We determined whether telavancin is as active in experimental immunocompetent murine pneumococcal pneumonia as is vancomycin or ceftriaxone. Experimental murine pneumonia was established by intratracheal administratio...We determined whether telavancin is as active in experimental immunocompetent murine pneumococcal pneumonia as is vancomycin or ceftriaxone. Experimental murine pneumonia was established by intratracheal administration of Streptococcus pneumoniae. Four groups of animals were studied, untreated and treated with vancomycin (110 mg/kg, bid, SQ), telavancin (40 mg/kg, bid, SQ), or ceftriaxone (50 mg/kg, bid, SQ) for 2 days. The untreated animals had a mean of 6.54 ± 0.82 log10 cfu/g lung. The vancomycin-, telavancin-, and ceftriaxone-treated animals had means of 2.01 ± 0.02, 2.00 ± 0.00, and 2.00 ± 0.01 log10 cfu/g lung, respectively (p-values < 0.0001 for each treatment group versus the untreated group). In the model studied, telavancin was as active as vancomycin and ceftriaxone in treating experimental pneumococcal pneumonia in mice.展开更多
The emergence and rapid spread of multidrug-resistant gram-positive bacteria has become a vital and serious medical problem. A literature search was conducted in Pub Med, EMBASE, and Elsevier databases to identify rel...The emergence and rapid spread of multidrug-resistant gram-positive bacteria has become a vital and serious medical problem. A literature search was conducted in Pub Med, EMBASE, and Elsevier databases to identify relevant publications. To calculate the risk ratios（RRs） with 95% confidential intervals（CIs）, a fixed- or random-effects model was applied based on the heterogeneity across studies. Five studies containing seven RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. Regarding c SSTIs, HAP, SAB, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of clinical cure between telavancin and vancomycin or standard therapy in intention-to-treat population（ITT）（RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97–1.05, P = 0.72; FEM） and clinically evaluable population（CE）（RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98–1.04, P = 0.41; FEM）. However, telavancin was more effective than vancomycin or standard therapy in MRSA eradication rate（RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02–1.14, P = 0.009; FEM）. Regarding the safety profile, no statistically significant differences were found in all-cause mortality（9.0% vs. 8.4%; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.88–1.31, P = 0.49; FEM） and overall adverse events（77.0% vs. 72.3%; RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.98–1.20, P = 0.12; FEM） between telavancin and vancomycin or standard therapy. Pooled data from c SSTIs, HAP and SAB studies on telavancin indicated higher rates of adverse-event related withdrawals（7.7% vs. 5.4%; RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.12–1.83, P = 0.05; FEM） and creatinine elevation（10.0% vs. 5.1%; RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.53–2.48, P0.00001; FEM） than vancomycin or standard therapy. Telavancin and vancomycin or standard therapy are equally effective for the treatment of c SSTIs, HAP and SAB, and telavancin might be an option for the treatment of difficult-to-treat serious infections caused by MRSA. However, telavancin is associated a higher incidence of creatinine elevation and adverse-event related withdrawals.展开更多
文摘We determined whether telavancin is as active in experimental immunocompetent murine pneumococcal pneumonia as is vancomycin or ceftriaxone. Experimental murine pneumonia was established by intratracheal administration of Streptococcus pneumoniae. Four groups of animals were studied, untreated and treated with vancomycin (110 mg/kg, bid, SQ), telavancin (40 mg/kg, bid, SQ), or ceftriaxone (50 mg/kg, bid, SQ) for 2 days. The untreated animals had a mean of 6.54 ± 0.82 log10 cfu/g lung. The vancomycin-, telavancin-, and ceftriaxone-treated animals had means of 2.01 ± 0.02, 2.00 ± 0.00, and 2.00 ± 0.01 log10 cfu/g lung, respectively (p-values < 0.0001 for each treatment group versus the untreated group). In the model studied, telavancin was as active as vancomycin and ceftriaxone in treating experimental pneumococcal pneumonia in mice.
文摘The emergence and rapid spread of multidrug-resistant gram-positive bacteria has become a vital and serious medical problem. A literature search was conducted in Pub Med, EMBASE, and Elsevier databases to identify relevant publications. To calculate the risk ratios（RRs） with 95% confidential intervals（CIs）, a fixed- or random-effects model was applied based on the heterogeneity across studies. Five studies containing seven RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. Regarding c SSTIs, HAP, SAB, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of clinical cure between telavancin and vancomycin or standard therapy in intention-to-treat population（ITT）（RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97–1.05, P = 0.72; FEM） and clinically evaluable population（CE）（RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98–1.04, P = 0.41; FEM）. However, telavancin was more effective than vancomycin or standard therapy in MRSA eradication rate（RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02–1.14, P = 0.009; FEM）. Regarding the safety profile, no statistically significant differences were found in all-cause mortality（9.0% vs. 8.4%; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.88–1.31, P = 0.49; FEM） and overall adverse events（77.0% vs. 72.3%; RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.98–1.20, P = 0.12; FEM） between telavancin and vancomycin or standard therapy. Pooled data from c SSTIs, HAP and SAB studies on telavancin indicated higher rates of adverse-event related withdrawals（7.7% vs. 5.4%; RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.12–1.83, P = 0.05; FEM） and creatinine elevation（10.0% vs. 5.1%; RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.53–2.48, P0.00001; FEM） than vancomycin or standard therapy. Telavancin and vancomycin or standard therapy are equally effective for the treatment of c SSTIs, HAP and SAB, and telavancin might be an option for the treatment of difficult-to-treat serious infections caused by MRSA. However, telavancin is associated a higher incidence of creatinine elevation and adverse-event related withdrawals.
