Evidence Hub

Effectiveness of fosfomycin trometamol as oral step-down therapy for bacteraemic urinary tract infections due to MDR Escherichia coli: a post hoc analysis of the FOREST randomized trial

Sojo-Dorado J, López-Hernández I, Hernández-Torres A, Retamar-Gentil P, Merino de Lucas E, Escolà-Vergé L, Bereciartua E, García-Vázquez E et al.

The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2023

61 participants · 13 citations

Abstract

Background: Fosfomycin is a potentially attractive option as step-down therapy for bacteraemic urinary tract infections (BUTI), but available data are scarce. Our objective was to compare the effectiveness and safety of fosfomycin trometamol and other oral drugs as step-down therapy in patients with BUTI due to MDR Escherichia coli (MDR-Ec).

Methods: Participants in the FOREST trial (comparing IV fosfomycin with ceftriaxone or meropenem for BUTI caused by MDR-Ec in 22 Spanish hospitals from June 2014 to December 2018) who were stepped-down to oral fosfomycin (3 g q48h) or other drugs were included. The primary endpoint was clinical and microbiological cure (CMC) 5-7 days after finalization of treatment. A multivariate analysis was performed using logistic regression to estimate the association of oral step-down with fosfomycin with CMC adjusted for confounders.

Results: Overall, 61 patients switched to oral fosfomycin trometamol and 47 to other drugs (cefuroxime axetil, 28; amoxicillin/clavulanic acid and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, 7 each; ciprofloxacin, 5) were included. CMC was reached by 48/61 patients (78.7%) treated with fosfomycin trometamol and 38/47 (80.9%) with other drugs (difference, -2.2; 95% CI: -17.5 to 13.1; P = 0.38). Subgroup analyses provided similar results. Relapses occurred in 9/61 (15.0%) and 2/47 (4.3%) of patients, respectively (P = 0.03). The adjusted OR for CMC was 1.11 (95% CI: 0.42-3.29, P = 0.75). No relevant differences in adverse events…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 61 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