User login
Key clinical point: Lefamulin is suitable as monotherapy against common community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP)-causing pathogens, both typical and atypical, including drug-resistant strains and those causing polymicrobial infections.
Main finding: Lefamulin was as effective as moxifloxacin in the microbiological intent-to-treat (microITT) population, exhibiting a similar early clinical response rate (89.3% vs. 93.0%; difference ‒3.7; 95% CI ‒7.9 to 0.5) and investigator assessment of clinical response success rate (83.2% vs. 86.7%; difference ‒3.3; 95% CI ‒8.6 to 2.0).
Study details: The study analyzed pooled data from the phase 3 noninferiority Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia 1 and 2 trials, including a total of 1,289 adult patients with CABP (Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team risk classes II-V) who were randomly assigned to receive lefamulin or moxifloxacin. Of these, a baseline CABP pathogen was detected in 709 patients (microITT population).
Disclosures: Nabriva Therapeutics plc (Fort Washington, PA, USA) sponsored the study. Some of the authors, including the lead author, are former or current employees of or stockholders in Nabriva Therapeutics. A few others received research grants/consultation fees from various sources including Nabriva Therapeutics.
Source: Paukner S et al. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2021 (Nov 14). Doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2021.10.021.
Key clinical point: Lefamulin is suitable as monotherapy against common community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP)-causing pathogens, both typical and atypical, including drug-resistant strains and those causing polymicrobial infections.
Main finding: Lefamulin was as effective as moxifloxacin in the microbiological intent-to-treat (microITT) population, exhibiting a similar early clinical response rate (89.3% vs. 93.0%; difference ‒3.7; 95% CI ‒7.9 to 0.5) and investigator assessment of clinical response success rate (83.2% vs. 86.7%; difference ‒3.3; 95% CI ‒8.6 to 2.0).
Study details: The study analyzed pooled data from the phase 3 noninferiority Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia 1 and 2 trials, including a total of 1,289 adult patients with CABP (Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team risk classes II-V) who were randomly assigned to receive lefamulin or moxifloxacin. Of these, a baseline CABP pathogen was detected in 709 patients (microITT population).
Disclosures: Nabriva Therapeutics plc (Fort Washington, PA, USA) sponsored the study. Some of the authors, including the lead author, are former or current employees of or stockholders in Nabriva Therapeutics. A few others received research grants/consultation fees from various sources including Nabriva Therapeutics.
Source: Paukner S et al. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2021 (Nov 14). Doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2021.10.021.
Key clinical point: Lefamulin is suitable as monotherapy against common community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP)-causing pathogens, both typical and atypical, including drug-resistant strains and those causing polymicrobial infections.
Main finding: Lefamulin was as effective as moxifloxacin in the microbiological intent-to-treat (microITT) population, exhibiting a similar early clinical response rate (89.3% vs. 93.0%; difference ‒3.7; 95% CI ‒7.9 to 0.5) and investigator assessment of clinical response success rate (83.2% vs. 86.7%; difference ‒3.3; 95% CI ‒8.6 to 2.0).
Study details: The study analyzed pooled data from the phase 3 noninferiority Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia 1 and 2 trials, including a total of 1,289 adult patients with CABP (Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team risk classes II-V) who were randomly assigned to receive lefamulin or moxifloxacin. Of these, a baseline CABP pathogen was detected in 709 patients (microITT population).
Disclosures: Nabriva Therapeutics plc (Fort Washington, PA, USA) sponsored the study. Some of the authors, including the lead author, are former or current employees of or stockholders in Nabriva Therapeutics. A few others received research grants/consultation fees from various sources including Nabriva Therapeutics.
Source: Paukner S et al. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2021 (Nov 14). Doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2021.10.021.