Transparent Reporting-SPIRIT-C/CONSORT-C Pediatric Updates

Oral versus intravenous empirical antibiotics in children and adolescents with uncomplicated bone and joint infections: a nationwide, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial in Denmark

BACKGROUND

Bone and joint infections (BJIs) are treated with intravenous antibiotics, which are burdensome and costly. No randomised controlled studies have compared if initial oral antibiotics are as effective as intravenous therapy. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of initial oral antibiotics compared with initial intravenous antibiotics followed by oral antibiotics in children and adolescents with uncomplicated BJIs.

METHODS

From Sept 15, 2020, to June 30, 2023, this nationwide, randomised, non-inferiority trial included patients aged 3 months to 17 years with BJIs who presented to one of the 18 paediatric hospital departments in Denmark. Exclusion criteria were severe infection (ie, septic shock, the need for acute surgery, or substantial soft tissue involvement), prosthetic material, comorbidity, previous BJIs, or antibiotic therapy for longer than 24 h before inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), stratified by C-reactive protein concentration (<35 mg/L vs ≥35 mg/L), to initially receive either high-dose oral antibiotics or intravenous ceftriaxone (100 mg/kg per day in one dose). High-dose oral antibiotics were coformulated amoxicillin (100 mg/kg per day) and clavulanic acid (12·5 mg/kg per day) in three doses for patients younger than 5 years or dicloxacillin (200 mg/kg per day) in four doses for patients aged 5 years or older. After a minimum of 3 days, and upon clinical improvement and decrease in C-reactive protein, patients in both groups received oral antibiotics in standard doses. The primary outcome was sequelae after 6 months in patients with BJIs, defined as any atypical mobility or function of the affected bone or joint, assessed blindly, in all randomised patients who were not terminated early due to an alternative diagnosis (ie, not BJI) and who attended the primary outcome assessment. A risk difference in sequelae after 6 months of less than 5% implied non-inferiority of the oral treatment. Safety outcomes were serious complications, the need for surgery after initiation of antibiotics, and treatment-related adverse events in the as-randomised population. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04563325.

FINDINGS

248 children and adolescents with suspected BJIs were randomly assigned to initial oral antibiotics (n=123) or initial intravenous antibiotics (n=125). After exclusion of patients without BJIs (n=54) or consent withdrawal (n=2), 101 patients randomised to oral treatment and 91 patients randomised to intravenous treatment were included. Ten patients did not attend the primary outcome evaluation. Sequelae after 6 months occurred in none of 98 patients with BJIs in the oral group and none of 84 patients with BJIs in the intravenous group (risk difference 0, one-sided 97·5% CI 0·0 to 3·8, pnon-inferiority=0·012). Surgery after randomisation was done in 12 (9·8%) of 123 patients in the oral group compared with seven (5·6%) of 125 patients in the intravenous group (risk difference 4·2%, 95% CI -2·7 to 11·5). We observed no serious complications. Rates of adverse events were similar across both treatment groups.

INTERPRETATION

In children and adolescents with uncomplicated BJIs, initial oral antibiotic treatment was non-inferior to initial intravenous antibiotics followed by oral therapy. The results are promising for oral treatment of uncomplicated BJIs, precluding the need for intravenous catheters and aligning with the principles of antimicrobial stewardship.

FUNDING

Innovation Fund Denmark and Rigshospitalets Forskningsfond.

Developments in the Design, Conduct, and Reporting of Child Health Trials

To identify priority areas to improve the design, conduct, and reporting of pediatric clinical trials, the international expert network, Standards for Research (StaR) in Child Health, was assembled and published the first 6 Standards in Pediatrics in 2012. After a recent review summarizing the 247 publications by StaR Child Health authors that highlight research practices that add value and reduce research "waste," the current review assesses the progress in key child health trial methods areas: consent and recruitment, containing risk of bias, roles of data monitoring committees, appropriate sample size calculations, outcome selection and measurement, and age groups for pediatric trials. Although meaningful change has occurred within the child health research ecosystem, measurable progress is still disappointingly slow. In this context, we identify and review emerging trends that will advance the agenda of increased clinical usefulness of pediatric trials, including patient and public engagement, Bayesian statistical approaches, adaptive designs, and platform trials. We explore how implementation science approaches could be applied to effect measurable improvements in the design, conducted, and reporting of child health research.

Guidelines for reporting pediatric and child health clinical trial protocols and reports: study protocol for SPIRIT-Children and CONSORT-Children

BACKGROUND

Despite the critical importance of clinical trials to provide evidence about the effects of intervention for children and youth, a paucity of published high-quality pediatric clinical trials persists. Sub-optimal reporting of key trial elements necessary to critically appraise and synthesize findings is prevalent. To harmonize and provide guidance for reporting in pediatric controlled clinical trial protocols and reports, reporting guideline extensions to the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines specific to pediatrics are being developed: SPIRIT-Children (SPIRIT-C) and CONSORT-Children (CONSORT-C).

METHODS

The development of SPIRIT-C/CONSORT-C will be informed by the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research Quality (EQUATOR) method for reporting guideline development in the following stages: (1) generation of a preliminary list of candidate items, informed by (a) items developed during initial development efforts and child relevant items from recent published SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions; (b) two systematic reviews and environmental scan of the literature; (c) workshops with young people; (2) an international Delphi study, where a wide range of panelists will vote on the inclusion or exclusion of candidate items on a nine-point Likert scale; (3) a consensus meeting to discuss items that have not reached consensus in the Delphi study and to "lock" the checklist items; (4) pilot testing of items and definitions to ensure that they are understandable, useful, and applicable; and (5) a final project meeting to discuss each item in the context of pilot test results. Key partners, including young people (ages 12-24 years) and family caregivers (e.g., parents) with lived experiences with pediatric clinical trials, and individuals with expertise and involvement in pediatric trials will be involved throughout the project. SPIRIT-C/CONSORT-C will be disseminated through publications, academic conferences, and endorsement by pediatric journals and relevant research networks and organizations.

DISCUSSION

SPIRIT/CONSORT-C may serve as resources to facilitate comprehensive reporting needed to understand pediatric clinical trial protocols and reports, which may improve transparency within pediatric clinical trials and reduce research waste.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The development of these reporting guidelines is registered with the EQUATOR Network: SPIRIT-Children ( https://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-clinical-trials-protocols/#35 ) and CONSORT-Children ( https://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-clinical-trials/#CHILD ).