Comparison of cefprozil, cefpodoxime proxetil, loracarbef, cefixime, and ceftibuten

Cefazolin as a predictor of urinary cephalosporin activity in indicated Enterobacterales

Traditionally, cephalothin susceptibility results were used to predict the susceptibility of additional cephalosporins; however, in 2013-2014, the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) revisited this practice and determined that cefazolin is a more accurate proxy than cephalothin for uncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTIs). Therefore, a cefazolin surrogacy breakpoint was established to predict the susceptibility of seven oral cephalosporins for Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Proteus mirabilis in the context of uUTIs. Clinical microbiology laboratories face several operational challenges when implementing the cefazolin surrogacy breakpoint, which may lead to confusion for the best path forward. Here, we review the historical context and data behind the surrogacy breakpoints, review PK/PD profiles for oral cephalosporins, discuss challenges in deploying the breakpoint, and highlight the limited clinical outcome data in this space.

Pharmacokinetics and Bioequivalence of Cefprozil for Suspension and Granule Formulation in Healthy Chinese Volunteers: Two Single-Dose Crossover Studies

INTRODUCTION

Cefprozil, an oral second-generation semi-synthetic cephalosporin, possesses a broad spectrum of antimicrobial activity. A granule formulation has been developed to improve medication adherence of the patients. This study was conducted to assess the bioequivalence of the granule formulation to a dry suspension in healthy Chinese volunteers and estimate the pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles of cefprozil.

METHODS

An open-label, randomized, single-dose, two-period, two-group, crossover study was conducted in 60 healthy Chinese volunteers under fasted or fed conditions (30 volunteers for each condition) to assess the bioequivalence between two formulations of cefprozil. Blood samples were collected at specified time intervals, and the plasma concentrations of cis- and trans-cefprozil were determined by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method. PK and bioavailability parameters were estimated via non-compartmental methods. Adverse events (AEs) were also recorded.

RESULTS

Under fasted conditions, the mean Cmax was (3534.70 ± 634.67) ng/ml, Tmax was (0.98 ± 0.25) h, t1/2 was (1.37 ± 0.13) h and AUC0-t was (9302.86 ± 1618.39) ng·h/ml, respectively, after a single dose of 125 mg cefprozil for suspension. Under fed conditions, the mean Cmax was (2438.80 ± 493.78) ng/ml, Tmax was (1.66 ± 0.76) h, t1/2 was (1.36 ± 0.24) h and AUC0-t was (9332.36 ± 1373.61) ng·h/ml, respectively. The PK parameters of the granule formulation of cefprozil were similar to those of the suspension. The 90% CI values of the GMRs of Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-∞ under both fasted and fed conditions were within the prespecified bioequivalence range (80.00-125.00%).

CONCLUSIONS

According to the criteria for bioequivalence, the test granule formulations of cefprozil and "Cefprozil for Suspension®" were determined to be bioequivalent whether under fasted or fed conditions by measurement of cis-, trans- and total cefprozil.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04414254.

Clinical trial protocol to evaluate the efficacy of cefixime in the treatment of early syphilis

BACKGROUND

Syphilis rates have been increasing both in the USA and internationally with incidence higher among men-who-have-sex-with-men and people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Currently, benzathine penicillin is the recommended treatment for syphilis in all patients. Global shortages and cost increases in benzathine penicillin call for alternative treatment options. This study evaluates the efficacy of oral cefixime for the treatment of early syphilis.

METHODS

We are conducting a randomized, multisite, open-label, non-comparative clinical trial in Los Angeles and Oakland, CA. Eligible participants are ≥ 18 years old, with primary, secondary, or early latent syphilis (rapid plasma reagin [RPR] titer ≥ 1:8). Patients with HIV infection must have a viral load ≤ 200 copies/mL and CD4+ T cell count ≥ 350 cells/μL during the past 6 months. Participants are randomized to receive either 2.4 M IU benzathine penicillin G intramuscularly once or cefixime 400 mg orally twice a day for 10 days. Participants return at 3, 6, and 12 months post-treatment for follow-up RPR serological testing. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants who achieve ≥ 4-fold RPR titer decrease at 3 or 6 months post-treatment.

DISCUSSION

Clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of alternative antibiotics to penicillin are urgently needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03660488 . Registered on 4 September 2018.

Cefpodoxime proxetil

A comprehensive profile of cefpodoxime proxetil including the nomenclatures, formulae, elemental composition, appearance, uses, and applications. The methods which were developed for the preparation of the drug substance and their respective schemes are outlined. The physical characteristics of the drug including the ionization constant, solubility, X-ray powder diffraction pattern, differential scanning calorimetry, thermal behavior, and spectroscopic studies are included. The methods which were used for the analysis of the drug substance in bulk drug and/or in pharmaceutical formulations includes the compendial, spectrophotometric, electrochemical and the chromatographic methods. The other studies which was carried out on this drug substance are including the drug stability, pharmacokinetics, bioavailability, drug evaluation, comparison and several compiled reviews. Finally, more than two hundred references are listed at the end of this profile.

The Surgical Infection Society Revised Guidelines on the Management of Intra-Abdominal Infection

BACKGROUND

Previous evidence-based guidelines on the management of intra-abdominal infection (IAI) were published by the Surgical Infection Society (SIS) in 1992, 2002, and 2010. At the time the most recent guideline was released, the plan was to update the guideline every five years to ensure the timeliness and appropriateness of the recommendations.

METHODS

Based on the previous guidelines, the task force outlined a number of topics related to the treatment of patients with IAI and then developed key questions on these various topics. All questions were approached using general and specific literature searches, focusing on articles and other information published since 2008. These publications and additional materials published before 2008 were reviewed by the task force as a whole or by individual subgroups as to relevance to individual questions. Recommendations were developed by a process of iterative consensus, with all task force members voting to accept or reject each recommendation. Grading was based on the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system; the quality of the evidence was graded as high, moderate, or weak, and the strength of the recommendation was graded as strong or weak. Review of the document was performed by members of the SIS who were not on the task force. After responses were made to all critiques, the document was approved as an official guideline of the SIS by the Executive Council.

RESULTS

This guideline summarizes the current recommendations developed by the task force on the treatment of patients who have IAI. Evidence-based recommendations have been made regarding risk assessment in individual patients; source control; the timing, selection, and duration of antimicrobial therapy; and suggested approaches to patients who fail initial therapy. Additional recommendations related to the treatment of pediatric patients with IAI have been included.

SUMMARY

The current recommendations of the SIS regarding the treatment of patients with IAI are provided in this guideline.

Comparative evaluation of 2 g single dose versus conventional dose azithromycin in uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections

Objectives:

Uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections (uSSSIs) are a common clinical problem. Majority are caused by staphylococci and streptococci. Different oral antibiotics are used for uSSSI, with comparable efficacy but varying treatment duration, cost, and adverse event profile. Azithromycin is used in uSSSI in adults conventionally in a dose of 500 mg once for 5 days. The extensive tissue distribution of the drug and its long elimination half-life prompted us to explore whether a single 2 g dose of the drug would produce a response in uSSSI comparable to conventional dosing.

Materials and Methods:

We conducted a parallel group, open-label, randomized, controlled trial (CTRI/2015/07/005969) with subjects of either sex, ≥12 years of age, presenting with uSSSI to the dermatology outpatient department. One group (n = 146) received 2 g single supervised dose while the other (n = 146) received conventional dose of 500 mg once daily for 5 days. Subjects were followed up on day 4 and day 8. Complete clinical cure implied complete healing of lesions, without residual signs or symptoms, within 7 days.

Results:

High cure rate was observed in both arms (97.97% and 98.63%, respectively) along with noticeable improvement in symptom profile from baseline but without statistically significant difference between groups. However, excellent adherence (defined as no tablets missed) was better in single dosing arm (98.65% vs. 86.30%). Tolerability was also comparable between groups with the majority of adverse events encountered being gastrointestinal in nature and mild.

Conclusions:

Single 2 g azithromycin dose achieved the same result as conventional azithromycin dosing in uSSSI with comparable tolerability but with the advantage of assured adherence. This dose can, therefore, be recommended as an alternative and administration supervised if feasible.

Diagnosis and management of skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTI): a literature review and consensus statement on behalf of the Italian Society of Infectious Diseases and International Society of Chemotherapy

Skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTIs) are among the most common bacterial infections, posing considerable diagnostic and therapeutic challenges and resulting in significant morbidity and mortality among patients as well as increased healthcare costs. eight members of the SSTI working group of the Italian Society of infectious Diseases prepared a draft of the statements, grading the quality of each piece of evidence after a careful review of the current literature using MEDLINE database and their own clinical experience. Statements were graded for their strength and quality using a system based on the one adopted by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). The manuscript was successively reviewed by seven members of the SSTI working group of the international Society of Chemotherapy, and ultimately re-formulated by all e xperts. the microbiological and clinical aspects together with diagnostic features were considered for uncomplicated and complicated SSTIs. Antimicrobial therapy was considered as well -both empirical and targeted to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and/or other main pathogens.

Review of the spectrum and potency of orally administered cephalosporins and amoxicillin/clavulanate

The antimicrobial spectrum and in vitro potency of the most frequently prescribed orally administered cephalosporins (cefaclor, cefdinir, cefpodoxime, cefprozil, cefuroxime axetil, cephalexin) and amoxicillin/clavulanate are reviewed. These beta-lactam agents have been widely used in the outpatient arena for the treatment of community-acquired respiratory tract and other mild-to-moderate infections. The data presented here were obtained from critical review articles on each of these compounds. Cephalexin and cefaclor were among the least potent and had the narrowest antimicrobial spectrums against the pathogens evaluated. In contrast, cefdinir, cefpodoxime, cefprozil, and cefuroxime were highly active against penicillin-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae and retained some activity against penicillin-intermediate strains, whereas amoxicillin/clavulanate was the most active against S. pneumoniae, including most penicillin nonsusceptible strains. Amoxicillin/clavulanate and cefdinir were the most potent compounds against methicillin (oxacillin)-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus, whereas cefpodoxime was the most potent compound against Haemophilus influenzae. Amoxicillin/clavulanate, cefdinir, and cefpodoxime were also active against Moraxella catarrhalis, including beta-lactamase-producing strains. In summary, orally administered "3rd-generation" or extended spectrum cephalosporins exhibited more balanced spectrums of activity against the principal bacterial pathogens responsible for outpatient respiratory tract and other infections when compared with other widely used oral cephalosporins of earlier generations or amoxicillin alone.

Cefdinir vs. cephalexin for mild to moderate uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections in adolescents and adults

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of cefdinir to that of cephalexin in adolescents and adults with mild to moderate uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections (USSSI).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was an investigator-blinded, multicenter study in which patients at least 13 years of age with USSSI were randomized to receive 10 days of cefdinir 300 mg twice daily (BID) or cephalexin 250 mg four times daily (QID). Patients were evaluated at baseline, by telephone on Days 3-5, and during office visits on Days 12-14 (end-of-therapy [EOT] visit) and Days 17-24 (test-of-cure [TOC] visit).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical response was evaluated at the TOC visit. Patient reported outcomes, including a usefulness questionnaire, were also assessed.

RESULTS

Three hundred and ninety-one patients were treated. The treatment groups were well matched with regard to demographic characteristics and types of infection. Abscess(es) (26%), wound infection (24%), and cellulitis (21%) were the most common infections. At the TOC visit, the clinical cure rate for both treatment groups was 89% (151/170 for cefdinir and 154/174 for cephalexin) in clinically evaluable patients (95% CI for difference in cure rates [-6.7 to 7.3]). In the intent-to-treat analysis, cure rates were 83% for cefdinir vs. 82% for cephalexin. Clinical cure rates for infections caused by methicillin-susceptible (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant (MRSA) Staphylococcus aureus were 93% (37/40) and 92% (35/38) for cefdinir vs. 91% (29/32) and 90% (37/41) for cephalexin (p > 0.999 comparing treatment groups for MSSA; p > 0.999 for MRSA). The usefulness questionnaire demonstrated that cefdinir was more highly rated in the mean composite score (87.4 vs. 83.6, p = 0.04), with the difference primarily due to the respondents' preference for the convenience of taking the study medication (mean score 93.5 vs. 74.1 for cephalexin, p < 0.001). The study had the following limitations: the requirement for culture at baseline likely skewed the enrollment of patients towards those with abscesses; the results of culture in patients with USSSIs are often nonspecific; in some patients entering the study with a diagnosis of cellulitis, the cellulitis was associated with an abscess; and, incision and drainage (I&D), spontaneous drainage, and needle aspiration are likely to have contributed to clinical response for purulent infections, and in particular MRSA-associated infections. Both study drugs were well tolerated. The most common treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea (10% cefdinir, 4% cephalexin, p = 0.017), nausea (3% and 6%, respectively, p = 0.203), and vaginal mycosis (3% and 6% of females, respectively, p = 0.500).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that empiric coverage of USSSIs with cephalosporin therapy remains an appropriate clinical strategy. MRSA infections responded well in both arms of the study, suggesting that the choice of a cephalosporin did not adversely affect patient outcome. However, cephalosporins do not have accepted, clinically relevant in vitro activity against MRSA. Hence, the clinical response rates seen in this study against MRSA infections must be interpreted with caution. Cefdinir was more highly rated than cephalexin in a composite usefulness assessment.

Staphylococcal skin infections in children: rational drug therapy recommendations

Staphylococcus aureus remains one of the most common and troublesome of bacteria causing disease in humans, despite the development of effective antibacterials and improvement in hygiene. The organism is responsible for over 70% of all skin and soft tissue infections in children and accounts for up to one-fifth of all visits to pediatric clinics. Skin and soft tissue infections that are predominantly caused by S. aureus include bullous and non-bullous impetigo, folliculitis, furunculosis, carbunculosis, cellulitis, surgical and traumatic wound infections, mastitis, and neonatal omphalitis. Other skin and soft tissue infections may also be caused by S. aureus but are often polymicrobial in origin and require special consideration. These include burns, decubitus ulcers (particularly in the perianal region), puncture wounds of the foot, as well as human and mammalian bites. Treatment of staphylococcal skin infections varies from topical antiseptics to prolonged intravenous antibacterials, depending on severity of the lesions and the health of the child. The treatment of choice for oral antibacterials remains the penicillinase-resistant penicillins such as flucloxacillin. Cefalexin and erythromycin are suitable cost-effective alternatives with broader cover, although care must be taken with the use of macrolides because of development of resistance to multiple families of antibacterials, particularly the lincosamides. Other cephalosporins such as cefadroxil and cefprozil are also effective, can be given once daily and have a better tolerability profile -- while azithromycin has a further advantage of a 3-day course. However, all of these agents are more expensive. Although the antibacterials have been given for 10 days in most clinical trials, there is no evidence that this duration is more effective than a 7-day course. In children requiring intravenous therapy, ceftriaxone has a major advantage over other antibacterials such as sulbactam/ampicillin and cefuroxime in that it can be given once daily and may, therefore, be suitable for outpatient treatment of moderate-to-severe skin infections. Newer-generation cephalosporins and loracarbef are also effective and have a broader spectrum of activity, but do not offer any added benefit and are significantly more expensive. Skin and soft tissue infections due to methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) are still relatively uncommon in children. Well children with community-acquired MRSA infections can be treated with clindamycin or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (cotrimoxazole), but must be observed closely for potentially severe adverse effects. In severe infections, vancomycin remains the treatment of choice, while intravenous teicoplanin and clindamycin are suitable alternatives. Linezolid and quinupristin/dalfopristin are currently showing great promise for the treatment of multi-resistant Gram-positive infections. While the choice of antibacterial is important, supportive management, including removal of any infected foreign bodies, surgical drainage of walled-off lesions, and regular wound cleaning, play a vital role in ensuring cure.

Cefixime Allows Greater Dose Escalation of Oral Irinotecan: A Phase I Study in Pediatric Patients With Refractory Solid Tumors

Purpose

Irinotecan is active against a variety of malignancies; however, severe diarrhea limits its usefulness. In our phase I study, the intravenous formulation of irinotecan was administered orally daily for 5 days for 2 consecutive weeks (repeated every 21 days) to children with refractory solid tumors. Our objectives were to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicity, and pharmacokinetics of oral irinotecan and to evaluate whether coadministration of cefixime (8 mg/kg/d beginning 5 days before irinotecan and continuing throughout the course) ameliorates irinotecan-induced diarrhea.

Patients and Methods

In separate cohorts, irinotecan doses were escalated from 15 to 45 mg/m2/d without cefixime and then from 45 to 60 and 75 mg/m2/d with cefixime.

Results

Without cefixime, diarrhea was dose limiting at irinotecan 45 mg/m2/d. Myelotoxicity was not significant at any dose. The MTD was 40 mg/m2/d without cefixime but 60 mg/m2/d with cefixime. Systemic exposure to SN-38 at the MTD was significantly higher with cefixime than without cefixime (mean SN-38 area under the curve: 19.5 ng×h/mL; standard deviation [SD], 6.8 ng × h/mL v 10.4 ng × h/mL; SD, 4.3 ng × h/mL, respectively; P = .030).

Conclusion

Cefixime administered with oral irinotecan is well tolerated in children and allows greater dose escalation of irinotecan. Because diarrhea is a major adverse effect of both intravenous and oral irinotecan, further evaluation of the use of cefixime to ameliorate this adverse effect is warranted.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling of antibacterial activity of cefpodoxime and cefixime in in vitro kinetic models

The bacterial time-kill curves of cefpodoxime and cefixime against four bacterial strains (Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis, Streptococcus pneumoniae/penicillin sensitive and S. pneumoniae/penicillin intermediate) were compared in in vitro infection models in which various human pharmacokinetic profiles of unbound antibiotic were simulated. This approach offers more detailed information than the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) does about the time course of antibacterial efficacy of an antibiotic. A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) model based on unbound antibiotic concentrations at the site of infection, and a sigmoid Emax-relationship with EC50 as the antibiotic concentration necessary to produce 50% of the maximum effect, effectively described the antimicrobial efficacy of both cefpodoxime and cefixime. The EC50 values of cefpodoxime and cefixime were consistent with their respective MIC values. Both antibiotics had similar high potency against H. influenzae (EC50: 0.04 mg/L) and M. catarrhalis (EC50: 0.12 mg/L), while the potency of cefpodoxime against S. pneumoniae strains was about 10-fold higher than that of cefixime (EC50s/sensitive strain: 0.02 mg/L versus 0.27 mg/L; EC50s/intermediate strain: 0.09 mg/L versus 0.69 mg/L). Applications of this model and unbound tissue PK profiles obtained from a previous clinical study performed in our group, showed that cefpodoxime has higher bacteriological potency than cefixime against S. pneumoniae. Simulations based on this model allow the comparison of antibacterial efficacy of different antibiotics and dosing regimens.

Cefpodoxime - utility in respiratory tract infections and typhoid fever

Cefpodoxime is a oral third generation cephalosporin active against most of gram positive and gram negative bacteria except Pseudomonas, B. fragilis and Entrococcous. Clinical studies have confirmed efficacy of cefpodoxime in acute otitis media, sinusitis and tosillopharyngitis. Twice daily administration and safety profile increases compliance and decreases failure rate. It has a role as switch over therapy from intravenous ceftriaxone in serious respiratory tract infections (RTIs). In areas where common respiratory pathogens show decreased sensitivity to penicillins and macrolides cefpodoxime can be used as empirical first line therapy in respiratory tract infections. It seems to be a promising molecule in pediatric typhoid fever because of its excellent activity against Salmonella species but clinical trials are limited.

Randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparison of oral cefditoren 200 or 400 mg BID with either cefuroxime 250 mg BID or cefadroxil 500 mg BID for the treatment of uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections

BACKGROUND

Uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections are commonly observed in medical practice. Because these infections typically are confined to the superficial layers and seldom lead to the destruction of skin structures and resultant systemic dissemination, in general they can be treated with an oral antibiotic with potent microbiologic activity against gram-positive pathogens.

OBJECTIVE

This paper compares the efficacy and tolerability of 3 beta-lactam antibiotics in patients with uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections.

METHODS

Two double-blind, multicenter, parallel-group studies were conducted, in which patients aged > or = 12 years with uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections were randomized to receive cefditoren 200 or 400 mg, cefuroxime 250 mg, or cefadroxil 500 mg, each BID for 10 days. Study 1 compared cefditoren with cefuroxime; Study 2 compared cefditoren with cefadroxil. Clinical and microbiologic responses were assessed at a posttreatment visit (within 48 hours of treatment completion) and test-of-cure visit (7-14 days after treatment completion). Patients were monitored closely throughout the study with the use of physical examinations, clinical laboratory tests, and assessment of adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 1,685 patients (855 males, 830 females; mean age, 41.1 years [range, 12-95 years]) were enrolled. Within both studies, the 3 treatment groups were similar at baseline based on demographic characteristics and types of infection. Cellulitis (26%), wound infection (25%), and simple abscess (15%) were the most common infections. Clinical cure rates at the test-of-cure visit were 85% (443/523) for cefditoren 200 mg, 83% (427/516) for cefditoren 400 mg, 88% (234/265) for cefuroxime, and 85% (211/248) for cefadroxil. At the test-of-cure visit, cefditoren 200 mg had eradicated significantly fewer of the causative pathogens isolated before treatment in microbiologically evaluable patients than did cefuroxime in Study 1 (P = 0.043) but significantly more of the pathogens than did cefadroxil in Study 2 (P = 0.018). Eradication rates for the most commonly isolated pathogens were generally similar in the 3 treatment groups in both studies, with the only significant difference favoring cefditoren 200 and 400 mg over cefadroxil for Peptostreptococcus species in Study 2 (P = 0.016 and P = 0.003, respectively). A minority of patients (< or = 5% in any treatment group) discontinued study-drug treatment prematurely due to a treatment-related adverse event, with statistically higher rates for cefditoren 400 mg than for cefditoren 200 mg and the comparator cephalosporins (each P < 0.05). All 3 cephalosporins were generally well tolerated. Most adverse events (>93%) were categorized as mild to moderate, with the most common being diarrhea, nausea, and headache.

CONCLUSION

In this population of patients with uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections, including those due to Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes, the clinical cure rate and tolerability of cefditoren were comparable to those of cefuroxime and cefadroxil.

Once-daily oral gatifloxacin versus oral levofloxacin in treatment of uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections: double-blind, multicenter, randomized study

This was a double-blind, multicenter study in which 410 adults (> or =18 years of age) with uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) were randomized to receive either 400 mg of gatifloxacin orally once daily or 500 mg of levofloxacin orally once daily for 7 to 10 days. The study protocol called for four assessments-before and during treatment, at the end of treatment, and posttreatment. Efficacy evaluations included clinical response and bacterial eradication rates. Of 407 treated patients, 202 (108 women, 94 men) received gatifloxacin and 205 (111 women, 94 men) received levofloxacin. For clinically evaluable patients, the cure rates were 91% for gatifloxacin and 84% for levofloxacin (95% confidence interval [CI] for the difference, -2.0 to 15.2%). Clinical cure rates for microbiologically evaluable patients were 93% for gatifloxacin and 88% for levofloxacin (95% CI for the difference, -6.5 to 16.8%). The bacterial eradication rate was 92% for each group, with gatifloxacin eradicating 93% of the methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus isolates and levofloxacin eradicating 91% of them. Both drugs were well tolerated. Most of the adverse events were mild to moderate, and nausea was the most common adverse event in each treatment arm. Once-daily oral gatifloxacin (400 mg) is clinically efficacious and well tolerated compared with once-daily levofloxacin (500 mg) for the treatment of patients with uncomplicated SSTIs.

The variability and appropriateness of the antibiotic prescription of acute otitis media in childhood. The Spanish Study Group for Antibiotic Treatments

OBJECTIVE

To know the variability of treatment of acute otitis media in Spain and the appropriateness of such with respect to consensus.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A descriptive, multicentre, prospective study was carried out in the services of 11 Spanish hospitals. Children diagnosed with acute otitis media and treated on 30 days selected randomly between January and June 1997 were included. An analysis of treatment variability was made. The results were compared with consensus conference of a panel of experts.

RESULTS

Out of the 29436 emergencies studied on 30 days, 821 were diagnosed with acute otitis media. Fifteen point seven percent of the cases were already receiving antibiotics (22% amoxicillin clavulanate, 20% amoxicillin and 11% cefuroxime axetil). For the treatment, at discharge, of the 93% an antibiotic was prescribed (amoxicillin clavulanate in 41%, amoxicillin in 15%, cefuroxime axetil in 11%, cefaclor 6% and azithromycin 5%). Two point eight percent of the children were admitted. According to the guidelines of the panel of experts consulted, appropriateness was 61% for antibiotics of first choice, 12% for drugs of alternate use and 25% for inadequate treatment. The different hospitals presented significant variability in the type of antibiotic used and the appropriateness of such.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute otitis media is treated with antibiotics in 93% of the cases diagnosed in Spanish hospitals. The most commonly used antibiotics are amoxicillin clavulanate and amoxicillin alone. The prescription and its appropriateness present significant variability in the different hospitals studied.

The new antibiotics

It is easy to become overwhelmed by the amount of information available on the new antibiotics and difficult to keep abreast of the appropriate indications for each of them. For most patients with community-acquired infections, the first-line agent is usually not one of the newer agents, but a standard regimen, or at times, no antibiotic at all. The development of resistance is likely to parallel the extent to which these agents are prescribed. They should be used only when standard treatment fails, when compliance with treatment is a real and serious issue, or when the patient has a real allergic reaction to the standard regimen.

Loracarbef versus clarithromycin in children with acute otitis media with effusion

Two multicenter, randomized, single-masked, parallel-group studies compared loracarbef and clarithromycin with regard to efficacy, tolerability, and patient acceptance. Three hundred thirty-four children aged 6 months to 3 years with acute otitis media with effusion received loracarbef (15 mg/kg) or clarithromycin (7.5 mg/kg) orally twice daily for 10 days. Patients were assessed for the presence of the diagnostic signs and symptoms of otitis media with effusion by physical examination and pneumatic otoscopy at 48 hours pretreatment, 3 to 5 days after initiation of treatment, 0 to 3 days after the final dose (posttreatment), and 14 to 21 days later (termination). Symptoms were assigned numeric values. Symptomatic response was assessed at the posttherapy and termination visits. Tolerability was determined by assessing adverse events, and a patient acceptance survey was completed by each patient's caregiver. The combined results of these 2 studies showed that the efficacy and tolerability of loracarbef were comparable to those of clarithromycin. Adverse events were reported by 46.4% of loracarbef patients and 41.0% of clarithromycin patients, with no statistically significant difference between groups. In the intent-to-treat analysis, 57.9% of loracarbef patients were cured at the termination of the study, compared with 55.7% of clarithromycin patients. Improvement was seen in 4.1% of loracarbef patients and 2.7% of clarithromycin patients. Results of the patient acceptance survey showed a clear preference for loracarbef over clarithromycin. Difficulties with administration of treatment were reported by 36.3% of clarithromycin caregivers, compared with 7.8% of loracarbef caregivers (P < 0.001). A desire to stop treatment was reported by 23.8% of clarithromycin caregivers, compared with 7.8% of loracarbef caregivers (P < 0.001). Taste and texture issues were most frequently cited as reasons for nonacceptance.

Recognition and management of sinusitis

Acute sinusitis frequently follows upper respiratory tract infections. Patients complain of headache, facial pain, fever and purulent rhinorrhoea. Diagnosis is based upon the symptoms, and treatment comprises symptomatic relief with analgesics, topical or systemic decongestants and steam inhalation. If indicated, antibiotics should be given for an adequate period of time. Patients with chronic sinusitis complain of a combination of nasal obstruction, rhinorrhoea and postnasal drip associated with intermittent facial pain, with symptoms persisting for 3 months or more. Predisposition to the condition may be caused by rhinitis (allergic or nonallergic) and anatomical variants. Failure of mucociliary transport and sinus ostial obstruction leads to mucosal oedema, mucous hypersecretion and chronic infection. Current treatment aims are to control rhinitis and improve ventilation and function of the sinuses. Rhinitis may be controlled with the long term use of topical corticosteroids, mast cell stabilisers or antihistamines, either alone or in combination. Secretions may be cleared with steam inhalation and/or saline nasal douching. Failure to control chronic sinusitis with medical treatment may indicate surgery. The aim of surgery is to improve ventilation and facilitate drainage of the sinuses, allowing the restoration of normal function. Removal of nasal polyps, reduction of inferior turbinates or septal straightening may be all that is required. Some patients will need endoscopic ethmoidectomy and middle meatal antrostomy. Improved ventilation in the ethmoid infundibulum may help to resolve disease in maxillary and frontal sinuses. Medical treatment of underlying rhinitis will need to be continued postoperatively, often in the long term, while special consideration needs to be paid to sinusitis in children, in relation to dental disease and in the immunosuppressed. Complications of acute and chronic sinusitis include intraorbital and intracranial sepsis. These potentially lethal complications need urgent evaluation with high resolution computerised tomography (CT) scanning, intravenous administration of broad spectrum antibiotics (including anaerobic and microaerophilic cover) and urgent surgical drainage as appropriate.

Newer oral antimicrobials for resistant respiratory tract pathogens. Which show the most promise?

As antimicrobial resistance to tried-and-true drugs continues to build, an arsenal of new drugs aimed at resistant respiratory tract pathogens is needed. Penicillin is now ineffective against several common pathogens, including many pneumococcal organisms. Newer antimicrobials, including macrolides, cephalosporins, and fluoroquinolones, have been developed to take its place. The authors of this article present a progress report of the fight against respiratory tract infection and an assessment of the most promising newer agents for use against multidrug-resistant pathogens.