Cefuroxime Axetil Tablets: Acute Bacterial
Maxillary Sinusitis:
One adequate and well-controlled study was
performed in patients with acute bacterial maxillary sinusitis. In this study
each patient had a maxillary sinus aspirate collected by sinus puncture before
treatment was initiated for presumptive acute bacterial sinusitis. All patients
had to have radiographic and clinical evidence of acute maxillary sinusitis. As
shown in the following summary of the study, the general clinical effectiveness
of cefuroxime axetil tablets was comparable to an oral antimicrobial agent that
contained a specific betalactamase inhibitor in treating acute maxillary
sinusitis. However, sufficient microbiology data were obtained to demonstrate
the effectiveness of cefuroxime axetil tablets in treating acute bacterial
maxillary sinusitis due only to Streptococcus pneumoniae
or non-beta-lactamase–producing Haemophilus
influenzae. An insufficient number of beta-lactamase–producing Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella
catarrhalis isolates were obtained in this trial to adequately evaluate
the effectiveness of cefuroxime axetil tablets in the treatment of acute
bacterial maxillary sinusitis due to these 2 organisms.
This study
enrolled 317 adult patients, 132 patients in the United States and 185 patients
in South America. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to cefuroxime axetil
250 mg twice daily or an oral antimicrobial agent that contained a specific
beta-lactamase inhibitor. An intent-to-treat analysis of the submitted clinical
data yielded the following results:
Table 5. Clinical Effectiveness of Cefuroxime Axetil Tablets Compared
to Beta-Lactamase Inhibitor-Containing Control Drug in the Treatment of Acute
Bacterial Maxillary Sinusitis
| U.S. Patients*
| South American Patients†
|
Cefuroxime Axetil (n =
49) | Control (n = 43) | Cefuroxime Axetil (n = 87) | Control (n = 89) |
Clinical success (cure + improvement)
| 65%
| 53%
| 77%
| 74%
|
Clinical cure
| 53%
| 44%
| 72%
| 64%
|
Clinical improvement
| 12%
| 9%
| 5%
| 10%
|
* 95%Confidence interval around the success difference [-0.08, +0.32].
† 95%Confidence interval around the success difference
[-0.1, +0.16].
In this trial and in a
supporting maxillary puncture trial, 15 evaluable patients had
non-beta-lactamase–producing
Haemophilus influenzae
as the identified pathogen. Ten (10) of these 15 patients (67%) had their
pathogen (non-beta-lactamase-producing
Haemophilus
influenzae) eradicated. Eighteen (18) evaluable patients had
Streptococcus pneumoniae as the identified pathogen.
Fifteen (15) of these 18 patients (83%) had their pathogen (
Streptococcus pneumoniae) eradicated.
Safety: The incidence of
drug-related gastrointestinal adverse events was statistically significantly
higher in the control arm (an oral antimicrobial agent that contained a specific
beta-lactamase inhibitor) versus the cefuroxime axetil arm (12%versus 1%,
respectively;
P<.001), particularly drug-related
diarrhea (8%versus 1%, respectively;
P =
.001).
Early Lyme Disease:
Two adequate and well-controlled studies were performed in
patients with early Lyme disease. In these studies all patients had to present
with physician-documented erythema migrans, with or without systemic
manifestations of infection. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a 20-day
course of treatment with cefuroxime axetil 500 mg twice daily or doxycycline 100
mg 3 times daily. Patients were assessed at 1 month posttreatment for success in
treating early Lyme disease (Part I) and at 1 year posttreatment for success in
preventing the progression to the sequelae of late Lyme disease (Part
II).
A total of 355 adult patients (181 treated with cefuroxime axetil
and 174 treated with doxycycline) were enrolled in the 2 studies. In order to
objectively validate the clinical diagnosis of early Lyme disease in these
patients, 2 approaches were used:1) blinded expert reading of photographs, when
available, of the pretreatment erythema migrans skin lesion; and 2) serologic
confirmation (using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA] and immunoblot
assay [“Western” blot]) of the presence of antibodies specific to
Borrelia burgdorferi, the etiologic agent of Lyme disease.
By these procedures, it was possible to confirm the physician diagnosis of early
Lyme disease in 281 (79%) of the 355 study patients. The efficacy data
summarized below are specific to this “validated” patient subset, while the
safety data summarized below reflect the entire patient population for the 2
studies.
Analysis of the submitted clinical data for evaluable patients
in the “validated” patient subset yielded the following results:
Table 6. Clinical Effectiveness of Cefuroxime Axetil Tablets Compared
to Doxycycline in the Treatment of Early Lyme Disease
| Part I
(1 Month Posttreatment)* | Part II (1
Year Posttreatment)†
|
Cefuroxime Axetil (n = 125) | Doxycycline (n = 108) | Cefuroxime Axetil (n = 105‡) | Doxycycline (n = 83‡) |
Satisfactory clinical outcome§
| 91%
| 93%
| 84%
| 87%
|
Clinical cure/success
| 72%
| 73%
| 73%
| 73%
|
Clinical improvement
| 19%
| 19%
| 10%
| 13%
|
* 95%confidence interval around the satisfactory difference for Part I (-0.08, +0.05).
† 95%confidence interval around the satisfactory difference for Part II (-0.13, +0.07).
‡
n’s include patients assessed as unsatisfactory clinical outcomes
(failure + recurrence)
in Part I (cefuroxime axetil tablets - 11 [5
failure, 6 recurrence]; doxycycline - 8 [6 failure, 2 recurrence]).
§ Satisfactory clinical outcome includes cure + improvement
(Part I) and success + improvement (Part II).
Cefuroxime axetil and
doxycycline were effective in prevention of the development of sequelae of late
Lyme disease.
Safety:
Drug-related adverse events affecting the skin were reported
significantly more frequently by patients treated with doxycycline than by
patients treated with cefuroxime axetil (12%versus 3%, respectively;
P = .002), primarily reflecting the statistically
significantly higher incidence of drug-related photosensitivity reactions in the
doxycycline arm versus the cefuroxime axetil arm (9%versus 0%, respectively;
P<.001). While the incidence of drug-related
gastrointestinal adverse events was similar in the 2 treatment groups
(cefuroxime axetil - 13%; doxycycline - 11%), the incidence of drug-related
diarrhea was statistically significantly higher in the cefuroxime axetil arm
versus the doxycycline arm (11%versus 3%, respectively;
P
= .005).
Secondary Bacterial
Infections of Acute Bronchitis: Four randomized, controlled
clinical studies were performed comparing 5 days versus 10 days of cefuroxime
axetil for the treatment of patients with secondary bacterial infections of
acute bronchitis. These studies enrolled a total of 1,253 patients (CAE-516 n =
360; CAE-517 n = 177; CAEA4001 n = 362; CAEA4002 n = 354). The protocols for
CAE-516 and CAE-517 were identical and compared cefuroxime axetil 250 mg twice
daily for 5 days, cefuroxime axetil 250 mg twice daily for 10 days, and
AUGMENTIN
® 500 mg 3 times daily for 10 days. These 2
studies were conducted simultaneously. CAEA4001 and CAEA4002 compared cefuroxime
axetil 250 mg twice daily for 5 days, cefuroxime axetil 250 mg twice daily for
10 days, and CECLOR
® 250 mg 3 times daily for 10 days.
They were otherwise identical to CAE-516 and CAE-517 and were conducted over the
following 2 years. Patients were required to have polymorphonuclear cells
present on the Gram stain of their screening sputum specimen, but isolation of a
bacterial pathogen from the sputum culture was not required for inclusion. The
following table demonstrates the results of the clinical outcome analysis of the
pooled studies CAE-516/CAE-517 and CAEA4001/CAEA4002, respectively:
Table 7. Clinical Effectiveness of Cefuroxime Axetil Tablets 250 mg
Twice Daily in Secondary Bacterial Infections of Acute Bronchitis: Comparison of
5 Versus 10 Days’ Treatment Duration
| CAE-516 and CAE-517* | CAEA4001 and CAEA4002† |
5 day (n = 127) | 10 day (n = 139) | 5 day (n = 173) | 10 day (n = 192) |
Clinical success (cure +
improvement) | 80%
| 87%
| 84%
| 82%
|
Clinical cure
| 61%
| 70%
| 73%
| 72%
|
Clinical improvement
| 19%
| 17%
| 11%
| 10%
|
* 95%Confidence interval around the success difference
[-0.164, +0.029].
† 95%Confidence interval around the success
difference
[-0.061, +0.103].
The response rates for
patients who were both clinically and bacteriologically evaluable were
consistent with those reported for the clinically evaluable
patients.
Safety: In
these clinical trials, 399 patients were treated with cefuroxime axetil for 5
days and 402 patients with cefuroxime axetil for 10 days. No difference in the
occurrence of adverse events was observed between the 2 regimens.