scholarly journals Investigator-Driven Randomised Controlled Trial of Cefiderocol versus Standard Therapy for Healthcare-Associated and Hospital-Acquired Gram-negative Bloodstream Infection: Study protocol (the GAME CHANGER trial): study protocol for an open-label, randomised controlled trial

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh Wright ◽  
Patrick N. A. Harris ◽  
Mark D. Chatfield ◽  
David Lye ◽  
Andrew Henderson ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Increasing rates of antibiotic resistance in Gram-negative organisms due to the presence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL), hyperproduction of AmpC enzymes, carbapenemases and other mechanisms of resistance are identified in common hospital- and healthcare-associated pathogens including Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii. Cefiderocol is a novel siderophore cephalosporin antibiotic with a catechol moiety on the 3-position side chain. Cefiderocol has been shown to be potent in vitro against a broad range of Gram-negative organisms, including carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) and multi-drug-resistant (MDR) P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii. Recent clinical data has shown cefiderocol to be effective in the setting of complicated urinary tract infections and nosocomial pneumonia, but it has not yet been studied as treatment of bloodstream infection. Methods This study will use a multicentre, open-label non-inferiority trial design comparing cefiderocol and standard of care antibiotics. Eligible participants will be adult inpatients who are diagnosed with a bloodstream infection with a Gram-negative organism on the basis of a positive blood culture result where the acquisition meets the definition for healthcare-associated or hospital-acquired. It will compare cefiderocol with the current standard of care (SOC) antibiotic regimen according to the patient’s treating clinician. Eligible participants will be randomised 1:1 to cefiderocol or SOC and receive 5–14 days of antibiotic therapy. Trial recruitment will occur in at least 20 sites in ten countries (Australia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Turkey and Greece). The sample size has been derived from an estimated 14 day, all-cause mortality rate of 10% in the control group, and a non-inferiority margin of 10% difference in the two groups. A minimum of 284 patients are required in total to achieve 80% power with a two-sided alpha level of 0.05. Data describing demographic information, risk factors, concomitant antibiotics, illness scores, microbiology, multidrug-resistant organism screening, discharge and mortality will be collected. Discussion With increasing antimicrobial resistance, there is a need for the development of new antibiotics with broad activity against Gram-negative pathogens such as cefiderocol. By selecting a population at risk for multi-drug-resistant pathogens and commencing study treatment early in the clinical illness (within 48 h of index blood culture) the trial hopes to provide guidance to clinicians of the efficacy of this novel agent. Trial registration The GAME CHANGER trial is registered under the US National Institute of Health ClinicalTrials.gov register, reference number NCT03869437. Registered on March 11, 2019.

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fiona V. Cresswell ◽  
Kenneth Ssebambulidde ◽  
Daniel Grint ◽  
Lindsey te Brake ◽  
Abdul Musabire ◽  
...  

Background: Tuberculous meningitis (TBM) has 44% (95%CI 35-52%) in-hospital mortality with standard therapy in Uganda. Rifampicin, the cornerstone of TB therapy, has 70% oral bioavailability and ~10-20% cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) penetration.  With current WHO-recommended TB treatment containing 8-12mg/kg rifampicin, CSF rifampicin exposures frequently fall below the minimal inhibitory concentration for M. tuberculosis. Two Indonesian phase II studies, the first investigating intravenous rifampicin 600mg and the second oral rifampicin ~30mg/kg, found the interventions were safe and resulted in significantly increased CSF rifampicin exposures and a reduction in 6-month mortality in the investigational arms. Whether such improvements can be replicated in an HIV-positive population remains to be determined. Protocol: We will perform a phase II, open-label randomised controlled trial, comparing higher-dose oral and intravenous rifampicin with current standard of care in a predominantly HIV-positive population. Participants will be allocated to one of three parallel arms (I:I:I): (i) intravenous rifampicin 20mg/kg for 2-weeks followed by oral rifampicin 35mg/kg for 6-weeks; (ii) oral rifampicin 35mg/kg for 8-weeks; (iii) standard of care, oral rifampicin 10mg/kg/day for 8-weeks. Primary endpoints will be: (i) pharmacokinetic parameters in plasma and CSF; (ii) safety. We will also examine the effect of higher-dose rifampicin on survival time, neurological outcomes and incidence of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome. We will enrol 60 adults with suspected TBM, from two hospitals in Uganda, with follow-up to 6 months post-enrolment. Discussion: HIV co-infection affects the bioavailability of rifampicin in the initial days of therapy, risk of drug toxicity and drug interactions, and ultimately mortality from TBM. Our study aims to demonstrate, in a predominantly HIV-positive population, the safety and pharmacokinetic superiority of one or both investigational arms compared to current standard of care. The most favourable dose may ultimately be taken forward into an adequately powered phase III trial. Trial registration: ISRCTN42218549 (24th April 2018)


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 141
Author(s):  
Evelyne Kestelyn ◽  
Nguyen Thi Phuong Dung ◽  
Yen Lam Minh ◽  
Le Manh Hung ◽  
Nguyen Minh Quan ◽  
...  

Background: COVID-19 is a respiratory disease caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and causes substantial morbidity and mortality. There is currently no vaccine to prevent COVID-19 or therapeutic agent to treat COVID-19. This clinical trial is designed to evaluate chloroquine as a potential therapeutic for the treatment of hospitalised people with COVID-19. We hypothesise that chloroquine slows viral replication in patients with COVID-19, attenuating the infection, and resulting in more rapid decline of viral load in throat/nose swabs. This viral attenuation should be associated with improved patient outcomes. Method: The study will start with a 10-patient prospective observational pilot study following the same entry and exclusion criteria as for the randomized trial and undergoing the same procedures. The main study is an open label, randomised, controlled trial with two parallel arms of standard of care (control arm) versus standard of care with 10 days of chloroquine (intervention arm) with a loading dose over the first 24 hours, followed by 300mg base orally once daily for nine days. The study will recruit patients in three sites in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam: the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, the Cu Chi Field Hospital, and the Can Gio COVID hospital. The primary endpoint is the time to viral clearance from throat/nose swab, defined as the time following randomization until the midpoint between the last positive and the first of the negative throat/nose swabs. Viral presence will be determined using RT-PCR to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Discussion: The results of the study will add to the evidence-based guidelines for management of COVID-19. Given the enormous experience of its use in malaria chemoprophylaxis, excellent safety and tolerability profile, and its very low cost, if proved effective then chloroquine would be a readily deployable and affordable treatment for patients with COVID-19. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04328493 31/03/2020


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Adeniyi Olagunju ◽  
Adeola Fowotade ◽  
Ajibola Olagunoye ◽  
Temitope Olumuyiwa Ojo ◽  
Bolanle Olufunlola Adefuye ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives To investigate the efficacy and safety of repurposed antiprotozoal and antiretroviral drugs, nitazoxanide and atazanavir/ritonavir, in shortening the time to clinical improvement and achievement of SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) negativity in patients diagnosed with moderate to severe COVID-19. Trial design This is a pilot phase 2, multicentre 2-arm (1:1 ratio) open-label randomised controlled trial. Participants Patients with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis (defined as SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive nasopharyngeal swab) will be recruited from four participating isolation and treatment centres in Nigeria: two secondary care facilities (Infectious Diseases Hospital, Olodo, Ibadan, Oyo State and Specialist State Hospital, Asubiaro, Osogbo, Osun State) and two tertiary care facilities (Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals Complex, Ile-Ife, Osun State and Olabisi Onabanjo University Teaching Hospital, Sagamu, Ogun State). These facilities have a combined capacity of 146-bed COVID-19 isolation and treatment ward. Inclusion criteria Confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection by PCR test within two days before randomisation and initiation of treatment, age bracket of 18 and 75 years, symptomatic, able to understand study information and willingness to participate. Exclusion criteria include the inability to take orally administered medication or food, known hypersensitivity to any of the study drugs, pregnant or lactating, current or recent (within 24 hours of enrolment) treatment with agents with actual or likely antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2, concurrent use of agents with known or suspected interaction with study drugs, and requiring mechanical ventilation at screening. Intervention and comparator Participants in the intervention group will receive 1000 mg of nitazoxanide twice daily orally and 300/100 mg of atazanvir/ritonavir once daily orally in addition to standard of care while participants in the control group will receive only standard of care. Standard of care will be determined by the physician at the treatment centre in line with the current guidelines for clinical management of COVID-19 in Nigeria. Main outcome measures Main outcome measures are: (1) Time to clinical improvement (defined as time from randomisation to either an improvement of two points on a 10-category ordinal scale (developed by the WHO Working Group on the Clinical Characterisation and Management of COVID-19 infection) or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first); (2) Proportion of participants with SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) negative result at days 2, 4, 6, 7, 14 and 28; (3) Temporal patterns of SARS-CoV-2 viral load on days 2, 4, 6, 7, 14 and 28 quantified by RT-PCR from saliva of patients receiving standard of care alone versus standard of care plus study drugs. Randomisation Allocation of participants to study arm is randomised within each site with a ratio 1:1 based on randomisation sequences generated centrally at Obafemi Awolowo University. The model was implemented in REDCap and includes stratification by age, gender, viral load at diagnosis and presence of relevant comorbidities. Blinding None, this is an open-label trial. Number to be randomised (sample size) 98 patients (49 per arm). Trial status Regulatory approval was issued by the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control on 06 October 2020 (protocol version number is 2.1 dated 06 August 2020). Recruitment started on 9 October 2020 and is anticipated to end before April 2021. Trial registration The trial has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (July 7, 2020), with identifier number NCT04459286 and on Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (August 13, 2020), with identifier number PACTR202008855701534. Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file which will be made available on the trial website. In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the traditional formatting has been eliminated, and this letter serves as a summary of the key elements in the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Surey ◽  
H. R. Stagg ◽  
T. A. Yates ◽  
M. Lipman ◽  
P. J. White ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Ending the global tuberculosis (TB) epidemic requires a focus on treating individuals with latent TB infection (LTBI) to prevent future cases. Promising trials of shorter regimens have shown them to be effective as preventative TB treatment, however there is a paucity of data on self-administered treatment completion rates. This pilot trial assessed treatment completion, adherence, safety and the feasibility of treating LTBI in the UK using a weekly rifapentine and isoniazid regimen versus daily rifampicin and isoniazid, both self-administered for 12 weeks. Methods An open label, randomised, multi-site pilot trial was conducted in London, UK, between March 2015 and January 2017. Adults between 16 and 65 years with LTBI at two TB clinics who were eligible for and agreed to preventative therapy were consented and randomised 1:1 to receive either a weekly combination of rifapentine/isoniazid (‘intervention’) or a daily combination of rifampicin/isoniazid (‘standard’), with both regimens taken for twelve weeks; treatment was self-administered in both arms. The primary outcome, completion of treatment, was self-reported, defined as taking more than 90% of prescribed doses and corroborated by pill counts and urine testing. Adverse events were recorded. Results Fifty-two patients were successfully enrolled. In the intervention arm 21 of 27 patients completed treatment (77.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 57.7–91.4), compared with 19 of 25 (76.0%, CI 54.9–90.6) in the standard of care arm. There was a similar adverse effect profile between the two arms. Conclusion In this pilot trial, treatment completion was comparable between the weekly rifapentine/isoniazid and the daily rifampicin/isoniazid regimens. Additionally, the adverse event profile was similar between the two arms. We conclude that it is safe and feasible to undertake a fully powered trial to determine whether self-administered weekly treatment is superior/non-inferior compared to current treatment. Trial registration The trial was funded by the NIHR, UK and registered with ISRCTN (26/02/2013-No.04379941).


BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m1849 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Tang ◽  
Zhujun Cao ◽  
Mingfeng Han ◽  
Zhengyan Wang ◽  
Junwen Chen ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19).DesignMulticentre, open label, randomised controlled trial.Setting16 government designated covid-19 treatment centres in China, 11 to 29 February 2020.Participants150 patients admitted to hospital with laboratory confirmed covid-19 were included in the intention to treat analysis (75 patients assigned to hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care, 75 to standard of care alone).InterventionsHydroxychloroquine administrated at a loading dose of 1200 mg daily for three days followed by a maintenance dose of 800 mg daily (total treatment duration: two or three weeks for patients with mild to moderate or severe disease, respectively).Main outcome measureNegative conversion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by 28 days, analysed according to the intention to treat principle. Adverse events were analysed in the safety population in which hydroxychloroquine recipients were participants who received at least one dose of hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine non-recipients were those managed with standard of care alone.ResultsOf 150 patients, 148 had mild to moderate disease and two had severe disease. The mean duration from symptom onset to randomisation was 16.6 (SD 10.5; range 3-41) days. A total of 109 (73%) patients (56 standard of care; 53 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) had negative conversion well before 28 days, and the remaining 41 (27%) patients (19 standard of care; 22 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) were censored as they did not reach negative conversion of virus. The probability of negative conversion by 28 days in the standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine group was 85.4% (95% confidence interval 73.8% to 93.8%), similar to that in the standard of care group (81.3%, 71.2% to 89.6%). The difference between groups was 4.1% (95% confidence interval –10.3% to 18.5%). In the safety population, adverse events were recorded in 7/80 (9%) hydroxychloroquine non-recipients and in 21/70 (30%) hydroxychloroquine recipients. The most common adverse event in the hydroxychloroquine recipients was diarrhoea, reported in 7/70 (10%) patients. Two hydroxychloroquine recipients reported serious adverse events.ConclusionsAdministration of hydroxychloroquine did not result in a significantly higher probability of negative conversion than standard of care alone in patients admitted to hospital with mainly persistent mild to moderate covid-19. Adverse events were higher in hydroxychloroquine recipients than in non-recipients.Trial registrationChiCTR2000029868.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian Surey ◽  
Helen R Stagg ◽  
Thomas A Yates ◽  
Marc Lipman ◽  
Peter J White ◽  
...  

Abstract BackgroundEnding the global tuberculosis (TB) epidemic requires a focus on treating individuals with latent TB infection (LTBI) to prevent future cases. Promising trials of shorter regimens have shown them to be effective as preventative TB treatment, however there is a paucity of data on self-administered treatment completion rates. This pilot trial assessed treatment completion, adherence, safety and the feasibility of treating LTBI in the UK using a weekly rifapentine and isoniazid regimen versus daily rifampicin and isoniazid, both self-administered for twelve weeks. MethodsAn open label, randomised, multi-site pilot trial was conducted in London, UK, between March 2015 and January 2017. Adults between 16 and 65 years with LTBI at two TB clinics who were eligible for and agreed to preventative therapy were consented and randomised 1:1 to receive either a weekly combination of rifapentine/isoniazid (‘intervention’) or a daily combination of rifampicin/isoniazid (‘standard’), with both regimens taken for twelve weeks; treatment was self-administered in both arms. The primary outcome, completion of treatment, was self-reported, defined as taking more than 90% of prescribed doses and corroborated by pill counts and urine testing. Adverse events were recorded. Results52 patients were successfully enrolled. In the intervention arm 21 of 27 patients completed treatment (77.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 57.7-91.4), compared with 19 of 25 (76.0%, CI 54.9-90.6) in the standard of care arm. There was a similar adverse effect profile between the two arms. ConclusionIn this pilot trial, treatment completion was comparable between the weekly rifapentine/isoniazid and the daily rifampicin/isoniazid regimens. Additionally, the adverse event profile was similar between the two arms. We conclude that it is safe and feasible to undertake a fully powered trial to determine whether self-administered weekly treatment is superior/non-inferior compared to current treatment.Trial RegistrationThe trial was funded by the NIHR, UK and registered with ISRCTN (26/02/2013-No.04379941).


BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m3939 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anup Agarwal ◽  
Aparna Mukherjee ◽  
Gunjan Kumar ◽  
Pranab Chatterjee ◽  
Tarun Bhatnagar ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective To investigate the effectiveness of using convalescent plasma to treat moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) in adults in India. Design Open label, parallel arm, phase II, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Setting 39 public and private hospitals across India. Participants 464 adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital (screened 22 April to 14 July 2020) with confirmed moderate covid-19 (partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood/fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO 2 /FiO 2 ) ratio between 200 mm Hg and 300 mm Hg or a respiratory rate of more than 24/min with oxygen saturation 93% or less on room air): 235 were assigned to convalescent plasma with best standard of care (intervention arm) and 229 to best standard of care only (control arm). Interventions Participants in the intervention arm received two doses of 200 mL convalescent plasma, transfused 24 hours apart. The presence and levels of neutralising antibodies were not measured a priori; stored samples were assayed at the end of the study. Main outcome measure Composite of progression to severe disease (PaO 2 /FiO 2 <100 mm Hg) or all cause mortality at 28 days post-enrolment. Results Progression to severe disease or all cause mortality at 28 days after enrolment occurred in 44 (19%) participants in the intervention arm and 41 (18%) in the control arm (risk difference 0.008 (95% confidence interval −0.062 to 0.078); risk ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 1.54). Conclusion Convalescent plasma was not associated with a reduction in progression to severe covid-19 or all cause mortality. This trial has high generalisability and approximates convalescent plasma use in real life settings with limited laboratory capacity. A priori measurement of neutralising antibody titres in donors and participants might further clarify the role of convalescent plasma in the management of covid-19. Trial registration Clinical Trial Registry of India CTRI/2020/04/024775.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document