang, Huang Xiao-Jun, Wang Jian-Xiang, Jin Jie, Hu Jian-Da, Yu Kang, Wu De-Pei, Wang Shu-Jie, Yu Li, Chen Xie-Qun, Liu Ting, Liang Ying-Ming, Chen Fang-Ping, Li Yan, Shen Zhi-Xiang. Posaconazole vs. fluconazole as invasive fungal infection prophylaxis in China: a multicenter, randomized, open-label study.. International journal of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. 2013. DOI: 10.5414/cp201880.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.