Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
Phase 3 N=661 Randomized Double-blind Treatment

Safety and Efficacy Study of Cefepime/VNRX-5133 in Patients With Complicated Urinary Tract Infections

Urinary Tract Infections · Acute Pyelonephritis

Enrolled (actual)
661
Serious AEs
2.0%
Results posted
May 2024
Primary outcome: Primary: Composite Success at Test of Cure (TOC) in the Microbiological Intent-to-treat (microITT) Population — 207; 83 Participants — p=0.0088

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 3
Interventions
Cefepime/VNRX-5133 (taniborbactam) (Drug); Meropenem (Drug)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
Venatorx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Primary completion
Dec 2021

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Composite Success at Test of Cure (TOC) in the Microbiological Intent-to-treat (microITT) Population
207; 83 0.0088 sig
SECONDARY
Microbiologic Success at Test of Cure (TOC) in the microITT Population
229; 95
SECONDARY
Clinical Success at Test of Cure (TOC) in the microITT Population
251; 116
SECONDARY
Composite Success at Test of Cure (TOC) in the Extended Microbiological Intent-to-treat (emicroITT) Population
216; 86
SECONDARY
Composite Success at End of Treatment (EOT) in the microITT Population
261; 123
SECONDARY
Microbiological Success at End of Treatment (EOT) in the microITT Population
284; 139
SECONDARY
Clinical Success at End of Treatment (EOT) in the microITT Population
265; 127
SECONDARY
Composite Success at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the microITT Population
187; 74
SECONDARY
Microbiological Success at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the microITT Population
207; 90
SECONDARY
Clinical Success at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the microITT Population
238; 102
SECONDARY
Investigator Opinion of Clinical Success at Test of Cure (TOC) in the microITT Population
271; 128
SECONDARY
Composite Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at End of Treatment (EOT) in the microITT Population
57; 26; 1
SECONDARY
Microbiologic Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at End of Treatment (EOT) in the microITT Population
65; 28; 1
SECONDARY
Clinical Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at End of Treatment (EOT) in the microITT Population
57; 28; 1
SECONDARY
Composite Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Test of Cure (TOC) in the microITT Population
47; 16; 0
SECONDARY
Microbiologic Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Test of Cure (TOC) in the microITT Population
50; 18; 0
SECONDARY
Clinical Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Test of Cure (TOC) in the microITT Population
54; 25; 0
SECONDARY
Composite Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the microITT Population
45; 13; 0
SECONDARY
Microbiologic Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the microITT Population
48; 16; 0
SECONDARY
Clinical Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the microITT Population
49; 20; 0
SECONDARY
Composite Success at End of Treatment (EOT) in the Microbiologically-Evaluable (ME) Population
259; 121
SECONDARY
Microbiologic Success at End of Treatment (EOT) in the ME Population
279; 137
SECONDARY
Composite Success at Test of Cure (TOC) in the ME Population
195; 76
SECONDARY
Microbiologic Success at Test of Cure (TOC) in the ME Population
214; 88
SECONDARY
Composite Success at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the ME Population
178; 69
SECONDARY
Microbiologic Success at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the ME Population
192; 84
SECONDARY
Composite Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at the End of Treatment (EOT) in the ME Population
56; 26; 1
SECONDARY
Microbiologic Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at the End of Treatment (EOT) in the ME Population
62; 28; 1
SECONDARY
Composite Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Test of Cure (TOC) in the ME Population
44; 12; 0
SECONDARY
Microbiologic Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Test of Cure (TOC) in the ME Population
46; 14; 0
SECONDARY
Composite Success in Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the ME Population
44; 11; 0
SECONDARY
Microbiologic Success in Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the ME Population
45; 14; 0
SECONDARY
Clinical Success at End of Treatment (EOT) in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population
384; 187
SECONDARY
Clinical Success at Test of Cure (TOC) in the CE Population
343; 162
SECONDARY
Clinical Success at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the CE Population
321; 142
SECONDARY
Clinical Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at End of Treatment (EOT) in the CE Population
63; 31; 6; 2
SECONDARY
Clinical Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Test of Cure (TOC) in the CE Population
56; 23; 4; 2
SECONDARY
Clinical Success in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the CE Population
52; 19; 3; 1
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication at End of Treatment (EOT) in the microITT Population
2; 2; 1; 1; 14; 3
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication at Test of Cure (TOC) in the microITT Population
2; 2; 0; 1; 12; 1
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the microITT Population
1; 2; 0; 1; 12; 1
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at End of Treatment (EOT) in the microITT Population
100; 100; 100; 88.9; 100; 95.0
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Test of Cure (TOC) in the microITT Population
100; 50.0; 81.1; 61.1; 100; 60.0
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the microITT Population
100; 50.0; 73.0; 50.0; 100; 65.0
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication at End of Treatment (EOT) in the ME Population
2; 2; 1; 1; 14; 3
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication at Test of Cure (TOC) in the ME Population
2; 2; 0; 1; 11; 0
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the ME Population
1; 2; 1; 12; 1; 130
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at End of Treatment (EOT) in the ME Population
100; 100; 100; 100; 100; 95.0
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Test of Cure TOC in the ME Population
100; 0; 87.5; 66.7; 100; 64.7
SECONDARY
Per-Pathogen Microbiologic Eradication in Patients With Cefepime-Resistant Pathogens at Late Follow Up (LFU) in the ME Population
100; 50.0; 78.1; 53.3; 68.4; 71.4

Summary

This study will assess the safety and efficacy of cefepime/VNRX-5133 compared with meropenem in both eradication of bacteria and in symptomatic response in patients with cUTIs.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Adult male and female
  • Documented diagnosis of pyuria
  • Documented diagnosis of cUTI or Acute Pyelonephritis (AP)

Exclusion Criteria

  • Receipt of effective antibacterial drug therapy for cUTI for more than 24 hours during the previous 72 hours prior to randomization
  • A urine culture result is resistant to meropenem or a gram negative pathogen is not identified or more than 2 microorganisms are isolated or a confirmed fungal UTI is identified
  • Required use of nonstudy systemic bacterial therapy
  • Suspected or confirmed prostatitis or urinary tract symptoms attributable to sexually transmitted disease
  • Patients with perinephric or renal abscess
  • Patients with renal transplantation or receiving hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis
  • Abnormal labs
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03840148). 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