Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
Phase 2 N=452 Randomized Quadruple-blind Treatment

A Study of Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Cefiderocol (S-649266) Versus Imipenem/Cilastatin in Complicated Urinary Tract Infections

Urinary Tract Infections

Enrolled (actual)
452
Serious AEs
5.8%
Results posted
Dec 2019
Primary outcome: Primary: Percentage of Participants With Composite Response of Microbiological Eradication and Clinical Response at Test of Cure — 72.6; 54.6 percentage of participants

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 2
Interventions
Cefiderocol (Drug); Imipenem/cilastatin (Drug)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
Shionogi
Primary completion
Jul 2016

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Percentage of Participants With Composite Response of Microbiological Eradication and Clinical Response at Test of Cure
72.6; 54.6
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Composite Response of Microbiological Eradication and Clinical Response at Early Assessment
88.1; 87.4
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Composite Response of Microbiological Eradication and Clinical Response at End of Treatment
96.4; 95.8
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Composite Response of Microbiological Eradication and Clinical Response at Follow-up
54.4; 39.5
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Eradication at Test of Cure
73.0; 56.3
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Eradication at Early Assessment
92.1; 90.8
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Eradication at End of Treatment
96.8; 95.8
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Eradication at Follow-up
57.1; 43.7
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Eradication at Test of Cure Per Uropathogen
75.0; 58.2; 75.0; 52.0; 44.4; 60.0
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Eradication at Early Assessment Per Uropathogen
92.8; 94.9; 89.6; 88.0; 94.4; 80.0
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Eradication at End of Treatment Per Uropathogen
98.7; 97.5; 97.9; 92.0; 88.9; 100.0
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Eradication at Follow-up Per Uropathogen
59.9; 41.8; 58.3; 52.0; 27.8; 20.0
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at Test of Cure
89.7; 87.4
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at Early Assessment
90.5; 90.8
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at End of Treatment
98.0; 99.2
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at Follow-up
81.3; 72.3
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at Test of Cure Per Uropathogen
89.7; 88.3; 89.1; 84.0; 73.3; 75.0
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at Early Assessment Per Uropathogen
91.8; 96.1; 82.6; 88.0; 93.3; 75.0
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at End of Treatment Per Uropathogen
97.9; 98.7; 100.0; 100.0; 93.3; 100.0
SECONDARY
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response at Follow-up Per Uropathogen
82.9; 72.7; 82.6; 68.0; 53.3; 75.0
SECONDARY
Plasma Concentration of Cefiderocol
18.0; 141; 70.2
SECONDARY
Urine Concentration of Cefiderocol
2710; 1520
SECONDARY
Number of Participants With Adverse Events
122; 76; 27; 17; 1; 0

Summary

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of intravenous cefiderocol (S-649266) in hospitalized adults with complicated urinary tract infections caused by Gram-negative pathogens.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Hospitalized male and female patients ≥ 18 years
  • Clinical diagnosis of either complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI) with or without pyelonephritis or acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis
  • cUTI diagnosed with a history of ≥ 1 of the following:
  • Indwelling urinary catheter or recent instrumentation of the urinary tract
  • Urinary retention (caused by benign prostatic hypertrophy)
  • Urinary retention of at least 100 mL or more of residual urine after voiding (neurogenic bladder)
  • Obstructive uropathy
  • Azotemia caused by intrinsic renal disease (blood urea nitrogen and creatinine values greater than normal laboratory values) OR Pyelonephritis and normal urinary tract anatomy, ie, acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis AND

At least 2 of the following signs or symptoms:

  • Chills or rigors or warmth associated with fever (temperature greater than or equal to 38 degrees Celsius)
  • Flank pain (pyelonephritis) or suprapubic/pelvic pain (cUTI)
  • Nausea or vomiting
  • Dysuria, urinary frequency, or urinary urgency
  • Costo-vertebral angle tenderness on physical examination AND

All subjects had to have urinalysis evidence of pyuria demonstrated by 1 of the following:

  • Dipstick analysis positive for leukocyte esterase
  • ≥ 10 white blood cells (WBCs) per μL in unspun urine, or ≥ 10 WBCs per high power field in spun urine
  • Positive urine culture within 48 hours prior to randomization containing ≥10^5 colony forming unit (CFU)/mL of a Gram-negative uropathogen likely to be susceptible to imipenem (IPM)
  • Patients who were treated previously with an empiric antibiotic other than the study drugs but failed treatment, both clinically and microbiologically, were eligible for the study if they had an identified Gram-negative uropathogen that was not susceptible to the previously used empiric treatment and likely to be susceptible to IPM
  • Subjects receiving antibiotic prophylaxis for UTI who present with signs and symptoms consistent with an active new UTI

Exclusion Criteria

  • Urine culture identifies only a Gram-positive pathogen and/or a Gram-negative uropathogen resistant to IPM
  • Urine culture at study entry isolates more than 2 uropathogens or patient has a confirmed fungal UTI
  • Asymptomatic bacteriuria, the presence of >10^5 CFU/mL of a uropathogen and pyuria but without local or systemic symptoms
  • Patient is receiving hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02321800). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search