医学
利奈唑啉
临床试验
临床终点
肺炎
细菌性肺炎
内科学
万古霉素
重症监护医学
置信区间
呼吸机相关性肺炎
金黄色葡萄球菌
生物
细菌
遗传学
作者
Jessica Howard‐Anderson,Toshimitsu Hamasaki,Weixiao Dai,Deborah Collyar,Daniel B. Rubin,Sumathi Nambiar,Tori Kinamon,Heidi Leister‐Tebbe,Carol Hill,Holly Geres,Thomas L Holland,Sarah B. Doernberg,Henry F. Chambers,Vance G. Fowler,Scott Evans,Helen W. Boucher,Helen W. Boucher,Sara E. Cosgrove,Sarah B. Doernberg,Scott Evans
摘要
Abstract Background Hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) are frequently caused by multidrug-resistant organisms. Patient-centered endpoints in clinical trials are needed to develop new antibiotics for HABP/VABP. Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) is a paradigm for the design, analysis, and interpretation of clinical trials based on a patient-centered, benefit-risk evaluation. Methods A multidisciplinary committee created an infectious diseases DOOR endpoint customized for HABP/VABP, incorporating infectious complications, serious adverse events, and mortality. We applied this to 2 previously completed, large randomized controlled trials for HABP/VABP. ZEPHyR compared vancomycin to linezolid and VITAL compared linezolid to tedizolid. For each trial, we evaluated the DOOR distribution and probability, including DOOR component and partial credit analyses. We also applied DOOR in subgroup analyses. Results In both trials, the HABP/VABP DOOR demonstrated similar overall clinical outcomes between treatment groups. In ZEPHyR, the probability that a participant treated with linezolid would have a more desirable outcome than a participant treated with vancomycin was 50.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 45.1%−55.3%). In VITAL, the probability that a participant treated with tedizolid would have a more desirable outcome than a participant treated with linezolid was 48.7% (95% CI, 44.8%–52.6%). The DOOR component analysis revealed that participants treated with tedizolid had a less desirable outcome than those treated with linezolid when considering clinical response alone. However, participants with decreased renal function had improved overall outcomes with tedizolid. Conclusions The HABP/VABP DOOR provided more granular information about clinical outcomes than is typically presented in clinical trials. HABP/VABP trials would benefit from prospectively using DOOR.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI