Cargando…

Efficacy and safety of ridinilazole compared with vancomycin for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection is the most common health-care-associated infection in the USA. We assessed the safety and efficacy of ridinilazole versus vancomycin for treatment of C difficile infection. METHODS: We did a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vickers, Richard J, Tillotson, Glenn S, Nathan, Richard, Hazan, Sabine, Pullman, John, Lucasti, Christopher, Deck, Kenneth, Yacyshyn, Bruce, Maliakkal, Benedict, Pesant, Yves, Tejura, Bina, Roblin, David, Gerding, Dale N, Wilcox, Mark H
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Science ;, The Lancet Pub. Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5483507/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28461207
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30235-9
_version_ 1783245774726889472
author Vickers, Richard J
Tillotson, Glenn S
Nathan, Richard
Hazan, Sabine
Pullman, John
Lucasti, Christopher
Deck, Kenneth
Yacyshyn, Bruce
Maliakkal, Benedict
Pesant, Yves
Tejura, Bina
Roblin, David
Gerding, Dale N
Wilcox, Mark H
author_facet Vickers, Richard J
Tillotson, Glenn S
Nathan, Richard
Hazan, Sabine
Pullman, John
Lucasti, Christopher
Deck, Kenneth
Yacyshyn, Bruce
Maliakkal, Benedict
Pesant, Yves
Tejura, Bina
Roblin, David
Gerding, Dale N
Wilcox, Mark H
author_sort Vickers, Richard J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection is the most common health-care-associated infection in the USA. We assessed the safety and efficacy of ridinilazole versus vancomycin for treatment of C difficile infection. METHODS: We did a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study. Participants with signs and symptoms of C difficile infection and a positive diagnostic test result were recruited from 33 centres in the USA and Canada and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral ridinilazole (200 mg every 12 h) or oral vancomycin (125 mg every 6 h) for 10 days. The primary endpoint was achievement of a sustained clinical response, defined as clinical cure at the end of treatment and no recurrence within 30 days, which was used to establish non-inferiority (15% margin) of ridinilazole versus vancomycin. The primary efficacy analysis was done on a modified intention-to-treat population comprising all individuals with C difficile infection confirmed by the presence of free toxin in stool who were randomly assigned to receive one or more doses of the study drug. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02092935. FINDINGS: Between June 26, 2014, and August 31, 2015, 100 patients were recruited; 50 were randomly assigned to receive ridinilazole and 50 to vancomycin. 16 patients did not complete the study, and 11 discontinued treatment early. The primary efficacy analysis included 69 patients (n=36 in the ridinilazole group; n=33 in the vancomycin group). 24 of 36 (66·7%) patients in the ridinilazole group versus 14 of 33 (42·4%) of those in the vancomycin group had a sustained clinical response (treatment difference 21·1%, 90% CI 3·1–39·1, p=0·0004), establishing the non-inferiority of ridinilazole and also showing statistical superiority at the 10% level. Ridinilazole was well tolerated, with an adverse event profile similar to that of vancomycin: 82% (41 of 50) of participants reported adverse events in the ridinilazole group and 80% (40 of 50) in the vancomycin group. There were no adverse events related to ridinilazole that led to discontinuation. INTERPRETATION: Ridinilazole is a targeted-spectrum antimicrobial that shows potential in treatment of initial C difficile infection and in providing sustained benefit through reduction in disease recurrence. Further clinical development is warranted. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust and Summit Therapeutics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5483507
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Elsevier Science ;, The Lancet Pub. Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54835072017-07-01 Efficacy and safety of ridinilazole compared with vancomycin for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study Vickers, Richard J Tillotson, Glenn S Nathan, Richard Hazan, Sabine Pullman, John Lucasti, Christopher Deck, Kenneth Yacyshyn, Bruce Maliakkal, Benedict Pesant, Yves Tejura, Bina Roblin, David Gerding, Dale N Wilcox, Mark H Lancet Infect Dis Articles BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection is the most common health-care-associated infection in the USA. We assessed the safety and efficacy of ridinilazole versus vancomycin for treatment of C difficile infection. METHODS: We did a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study. Participants with signs and symptoms of C difficile infection and a positive diagnostic test result were recruited from 33 centres in the USA and Canada and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral ridinilazole (200 mg every 12 h) or oral vancomycin (125 mg every 6 h) for 10 days. The primary endpoint was achievement of a sustained clinical response, defined as clinical cure at the end of treatment and no recurrence within 30 days, which was used to establish non-inferiority (15% margin) of ridinilazole versus vancomycin. The primary efficacy analysis was done on a modified intention-to-treat population comprising all individuals with C difficile infection confirmed by the presence of free toxin in stool who were randomly assigned to receive one or more doses of the study drug. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02092935. FINDINGS: Between June 26, 2014, and August 31, 2015, 100 patients were recruited; 50 were randomly assigned to receive ridinilazole and 50 to vancomycin. 16 patients did not complete the study, and 11 discontinued treatment early. The primary efficacy analysis included 69 patients (n=36 in the ridinilazole group; n=33 in the vancomycin group). 24 of 36 (66·7%) patients in the ridinilazole group versus 14 of 33 (42·4%) of those in the vancomycin group had a sustained clinical response (treatment difference 21·1%, 90% CI 3·1–39·1, p=0·0004), establishing the non-inferiority of ridinilazole and also showing statistical superiority at the 10% level. Ridinilazole was well tolerated, with an adverse event profile similar to that of vancomycin: 82% (41 of 50) of participants reported adverse events in the ridinilazole group and 80% (40 of 50) in the vancomycin group. There were no adverse events related to ridinilazole that led to discontinuation. INTERPRETATION: Ridinilazole is a targeted-spectrum antimicrobial that shows potential in treatment of initial C difficile infection and in providing sustained benefit through reduction in disease recurrence. Further clinical development is warranted. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust and Summit Therapeutics. Elsevier Science ;, The Lancet Pub. Group 2017-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5483507/ /pubmed/28461207 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30235-9 Text en © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Articles
Vickers, Richard J
Tillotson, Glenn S
Nathan, Richard
Hazan, Sabine
Pullman, John
Lucasti, Christopher
Deck, Kenneth
Yacyshyn, Bruce
Maliakkal, Benedict
Pesant, Yves
Tejura, Bina
Roblin, David
Gerding, Dale N
Wilcox, Mark H
Efficacy and safety of ridinilazole compared with vancomycin for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study
title Efficacy and safety of ridinilazole compared with vancomycin for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study
title_full Efficacy and safety of ridinilazole compared with vancomycin for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study
title_fullStr Efficacy and safety of ridinilazole compared with vancomycin for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy and safety of ridinilazole compared with vancomycin for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study
title_short Efficacy and safety of ridinilazole compared with vancomycin for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study
title_sort efficacy and safety of ridinilazole compared with vancomycin for the treatment of clostridium difficile infection: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5483507/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28461207
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30235-9
work_keys_str_mv AT vickersrichardj efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT tillotsonglenns efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT nathanrichard efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT hazansabine efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT pullmanjohn efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT lucastichristopher efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT deckkenneth efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT yacyshynbruce efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT maliakkalbenedict efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT pesantyves efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT tejurabina efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT roblindavid efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT gerdingdalen efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT wilcoxmarkh efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy
AT efficacyandsafetyofridinilazolecomparedwithvancomycinforthetreatmentofclostridiumdifficileinfectionaphase2randomiseddoubleblindactivecontrollednoninferioritystudy