Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety of short course (5-day) moxifloxacin vs 7-day ceftriaxone in the treatment of acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB)

Grassi C, Casali L, Curti E, Tellarini M, Lazzaro C, Schito G, SMART Study Group. Studio Multicentrico con Moxifloxacina nel Trattamento delle Riacutizzazioni de Bronchite Cronica

Journal of chemotherapy (Florence, Italy), 2002

476 participants · 43 citations

Abstract

The aim of this multicenter, open, randomized study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of a 5-day treatment course with oral moxifloxacin (MXF) vs a 7-day course with i.m. ceftriaxone (CRO) in 476 patients with acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB), and to conduct a cost minimization analysis of the two treatments from the perspectives of both the Italian National Health Service (INHS) and society. The study was conducted in Italy. Clinical success rates at test-of-cure in the 423 patients of the PP (Per Protocol) population (primary efficacy parameter) were 90.6% and 89.0% for MXF and CRO, respectively. Statistical non-inferiority of MXF vs CRO was confirmed. Similar results were found between study drugs on the secondary efficacy parameters, including success at end-of-treatment (95.3% for MXF vs 92.9% for CRO), success at test-of-cure in bacteriologically-positive patients (94.1% vs 90.7%) and eradication/presumed eradication rates (91.7% vs 93.3%). ITT (Intention-to-Treat) analysis confirmed these data. There was a low incidence of adverse events (10.8% vs 9.1%). During a 6-month follow-up period, relapse rates were lower for MXF vs CRO (23.3% vs 28.3%; p > .05). Compared with CRO, MXF was associated with cost savings per patient ranging from Euro226.57 (INHS perspective) to Euro448.23 (societal perspective), with lower hospitalization rate the major variable contributing to reduced costs. MXF appears to be an ideal candidate for AECB treatment.

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: 476 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