The Journal of the Association of Physicians of India · 2018
A Multicentre, Open label, Randomized, Comparative, Parallel Group, Active-controlled, Phase III Clinical Trial to Evaluate Safety and Efficacy of Arbekacin Sulphate Injection versus Vancomycin Injection in Patients Diagnosed with MRSA Infection.
Клиническое исследование III фазыСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Dube Abhay, Deb Ashish Kumar, Das Chandan, Padhye Devdatta, Bhalla Hira, Basu Indraneel, Bs Madhu, Srivastava Pankaj, Agarwal Rajeev, Agrawal Rajendra Prasad, Singh Ram Murti, Kurlekar Uttkrant, Pawar Roshan, Shahavi Vinayaka, Srivastava Ambrish
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Increasing resistance to currently available antimicrobials has led to the development of new agents. Arbekacin is aminoglycoside antibiotic currently used in Japan and Korea for the treatment of infections caused by multi-resistant bacteria including MRSA. Currently there is no published data available for use of Arbekacin in Indian patient population, thus the present study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Arbekacin in Indian population.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was a phase III, multi-centre, open-label, randomised comparative, active control study. Subjects with microbiologically confirmed MRSA infection were randomized in the study to receive either Arbekacin sulphate 200 mg OD or Vancomycin hydrochloride 1000 mg BD for a period of 7 to 14 days. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the overall cure rate i.e. Clinical and microbiological cure during the study.
RESULTS: A total of 162 patients were randomized in 2 treatment groups (i.e. 81 patients in each group). Out of these microbiologically confirmed MRSA patients, 153 patients were admitted for SSTI while 9 patients were admitted for CAP. Overall cure rate of MRSA infection (clinical as well as microbiological cure) was comparable in both the treatment groups i.e. 97.5% (79/81) in Arbekacin group and 100 % (79/79) in Vancomycin group (p value: 0.159). Both Arbekacin and Vancomycin were well tolerated by the patients during the study period.
CONCLUSION: Arbekacin can be considered as safe and effective alternative to vancomycin in the management of MRSA infections.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was a phase III, multi-centre, open-label, randomised comparative, active control study. Subjects with microbiologically confirmed MRSA infection were randomized in the study to receive either Arbekacin sulphate 200 mg OD or Vancomycin hydrochloride 1000 mg BD for a period of 7 to 14 days. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the overall cure rate i.e. Clinical and microbiological cure during the study.
RESULTS: A total of 162 patients were randomized in 2 treatment groups (i.e. 81 patients in each group). Out of these microbiologically confirmed MRSA patients, 153 patients were admitted for SSTI while 9 patients were admitted for CAP. Overall cure rate of MRSA infection (clinical as well as microbiological cure) was comparable in both the treatment groups i.e. 97.5% (79/81) in Arbekacin group and 100 % (79/79) in Vancomycin group (p value: 0.159). Both Arbekacin and Vancomycin were well tolerated by the patients during the study period.
CONCLUSION: Arbekacin can be considered as safe and effective alternative to vancomycin in the management of MRSA infections.