A Non-inferiority Pilot Study Comparing the Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Generic Wide-spectrum Antibiotic Use in Septic Oncology Patients

Abstract

The present study is a non-inferiority study based on a descriptive and comparative case series for comparison of generic vs. original intravenous antimicrobials in septic oncology patients at an oncology private ICU. 1906 cancer patients admitted to Arturo Lopez Perez Foundation, Chile, were included in this study. After recruitment, a first retrospective group of 206 septic cancer patients recorded from 1^st January, 2008 until July 14^th, 2010, treated with original antibiotics (cefoperazone–sulbactam, imipenem-cilastatin, piperacillin-tazobactam) were included for analyses and a second prospective group of 143 septic cancer patients recorded from July 15^th, 2010 until January 02, 2013, treated with the same but generic antibiotics were also included for comparisons. The trial protocol was developed in accordance with Helsinki and Good Clinical Practices recommendations. The results of this study showed no significant differences between the 2 groups in days of treatment, rate of success and lab test determinations (white cell count, PCR and procalcitonin), with lower, but not significant, total bed days and CPU bed days for generic antibiotics. Therefore, we conclude that the safety and efficacy of the generic antibiotics cefactam^®, imipen^® and Piperazam^® are not inferior to original antibiotics for the treatment of severe sepsis in hospitalised patients at the Arturo Lopez Perez Foundation.

Key words

antibacterial drugs - cancer pharmacology - infectious disease

• References

• 1 Koll BS, Brown AE. The changing epidemiology of infections at cancer hospitals. Clin Infect Dis 1993; 17: S322-S328
• 2 Medeiros AA. Nosocomial outbreaks of multi-resistant bacteria: extended-spectrum beta-lactamases have arrived in North America. Ann Intern Med 1993; 119: 428-430
• 3 Murray BE. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Am J Med 1997; 102: 284-293
• 4 Whimbey E, Englund JA, Couch RB. Community respiratory virus infections in immunocompromised patients with cancer. In: Whimbey E, Englund JA, Ljungman P. editors. Proceedings of a symposium. Am J Med. 1997. 102. 10-18
• 5 Shorr AF, Micek ST, Jackson Jr WL et al. Economic implications of an evidence based sepsis protocol: Can we improve outcomes and lower costs?. Crit Care Med 2007; 35: 1257-1262
• 6 Kreger BE, Craven DE, McCabe WR. Gram negative bacteremia: IV. Re-evaluation of clinical features and treatment in 612 patients. Am J Med 1980; 68: 344-355
• 7 Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE et al. Duration of hypotension prior to initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med 2006; 34: 1589-1596
• 8 Shapiro NI, Howell MD, Talmor D et al. Implementation and outcomes of the Multiple Urgent Sepsis Therapies (MUST) protocol. Crit Care Med 2006; 34: 1025-1032
• 9 USP United States Pharmacopoeia, Revision 31/NF26, Volume 2, USP Convention lnc. Rockville, Md, 2008; p 1406
• 10 MINSAL, Ministerio de Salud de Chile . Norma general técnica sobre sistema nacional de fármaco vigilancia de productos farmacéuticos de uso humano. Enero 2012; http://www.minsal.gob.cl/portal/url/item/c4a31ad6db50e085e040010165017a39.pdf, http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/pdf/s8121s/s8121s.pdf (accessed, June 2^nd, 2014)
• 11 Laporte JR, Arnau JM. La detección de reacciones adversas por vigilancia intensiva en pacientes hospitalizados. En: Principios de epidemiología del medicamento. Laporte JR, Tognoni G. editores Barcelona: Salvat Editores S.A; 1983. p 223-225
• 12 Naranjo CA, Busto U, Sellers EM et al. A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1981; 30: 239-245
• 13 Levy MM, Fink MP, Marshall JC et al. 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference. Crit Care Med 2003; 31: 1250-1256
• 14 Dellinger RP, Carlet JM, Masur H et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock. Surviving Sepsis Campaign Management Guidelines Committee. Crit Care Med 2004; 32: 858-873
• 15 BMJ . (1964) NUREMBERG DOCTORS’ TRIAL Declaration of Helsinki 7 December ed. 1996; 313: 1448-1449
• 16 Gupta S. Non-inferiority clinigcal trials: Practical issues and current regulatory perspective. Indian J Pharmacol 2011; 43: 371-374
• 17 Hyatt JM, McKinnon PS, Zimmer GS et al. The importance of Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic surrogate markers to outcomes.
• 18 Weinstein MP, Reller LB, Murphy JR et al. The clinical significance of positive blood cultures: A comprehensive analysis of 500 episodes of bacteremia and fungemia in adults. I. Laboratory and epidemiologic observations. Rev Infect Dis 1983; 5: 35-53
• 19 Safdar N, Handelsman J, Maki DG. Does combination antimicrobial therapy reduce mortality in Gram-negative bacteraemia? A meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis 2004; 4: 519-527