In Vitro Activity of Ceftazidime-Avibactam against Isolates in a Phase 3 Open-Label Clinical Trial for Complicated Intra-Abdominal and Urinary Tract Infections Caused by Ceftazidime-Nonsusceptible Gram-Negative Pathogens
Abstract
The in vitro activity of ceftazidime-avibactam was evaluated against 341 Gram-negative isolates from 333 patients in a randomized, phase 3 clinical trial of patients with complicated urinary tract or intra-abdominal infections caused by ceftazidime-nonsusceptible pathogens (NCT01644643). Ceftazidime-avibactam MIC90 values against Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (including several class B or D enzyme producers that avibactam does not inhibit) were 1 and 64 μg/ml, respectively. Overall, the ceftazidime-avibactam activity against ceftazidime-nonsusceptible isolates was comparable to the activity of ceftazidime-avibactam previously reported against ceftazidime-susceptible isolates. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT01644643.).
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: 333 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Horizontal gene transfer in the human gastrointestinal tract: potential spread of antibiotic resistance genes
- Mutation supply and relative fitness shape the genotypes of ciprofloxacin-resistant Escherichia coli
- Genomic Survey of E. coli From the Bladders of Women With and Without Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
- Characterization of cefotaxime-resistant urinary Escherichia coli from primary care in South-West England 2017–18
- Fitness cost constrains the spectrum of marR mutations in ciprofloxacin-resistant Escherichia coli
- Emerging evidence-based innovative approaches to control catheter-associated urinary tract infection: a review
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.