The efficacy and safety of ceftaroline in the treatment of acute bacterial infection in pediatric patients - a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

doi:10.2147/IDR.S199978

CNU IR > College of Sustainable Environment and Recreation > Dept. of Occupational Safety > Periodical Articles > Item 310902800/32540

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ir.cnu.edu.tw/handle/310902800/32540

Title:	The efficacy and safety of ceftaroline in the treatment of acute bacterial infection in pediatric patients - a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Authors:	Chih-Wei Chen(陳志偉) Chang, Shen-Peng Huang, Hui-Ting Tang, Hung-Jen Lai, Chih-Cheng
Contributors:	Chi Mei Med Ctr, Div Neurosurg, Dept Surg Chia Nan Univ Pharm & Sci, Dept Occupat Safety & Hlth, Inst Ind Safety & Disaster Prevent, Coll Sustainable Environm Chi Mei Med Ctr, Dept Pharm China Med Univ, Sch Pharm Chi Mei Med Ctr, Dept Med Chi Mei Med Ctr, Dept Intens Care Med
Keywords:	ceftaroline acute bacterial infection pediatric community-acquired pneumonia skin and skin structure infection
Date:	2019
Issue Date:	2020-07-29 13:49:06 (UTC+8)
Publisher:	DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
Abstract:	Objectives: This meta-analysis aims to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of ceftaroline in treating acute bacterial infections - community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and skin and skin structure infection (SSSI) in pediatric patients. Methods: The Pubmed, Embase, ClinicalTrials. gov. and the Cochrane databases were searched up to December 31, 2018. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating ceftaroline and other comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infection in pediatric patients were included. The primary outcome was the clinical cure rate and the secondary outcome was the risk of adverse event. Results: Three RCTs were included. Overall, ceftaroline had a clinical cure rate at end of therapy (EOT) and test of cure (TOC) similar to comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infection (at EOT, OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 0.88-4.25, I-2= 0%, and at TOC, OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.64-2.91, I-2= 14%). In addition, ceftaroline had a clinical failure rate at EOT and TOC similar to comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infection (at EOT, OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.22-1.76, I-2= 0%, and at TOC, OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.24-1.91, I-2= 0%). No significant differences were found for the risk of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) in all and different degrees between ceftaroline and comparators (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.37-1.78, I2= 56%). The risks of TEAE and severe adverse events related to study drug were similar between ceftaroline and comparators (TEAE related to study drug, OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.52-1.82, I-2= 0%, severe adverse event related to study drug, OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.22-5.44, I2= 22%). Conclusions: The clinical efficacy of ceftaroline is as good as comparator therapy in the treatment of acute bacterial infections - CAP and SSSI, and this antibiotic is well tolerated as the comparators.
Relation:	Infection and Drug Resistance, v.12, 1303-1310
Appears in Collections:	[Dept. of Occupational Safety] Periodical Articles

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
10.2147-IDR.S199978.pdf		1560Kb	Adobe PDF	316	View/Open
index.html		0Kb	HTML	949	View/Open

Loading...