Evidence Hub

A Phase III, Randomized, Multicenter, Double-Blind, Double Dummy, Parallel Group, Comparative Study to Determine the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Ceftazidime Avibactam (CAZ-AVI, Formerly CAZ104) Versus Doripenem Followed by Appropriate Oral Therapy in the Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections, Including Acute Pyelonephritis, With a Gram Negative Pathogen in Hospitalized Adults

ClinicalTrials.gov · COMPLETED, 2014

641 participants

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of Ceftazidime Avibactam compared to Doripenem for treating hospitalized patients with complicated urinary tract infections, including acute pyelonephritis

Conditions: Complicated Urinary Tract Infection (cUTI) Including Acute Pyelonephritis.

Primary outcome: Patient-reported Symptomatic Response at Day 5 (mMITT Analysis Set): Non-inferiority Hypothesis Test; Combined Patient-reported Symptomatic and Microbiological Response at TOC (mMITT Analysis Set): Non-inferiority Hypothesis Test; Per-patient Microbiological Response at TOC (mMITT Analysis Set): Non-inferiority Hypothesis Test.

Enrollment: 641 participants.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 641 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free