跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT03632642
NCT03632642撤回4 期

Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial of Penicillin Versus Flucloxacillin for Definitive Treatment of Invasive Penicillin Susceptible Staphylococcus Aureus

The University of Queensland1 个研究点 分布在 1 个国家开始时间: 2019年7月1日最近更新:
适应症
干预措施
相关药物

试验速览

阶段
4 期
状态
撤回
试验地点
1
主要终点
Feasibility of DOOR

研究概览

简要总结

There is theroretical superiority with benzylpenicillin over orther anti-staphylococcal penicillins (ASP) for treatment of penicillin susceptible S. aureus (PSSA) infections due to a lower MIC distribution when compared with ASPs active against PSSA, combined with the ability to obtain higher levels of free non-protein-bound plasma drug concentrations. Although the data to support this theoretical advantage is limited, many clinicians in Australia (and worldwide) use benzylpenicillin for therapy in this situation despite many international guidelines cautioning against this. This uncertainty is significant given that 1) S. aureus bacteraemia (SAB) is associated with a high mortality and significant morbidity, 2) S. aureus is one of the most common organisms isolated from blood cultures, 3) SAB is the most common reason for consultation with an Infectious Disease specialist (which itself has been shown to improve outcomes) and 4) a significant proportion (up to 20%) of SAB isolates in Australia will be reported as susceptible to penicillin, a proportion which appears to be increasing over the past 10 years in Australia and internationally.

Given the frequency of PSSA and the associated morbidity and mortality related to SABs in general, a definitive study to determine the optimal therapy for PSSA is required. In a recent survey of Infectious Diseases Physicians and Clinical Microbiologists in Australasia, 87% of respondents were willing to randomise patients to either benzylpenicillin or flucloxacillin for a clinical trial, whist 71% responded that they would switch therapy from flucloxacillin to benzylpenicillin for treatment of PSSA BSIs in clinical practice (unpublished data).

Therefore, the investigators see the opportunity to determine the feasibility of a definitive study comparing benzylpenicillin against flucloxacillin (or other ASP) for treatment of PSSA bloodstream infections.

详细描述

Background and rationale:

Resistance to penicillin was discovered in Staphylococcus aureus in the mid-1940s, soon after the introduction of penicillin as a therapeutic agent into clinical practice. The emergence of penicillin resistant S. aureus (PRSA) was widely encountered in hospitals thereafter, with some reports finding rates of PRSA rising from 14% to 38% in less than 1 year. Two mechanisms are known that result in resistance to penicillin in staphylococci. The most common, and earliest described, was by the production of a serine β-lactamase, known as penicillinase (PC1), which hydrolyses the β-lactam ring resulting in the production of penicilloic acid. A second mechanism leads to resistance to penicillin and other beta-lactam agents by production of penicillin-binding protein, PBP2a, encoded by mecA. Following the emergence of PRSA, a new class of anti-staphylococcal penicillins were developed that were resistant to hydrolysis of the beta-lactam ring by penicillinase. The isoxazolyl-penicillins, semi-synthetic penicillin derivatives that are stable during exposure to penicillinase, are now the most commonly used agents for the treatment of S. aureus infections.

Despite widespread resistance to penicillin amongst S. aureus, a significant proportion of invasive isolates remain susceptible. Although penicillin and isoxazolyl-penicillins have been used in clinical practice for more than 50 years, the optimal therapy for patients with invasive penicillin susceptible S. aureus (PSSA) remains controversial. Methicillin susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) bloodstream infections are commonly sub-divided into categories based upon the presence of penicillinase, the absence of which defines PSSA strains. Many clinicians advocate treating both MSSA and PSSA the same, irrespective of whether penicillinase is detected or not. One group who strongly supports this view is the American Heart Association, which has published recently updated guidelines on infective endocarditis. This recommendation is based upon literature suggesting that detection of penicillinase is not reliable in some clinical laboratories. Multiple publications have demonstrated that the previous widely used phenotypic method of penicillinase detection, by nitrocefin hydrolysis, lacks adequate sensitivity for detecting penicillinase. Yet, treatment failure with penicillin due to inability to detect penicillinase has not been previously described in the medical literature to our knowledge. Regardless, many laboratories have now changed methods to the penicillin disc test, where isolates harbouring penicillinase may be detected by interrogation of the edge of the disc, with a sharp edge confirming the presence of penicillinase and a tapered edge indicating an absence. This method is now employed in most Pathology services and is the method approved by international governance organisations.

Other experts argue for potential superiority with penicillin due to a lower MIC distribution when compared with other beta-lactam agents active against S. aureus, combined with the ability to obtain high levels of free non-protein-bound plasma drug concentrations.

To date there is only one previous study that has directly compared the outcome between a semi-synthetic penicillin derivative (dicloxacillin) and penicillin for PSSA infections. In this retrospective study, no statistically significant difference was observed between penicillin and dicloxacillin based on a mortality outcome. Although this study does not support improved outcome with penicillin compared with dicloxacillin, it should be noted that significantly more patients treated with penicillin had a higher Pitt bacteraemia score and deep-seated infection such as endocarditis or osteomyelitis. Data from the ANZCOSS study, a prospective observational study of SAB within Australia between 2007 - 2016, demonstrated a possible 30-day crude mortality benefit for patients treated with benzylpenicillin compared to flucloxacillin or dicloxacillin (unpublished data). Patients in this cohort were treated 2:1 with flucloxacillin over benzylpenicillin, however, benzylpenicillin treatment was proportionally higher in patients with endocarditis or other deep-seated infections. In a multivariate logistic regression model, Flucloxacillin therapy was associated with a non-statistically significant increase in the odds ratio for 30-day mortality (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.99 - 2.47).

研究设计

研究类型
Interventional
分配方式
Randomized
干预模型
Parallel
主要目的
Treatment
盲法
None

入排标准

年龄范围
18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
性别
All
接受健康志愿者

入选标准

  • Bloodstream infection with Staphylococcus aureus susceptible to penicillin and negative for penicillinase by phenotypic methods.
  • No more than 72 hours has elapsed since the first positive blood culture was drawn
  • Patient is aged 18 years and over
  • The patient or approved proxy is able to provide informed consent

排除标准

  • Patient with a recorded allergy to penicillin including:
  • Hypersensitivity type reaction
  • Stephens-Johnson syndrome
  • Contraindications based upon other recorded allergies, such as gastrointestinal upset, will be at the discretion of the treating clinician
  • Patient with significant polymicrobial bacteraemia (skin contaminants excepted)
  • Treated with non-curative intent
  • Pregnancy or breast-feeding
  • Patient currently receiving concomitant antimicrobials with activity against S. aureus which cannot be ceased or substituted.

研究组 & 干预措施

Benzylpenicillin arm

Active Comparator

Patients randomised to benzylpenicillin will be treated according to Therapeutic Guidelines 15th Edition. During hospitalisation, the standard dose will be 1.8g Q4H IVI for uncomplicated BSIs and 2.4g Q4H for deep-seated or critical illness infections.

干预措施: Benzylpenicillin (Drug)

Flucloxacillin arm

Active Comparator

Patients randomised to flucloxacillin will be treated according to Therapeutic Guidelines 15th Edition. During hospitalisation, the standard dose will be 2g Q6H IVI or 2g Q4H for deep-seated or criticial illness infections.

干预措施: Flucloxacillin (Drug)

结局指标

主要结局

Feasibility of DOOR

时间窗: 90 day

The primary outcome of the study will utilise a desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) to assess superiority of benzylpenicillin against flucloxacillin.

次要结局

  • Adverse Events(90 day)
  • Mortality(14, 42 and 90 days)
  • Time to defervescence(From randomisation to any period where a temperature is < 37.5 degrees celsius for greater than or equal to 24 hours)
  • Persistent bacteraemia(Day 3 and day 7)
  • Microbiologic relapse(Any period within 90 days from randomisation following a negative blood culture at least 3 days prior)
  • Microbiologic treatment failure(Any period within day 14 to day 90 from randomisation)
  • Healthcare costs(90 day)

研究者

申办方类型
Other
责任方
Sponsor

研究点 (1)

Loading locations...

相似试验