Cargando…
A pilot randomized controlled trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for bloodstream infection on non-intensive care versus intensive care wards
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment duration for patients with bloodstream infection is understudied. The Bacteremia Antibiotic Length Actually Needed for Clinical Effectiveness (BALANCE) pilot randomized clinical trial (RCT) determined that it was feasible to enroll and randomize intensive care unit...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6964073/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31941546 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-4033-9 |
_version_ | 1783488427826610176 |
---|---|
author | Daneman, Nick Rishu, Asgar H. Pinto, Ruxandra Arabi, Yaseen Belley-Cote, Emilie P. Cirone, Robert Downing, Mark Cook, Deborah J. Hall, Richard McGuinness, Shay McIntyre, Lauralyn Muscedere, John Parke, Rachael Reynolds, Steven Rogers, Benjamin A. Shehabi, Yahya Shin, Phillip Whitlock, Richard Fowler, Robert A. |
author_facet | Daneman, Nick Rishu, Asgar H. Pinto, Ruxandra Arabi, Yaseen Belley-Cote, Emilie P. Cirone, Robert Downing, Mark Cook, Deborah J. Hall, Richard McGuinness, Shay McIntyre, Lauralyn Muscedere, John Parke, Rachael Reynolds, Steven Rogers, Benjamin A. Shehabi, Yahya Shin, Phillip Whitlock, Richard Fowler, Robert A. |
author_sort | Daneman, Nick |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment duration for patients with bloodstream infection is understudied. The Bacteremia Antibiotic Length Actually Needed for Clinical Effectiveness (BALANCE) pilot randomized clinical trial (RCT) determined that it was feasible to enroll and randomize intensive care unit (ICU) patients with bloodstream infection to 7 versus 14 days of treatment, and served as the vanguard for the ongoing BALANCE main RCT. We performed this BALANCE-Ward pilot RCT to examine the feasibility and impact of potentially extending the BALANCE main RCT to include patients hospitalized on non-ICU wards. METHODS: We conducted an open pilot RCT among a subset of six sites participating in the ongoing BALANCE RCT, randomizing patients with positive non-Staphylococcus aureus blood cultures on non-ICU wards to 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment. The co-primary feasibility outcomes were recruitment rate and adherence to treatment duration protocol. We compared feasibility outcomes, patient/pathogen characteristics, and overall outcomes among those enrolled in this BALANCE-Ward and prior BALANCE-ICU pilot RCTs. We estimated the sample size and non-inferiority margin impacts of expanding the BALANCE main RCT to include non-ICU patients. RESULTS: A total of 134 patients were recruited over 47 site-months (mean 2.9 patients/site-month, median 1.0, range 0.1–4.4 patients/site-month). The overall recruitment rate exceeded the BALANCE-ICU pilot RCT (mean 1.10 patients/site-month, p < 0.0001). Overall protocol adherence also exceeded the adherence in the BALANCE-ICU pilot RCT (125/134, 93% vs 89/115, 77%, p = 0.0003). BALANCE-Ward patients were older, with lower Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores, and higher proportions of infections caused by Escherichia coli and genito-urinary sources of bloodstream infection. The BALANCE-Ward pilot RCT patients had an overall 90-day mortality rate of 17/133 (12.8%), which was comparable to the 90-day mortality rate in the ICU pilot RCT (17/115, 14.8%) (p = 0.65). Simulation models indicated there would be minimal sample size and non-inferiority margin implications of expanding enrolment to increasing proportions of non-ICU versus ICU patients. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to enroll non-ICU patients in a trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotics for bloodstream infection, and expanding the BALANCE RCT hospital-wide has the potential to improve the timeliness and generalizability of trial results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02917551. Registered on September 28, 2016. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6964073 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69640732020-01-22 A pilot randomized controlled trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for bloodstream infection on non-intensive care versus intensive care wards Daneman, Nick Rishu, Asgar H. Pinto, Ruxandra Arabi, Yaseen Belley-Cote, Emilie P. Cirone, Robert Downing, Mark Cook, Deborah J. Hall, Richard McGuinness, Shay McIntyre, Lauralyn Muscedere, John Parke, Rachael Reynolds, Steven Rogers, Benjamin A. Shehabi, Yahya Shin, Phillip Whitlock, Richard Fowler, Robert A. Trials Research BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment duration for patients with bloodstream infection is understudied. The Bacteremia Antibiotic Length Actually Needed for Clinical Effectiveness (BALANCE) pilot randomized clinical trial (RCT) determined that it was feasible to enroll and randomize intensive care unit (ICU) patients with bloodstream infection to 7 versus 14 days of treatment, and served as the vanguard for the ongoing BALANCE main RCT. We performed this BALANCE-Ward pilot RCT to examine the feasibility and impact of potentially extending the BALANCE main RCT to include patients hospitalized on non-ICU wards. METHODS: We conducted an open pilot RCT among a subset of six sites participating in the ongoing BALANCE RCT, randomizing patients with positive non-Staphylococcus aureus blood cultures on non-ICU wards to 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment. The co-primary feasibility outcomes were recruitment rate and adherence to treatment duration protocol. We compared feasibility outcomes, patient/pathogen characteristics, and overall outcomes among those enrolled in this BALANCE-Ward and prior BALANCE-ICU pilot RCTs. We estimated the sample size and non-inferiority margin impacts of expanding the BALANCE main RCT to include non-ICU patients. RESULTS: A total of 134 patients were recruited over 47 site-months (mean 2.9 patients/site-month, median 1.0, range 0.1–4.4 patients/site-month). The overall recruitment rate exceeded the BALANCE-ICU pilot RCT (mean 1.10 patients/site-month, p < 0.0001). Overall protocol adherence also exceeded the adherence in the BALANCE-ICU pilot RCT (125/134, 93% vs 89/115, 77%, p = 0.0003). BALANCE-Ward patients were older, with lower Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores, and higher proportions of infections caused by Escherichia coli and genito-urinary sources of bloodstream infection. The BALANCE-Ward pilot RCT patients had an overall 90-day mortality rate of 17/133 (12.8%), which was comparable to the 90-day mortality rate in the ICU pilot RCT (17/115, 14.8%) (p = 0.65). Simulation models indicated there would be minimal sample size and non-inferiority margin implications of expanding enrolment to increasing proportions of non-ICU versus ICU patients. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to enroll non-ICU patients in a trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotics for bloodstream infection, and expanding the BALANCE RCT hospital-wide has the potential to improve the timeliness and generalizability of trial results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02917551. Registered on September 28, 2016. BioMed Central 2020-01-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6964073/ /pubmed/31941546 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-4033-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Daneman, Nick Rishu, Asgar H. Pinto, Ruxandra Arabi, Yaseen Belley-Cote, Emilie P. Cirone, Robert Downing, Mark Cook, Deborah J. Hall, Richard McGuinness, Shay McIntyre, Lauralyn Muscedere, John Parke, Rachael Reynolds, Steven Rogers, Benjamin A. Shehabi, Yahya Shin, Phillip Whitlock, Richard Fowler, Robert A. A pilot randomized controlled trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for bloodstream infection on non-intensive care versus intensive care wards |
title | A pilot randomized controlled trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for bloodstream infection on non-intensive care versus intensive care wards |
title_full | A pilot randomized controlled trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for bloodstream infection on non-intensive care versus intensive care wards |
title_fullStr | A pilot randomized controlled trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for bloodstream infection on non-intensive care versus intensive care wards |
title_full_unstemmed | A pilot randomized controlled trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for bloodstream infection on non-intensive care versus intensive care wards |
title_short | A pilot randomized controlled trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for bloodstream infection on non-intensive care versus intensive care wards |
title_sort | pilot randomized controlled trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for bloodstream infection on non-intensive care versus intensive care wards |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6964073/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31941546 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-4033-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT danemannick apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT rishuasgarh apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT pintoruxandra apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT arabiyaseen apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT belleycoteemiliep apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT cironerobert apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT downingmark apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT cookdeborahj apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT hallrichard apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT mcguinnessshay apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT mcintyrelauralyn apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT muscederejohn apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT parkerachael apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT reynoldssteven apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT rogersbenjamina apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT shehabiyahya apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT shinphillip apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT whitlockrichard apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT fowlerroberta apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT apilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT danemannick pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT rishuasgarh pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT pintoruxandra pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT arabiyaseen pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT belleycoteemiliep pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT cironerobert pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT downingmark pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT cookdeborahj pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT hallrichard pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT mcguinnessshay pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT mcintyrelauralyn pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT muscederejohn pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT parkerachael pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT reynoldssteven pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT rogersbenjamina pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT shehabiyahya pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT shinphillip pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT whitlockrichard pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT fowlerroberta pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards AT pilotrandomizedcontrolledtrialof7versus14daysofantibiotictreatmentforbloodstreaminfectiononnonintensivecareversusintensivecarewards |