Daptomycin versus Standard Therapy for Bacteremia and Endocarditis Caused by <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i>Vance G. Fowler, Helen W. Boucher, G. Ralph Corey et al.|New England Journal of Medicine|2006 BACKGROUND: Alternative therapies for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and endocarditis are needed. METHODS: We randomly assigned 124 patients with S. aureus bacteremia with or without endocarditis to receive 6 mg of daptomycin intravenously per kilogram of body weight daily and 122 to receive initial low-dose gentamicin plus either an antistaphylococcal penicillin or vancomycin. The primary efficacy end point was treatment success 42 days after the end of therapy. RESULTS: Forty-two days after the end of therapy in the modified intention-to-treat analysis, a successful outcome was documented for 53 of 120 patients who received daptomycin as compared with 48 of 115 patients who received standard therapy (44.2 percent vs. 41.7 percent; absolute difference, 2.4 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, -10.2 to 15.1 percent). Our results met prespecified criteria for the noninferiority of daptomycin. The success rates were similar in subgroups of patients with complicated bacteremia, right-sided endocarditis, and methicillin-resistant S. aureus. Daptomycin therapy was associated with a higher rate of microbiologic failure than was standard therapy (19 vs. 11 patients, P=0.17). In 6 of the 19 patients with microbiologic failure in the daptomycin group, isolates with reduced susceptibility to daptomycin emerged; similarly, a reduced susceptibility to vancomycin was noted in isolates from patients treated with vancomycin. As compared with daptomycin therapy, standard therapy was associated with a nonsignificantly higher rate of adverse events that led to treatment failure due to the discontinuation of therapy (17 vs. 8, P=0.06). Clinically significant renal dysfunction occurred in 11.0 percent of patients who received daptomycin and in 26.3 percent of patients who received standard therapy (P=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Daptomycin (6 mg per kilogram daily) is not inferior to standard therapy for S. aureus bacteremia and right-sided endocarditis. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00093067 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).
Efficacy and Safety of Tifacogin (Recombinant Tissue Factor Pathway Inhibitor) in Severe SepsisCONTEXT: The expression and release of tissue factor is a major trigger for the activation of coagulation in patients with sepsis. Tissue factor pathway inhibitor (TFPI) forms a complex with tissue factor and blood protease factors leading to inhibition of thrombin generation and fibrin formation. OBJECTIVES: To determine if administration of tifacogin (recombinant TFPI) provides mortality benefit in patients with severe sepsis and elevated international normalized ratio (INR) and to assess tifacogin safety in severe sepsis, including patients with low INR. DESIGN AND SETTING: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial conducted from March 21, 2000, through September 27, 2001, in 245 hospitals in 17 countries in North America, Europe, and Israel. PATIENTS: The primary efficacy population consisted of 1754 patients (> or =18 years) with severe sepsis and a high INR (> or =1.2) randomly assigned to intravenous infusion of either tifacogin (0.025 mg/kg per hour for 96 hours, n = 880) or placebo (arginine citrate buffer, n = 874), and 201 patients with a low INR (<1.2) randomly assigned to receive the same dose of either tifacogin or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: All-cause 28-day mortality. RESULTS: Overall mortality at 28 days in the tifacogin-treated group (n = 880) vs the placebo group (n = 874) for high INR was 34.2% vs 33.9%, respectively (P =.88, Pearson chi2 test; P =.75, logistic regression model). None of the protocol-specified secondary end points differed between the tifacogin vs placebo groups. An analysis on the first 722 patients demonstrated a mortality rate of 38.9% for placebo vs 29.1% for tifacogin (P =.006, Pearson chi2 test). Tifacogin significantly attenuated prothrombin fragment 1.2 and thrombin:antithrombin complex levels (P<.001, 2-sample t test) in patients with high and low INR. Overall mortality was lower in the tifacogin response in patients with low INR (12%; n = 83) vs placebo (22.9%; n = 118) (P =.051, Pearson chi2 test; P =.03, logistic regression model). There was an increase in serious adverse events with bleeding in the tifacogin group in both cohorts (6.5% tifacogin and 4.8% placebo for high INR; 6.0% tifacogin and 3.3% placebo for low INR). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with tifacogin had no effect on all-cause mortality in patients with severe sepsis and high INR. Tifacogin administration was associated with an increase in risk of bleeding, irrespective of baseline INR.
Micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for candidaemia and invasive candidosis: a phase III randomised double-blind trialA randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of TAK-242 for the treatment of severe sepsis*OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether TAK-242, a small-molecule inhibitor of Toll-like receptor-4-mediated signaling, suppresses cytokine levels and improves 28-day all-cause mortality rates in patients with severe sepsis. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: A total of 93 intensive care units worldwide. PATIENTS: A total of 274 patients with severe sepsis and shock or respiratory failure. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive a 30-min loading dose followed by 96-hr infusions of placebo, TAK-242 1.2 mg/kg/day, or TAK-242 2.4 mg/kg/day. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary pharmacodynamic end point was change in serum interleukin-6 levels relative to baseline, with 28-day all-cause mortality rate the primary clinical end point. The trial was terminated because of a lack of effect of TAK-242 in suppressing serum interleukin-6 levels. A total of 274 subjects were randomly assigned and treated. Clinical parameters at baseline were balanced across the three groups. TAK-242 did not suppress interleukin-6 as measured by 0- to 96.5-hr area under the interleukin-6 concentration curve at either dose. Specifically, the area under the effect curve increased by 9% and 26.9% in the TAK-242 1.2 and 2.4 mg/kg/day groups, respectively, which was not statistically different from placebo (p = .63 and .15, respectively). The 28-day mortality rate was 24% in the placebo, 22% in the low-dose, and 17% in the high-dose group (p = .26 for placebo vs. high dose). A nonsignificant reduction in mortality rate was observed in a subset of patients with both shock and respiratory failure (placebo [n = 51], 33%, vs. high dose [n = 52], 19%, p = .10). Transient, dose-related increases in methemoglobin levels were observed with TAK-242 treatment in 30.1% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: TAK-242 failed to suppress cytokine levels in patients with sepsis and shock or respiratory failure. Treatment with TAK-242 resulted in mild increases in serum methemoglobin levels but was otherwise well tolerated. Although observed mortality rates in patients with both shock and respiratory failure were lower with the 2.4 mg/kg/day dose, differences were not significant.
Effective Reversal of Moderate Rocuronium- or Vecuronium-induced Neuromuscular Block with Sugammadex, a Selective Relaxant Binding AgentKoen Suy, Karl Morias, Guy Cammu et al.|Anesthesiology|2007 BACKGROUND: Sugammadex rapidly reverses rocuronium-induced neuromuscular block. This study explored the dose-response relation of sugammadex given as a reversal agent at reappearance of the second muscle twitch after rocuronium- and vecuronium-induced block. A secondary objective was to investigate the safety of single doses of sugammadex. METHODS: In this two-center, phase II, dose-finding study, 80 patients (age >or= 18 yr, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II, surgery >or= 60 min requiring muscle relaxation for intubation) were randomly assigned to receive rocuronium (0.60 mg/kg) or vecuronium (0.10 mg/kg). Sugammadex or placebo was administered at reappearance of the second muscle twitch. The primary efficacy endpoint was time from starting sugammadex administration until recovery of the train-of-four ratio to 0.9. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, sugammadex produced dose-dependent decreases in mean time to recovery for all train-of-four ratios in the rocuronium and vecuronium groups. The mean time for recovery of the train-of-four ratio to 0.9 in the rocuronium group was 31.8 min after placebo compared with 3.7 and 1.1 min after 0.5 and 4.0 mg/kg sugammadex, respectively. The mean time for recovery of the train-of-four ratio to 0.9 in the vecuronium group was 48.8 min after placebo, compared with 2.5 and 1.4 min after 1.0 and 8.0 mg/kg sugammadex, respectively. Sugammadex was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Sugammadex rapidly reversed rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block at reappearance of the second muscle twitch and was well tolerated. A dose-response relation was observed with sugammadex for reversal of both rocuronium- and vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block.