医学
临床终点
肺炎
不利影响
内科学
肺炎克雷伯菌
泌尿系统
置信区间
肺炎克雷伯菌
临床试验
随机对照试验
重症监护医学
临床研究阶段
血流感染
菌血症
克雷伯菌
抗生素
呼吸道感染
最小抑制浓度
作者
Jinyi Yuan,Huaxue Wang,Xiaoju Zhang,Fei Xie,Panpan Wang,Hua Zhu,Paurus M. Irani,Junchao Lu,Fanglei Liu,Yuting Mu,Haihui Huang,张婴元
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2026.108030
摘要
BACKGROUND: Ceftazidime-avibactam is approved in China for complicated intra‑abdominal infections, hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP/VAP), and other infections with limited treatment options due to aerobic Gram‑negative bacteria. This post-approval phase IV study assessed the effectiveness and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam in Chinese adults with carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections. METHODS: In this prospective, multi-centre, open-label, active-controlled study in China, patients with bloodstream infections, complicated intra‑abdominal infections, complicated urinary tract infections, and HAP/VAP were randomised to ceftazidime-avibactam or best available treatment (BAT). The primary efficacy endpoint was clinical response at the test-of-cure (TOC) visit in the microbiologically modified intention-to-treat analysis set. Endpoint comparisons were descriptive with nominal P-values. RESULTS: Overall, 59 patients received ceftazidime-avibactam (n = 30) or BAT (n = 29), mostly for primary HAP/VAP (>70%, both arms). The most common baseline isolate was Klebsiella pneumoniae (ceftazidime-avibactam, 66.7% [16/24]; BAT, 84.6% [22/26]). In the microbiologically modified intention-to-treat set (n = 27, each arm), clinical cure (95% confidence interval) at TOC was higher for ceftazidime-avibactam (59.3% [40.6-76.1]) than BAT (25.9% [12.4-44.3]). Microbiological response at TOC favoured ceftazidime‑avibactam (59.3%) over BAT (25.9%). All-cause mortality at day 28 was similar for ceftazidime-avibactam (4/30 [13.3%]) and BAT (4/29 [13.8%]; intention‑to‑treat analysis set). Adverse events (AEs) in patients treated with ceftazidime‑avibactam versus BAT included: all-causality AEs, 24 (80.0%) vs. 26 (89.7%); serious AEs, 7 (23.3%) vs. 11 (37.9%); severe AEs, 6 (20.0%) vs. 11 (37.9%); and AEs leading to death, 5 (16.7%) vs. 7 (24.1%). CONCLUSIONS: These results support the effectiveness and safety of ceftazidime‑avibactam in Chinese patients with carbapenem-resistant infections and limited treatment options. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04882085.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI