Gatifloxacin versus chloramphenicol for uncomplicated enteric fever: an open-label, randomised, controlled trial

Amit Arjyal, Buddha Basnyat, Samir Koirala, Abhilasha Karkey, Sabina Dongol, Krishna Kumar Agrawaal, Nikki Shakya, Kabina Shrestha, Manish Sharma, Sanju Lama, Kasturi Shrestha, Nely Shrestha Khatri, Umesh Shrestha, James I Campbell, Stephen Baker, Jeremy Farrar, Marcel Wolbers, Christiane Dolecek, Amit Arjyal, Buddha Basnyat, Samir Koirala, Abhilasha Karkey, Sabina Dongol, Krishna Kumar Agrawaal, Nikki Shakya, Kabina Shrestha, Manish Sharma, Sanju Lama, Kasturi Shrestha, Nely Shrestha Khatri, Umesh Shrestha, James I Campbell, Stephen Baker, Jeremy Farrar, Marcel Wolbers, Christiane Dolecek

Abstract

Background: We aimed to investigate whether gatifloxacin, a new generation and affordable fluoroquinolone, is better than chloramphenicol for the treatment of uncomplicated enteric fever in children and adults.

Methods: We did an open-label randomised superiority trial at Patan Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal, to investigate whether gatifloxacin is more effective than chloramphenicol for treating uncomplicated enteric fever. Children and adults clinically diagnosed with enteric fever received either gatifloxacin (10 mg/kg) once a day for 7 days, or chloramphenicol (75 mg/kg per day) in four divided doses for 14 days. Patients were randomly allocated treatment (1:1) in blocks of 50, without stratification. Allocations were placed in sealed envelopes opened by the study physician once a patient was enrolled into the trial. Masking was not possible because of the different formulations and ways of giving the two drugs. The primary outcome measure was treatment failure, which consisted of at least one of the following: persistent fever at day 10, need for rescue treatment, microbiological failure, relapse until day 31, and enteric-fever-related complications. The primary outcome was assessed in all patients randomly allocated treatment and reported separately for culture-positive patients and for all patients. Secondary outcome measures were fever clearance time, late relapse, and faecal carriage. The trial is registered on controlled-trials.com, number ISRCTN 53258327.

Findings: 844 patients with a median age of 16 (IQR 9-22) years were enrolled in the trial and randomly allocated a treatment. 352 patients had blood-culture-confirmed enteric fever: 175 were treated with chloramphenicol and 177 with gatifloxacin. 14 patients had treatment failure in the chloramphenicol group, compared with 12 in the gatifloxacin group (hazard ratio [HR] of time to failure 0·86, 95% CI 0·40-1·86, p=0·70). The median time to fever clearance was 3·95 days (95% CI 3·68-4·68) in the chloramphenicol group and 3·90 days (3·58-4·27) in the gatifloxacin group (HR 1·06, 0·86-1·32, p=0·59). At 1 month only, three of 148 patients were stool-culture positive in the chloramphenicol group and none in the gatifloxacin group. At the end of 3 months only one person had a positive stool culture in the chloramphenicol group. There were no other positive stool cultures even at the end of 6 months. Late relapses were noted in three of 175 patients in the culture-confirmed chloramphenicol group and two of 177 in the gatifloxacin group. There were no culture-positive relapses after day 62. 99 patients (24%) experienced 168 adverse events in the chloramphenicol group and 59 (14%) experienced 73 events in the gatifloxacin group.

Interpretation: Although no more efficacious than chloramphenicol, gatifloxacin should be the preferred treatment for enteric fever in developing countries because of its shorter treatment duration and fewer adverse events.

Funding: Wellcome Trust.

Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trial profile *Two culture-positive patients in both the chloramphenicol and glatifloxacin groups were lost to follow-up before day 8.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Kaplan-Meier estimates for time to treatment failure, fever clearance, and relapse for culture-positive patients

References

    1. Parry CM, Hien TT, Dougan G, White NJ, Farrar JJ. Typhoid fever. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1770–1782.
    1. Crump JA, Luby SP, Mintz ED. The global burden of typhoid fever. Bull World Health Organ. 2004;82:346–353.
    1. Ochiai RL, Acosta CJ, Danovaro-Holliday MC. A study of typhoid fever in five Asian countries: disease burden and implications for controls. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86:260–268.
    1. Bhan MK, Bahl R, Bhatnagar S. Typhoid and paratyphoid fever. Lancet. 2005;366:749–762.
    1. Woodward TE, Smadel JE, Ley HL, Green R, Mankikar DS. Preliminary report on the beneficial effect of chloromycetin in the treatment of typhoid fever. Ann Intern Med. 1948;29:131–134.
    1. Murdoch DR, Woods CW, Zimmerman MD. The etiology of febrile illness in adults presenting to Patan Hospital in Kathmandu, Nepal. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2004;70:670–675.
    1. Thaver D, Zaidi AK, Critchley J, Azmatullah A, Madni SA, Bhutta ZA. Fluoroquinolones for treating typhoid and paratyphoid fever (enteric fever) Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;4 CD004530.
    1. Parry CM, Beeching NJ. Treatment of enteric fever. BMJ. 2009;338:b1159.
    1. Rodrigues C, Shenai S, Mehta A. Enteric fever in Mumbai, India: the good news and the bad news. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36:535.
    1. Maskey AP, Day JN, Tuan PQ. Salmonella enterica serovar Paratyphi A and S enterica serovar Typhi cause indistinguishable clinical syndromes in Kathmandu, Nepal. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;42:1247–1253.
    1. Joshi S, Amarnath SK. Fluoroquinolone resistance in Salmonella typhi and S paratyphi A in Bangalore, India. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2007;101:308–310.
    1. Maskey AP, Basnyat B, Thwaites GE, Campbell JI, Farrar JJ, Zimmerman MD. Emerging trends in enteric fever in Nepal: 9124 cases confirmed by blood culture 1993–2003. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2008;102:91–95.
    1. Dutta S, Sur D, Manna B, Bhattacharya SK, Deen JL, Clemens JD. Rollback of Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi resistance to chloramphenicol and other antimicrobials in Kolkata, India. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49:1662–1663.
    1. Sood S, Kapil A, Das B, Jain Y, Kabra SK. Re-emergence of chloramphenicol sensitive Salmonella typhi. Lancet. 1999;353:1241–1242.
    1. Wasfy MO, Frenck R, Ismail TF, Mansour H, Malone JL, Mahoney FJ. Trends of multiple-drug resistance among Salmonella serotype Typhi isolates during a 14-year period in Egypt. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;35:1265–1268.
    1. Pandit A, Arjyal A, Day JN. An open randomized comparison of gatifloxacin versus cefixime for the treatment of uncomplicated enteric fever. PLoS ONE. 2007;2:e542.
    1. Dolecek C, Phi La TT, Rang NN. A multi-center randomised controlled trial of gatifloxacin versus azithromycin for the treatment of uncomplicated typhoid fever in children and adults in Vietnam. PLoS One. 2008;3:e2188.
    1. Hooper DC. Mechanisms of action and resistance of older and newer fluoroquinolones. Clin Infect Dis. 2000;31:S24–S28.
    1. Lu T, Zhao X, Drlica K. Gatifloxacin activity against quinolone-resistant gyrase: allele-specific enhancement of bacteriostatic and bactericidal activities by the C-8-methoxy group. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1999;43:2969–2974.
    1. Kalbfleish JD, Prentice RL. The statistical analysis of failure time data. 2nd edn. John Wiley and Sons; Hoboken, NJ: 2002.
    1. R Development Core Team (20010) R: a language and environment for statistical computing (version 2.9.1) (accessed July 11, 2010).
    1. WHO . Background document: the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of typhoid fever. World Health Organization; Geneva: 2003. pp. 19–23.
    1. Park-Wyllie LY, Juurlink DN, Kopp A. Outpatient gatifloxacin therapy and dysglycemia in older adults. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:1352–1361.
    1. Pichichero ME, Arguedas A, Dagan R. Safety and efficacy of gatifloxacin therapy for children with recurrent acute otitis media (AOM) and/or AOM treatment failure. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;41:470–478.
    1. Ambrose PG, Bhavnani SM, Cirincione BB, Piedmonte M, Grasela TH. Gatifloxacin and the elderly: pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic rationale for a potential age-related dose reduction. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2003;52:435–440.
    1. Thaver D, Zaidi AKM, Critchley J, Azmatullah A, Madni SA, Bhutta ZA. A comparison of fluoroquinolones versus other antibiotics for treating enteric fever: meta-analysis. BMJ. 2009;338:b1865.
    1. Phongmany S, Phetsouvanh R, Sisouphone S. A randomized comparison of oral chloramphenicol versus ofloxacin in the treatment of uncomplicated typhoid fever in Laos. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2005;99:451–458.
    1. Quintero-Perez NP, Andrade-Villanueva J, Leon-Garnica M, Bertin-Montano M, Rodrigues-Chagollan E, Rodriguez-Noriega E. Comparative double blind efficacy and safety study of ciprofloxacin with chloramphenicol in the treatment of typhoid fever. Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; Oct 23–26 1988; Los Angeles, CA, USA. Abstract number 385.
    1. Bran JL, Garcia JF, Mendez O. Comparative, double blind study of chloramphenicol and ciprofloxacin in the treatment of typhoid fever. 31st Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; Sept 29–Oct 2 1991; Chicago, IL, USA. Abstract number 751.
    1. Gottuzzo E, Carrillo C. In: Use of quinolones in travel medicine. Second Conference on International Travel Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia 1991. Dupont HL, editor. Springer-Verlag; Berlin, Germany: 1992. Typhoid fever. Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of ciprofloxacin in comparison with chloramphenicol; pp. 16–22.
    1. Morelli G, Mazzoli S, Tortoli E, Tullia Simonetti M, Perruna F, Postiglione A. Fluoroquinolones versus chloramphenicol in the therapy of typhoid fever: a clinical and microbiological study. Curr Ther Res. 1992;52:532.
    1. Yousaf MH, Hasnain SS, Mohsin A, Ara N. A comparative study of efficacy and safety of three antimicrobials in the treatment of enteric fever. Pak J Gastroenterol. 1992;6:46–48.
    1. Abejar NH, Dimaano EM, Cabanban AB. Fleroxacin versus chloramphenicol in enteric fever. An open, randomized, parallel study. Philip J Intern Med. 1993;31:327–330.
    1. Arnold K, Hong CS, Nelwan R. Randomized comparative study of fleroxacin and chloramphenicol in typhoid fever. Am J Med. 1993;94:195S–200S.
    1. Cristiano P, Imparato L, Carpinelli C. Pefloxacin versus chloramphenicol in the therapy of typhoid fever. Infection. 1995;23:103–106.
    1. Gasem MH, Keuter M, Dolmans WMV, van der Ven-Jongekrijg J, Djokomoeljanto R, van der Meer JWM. Persistence of salmonellae in blood and bone marrow: randomized controlled trial comparing ciprofloxacin and chloramphenicol treatments against enteric fever. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003;47:1727–1731.
    1. Parry CM, Ho VA, Phuong LT. Randomized controlled comparison of ofloxacin, azithromycin, and an ofloxacin-azithromycin combination for treatment of multidrug-resistant and nalidixic acid-resistant typhoid fever. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007;51:819–825.

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera