Back to Search
Start Over
A double-blind randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of a 5-day course of cefotiam hexetil with that of a 10-day course of penicillin V in adult patients with pharyngitis caused by group A β-haemolytic streptococci
- Source :
- Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 35:843-854
- Publication Year :
- 1995
- Publisher :
- Oxford University Press (OUP), 1995.
-
Abstract
- A 10-day course of penicillin is the antibiotic regimen currently recommended by the American Heart Association (AHA) as treatment for patients with tonsillitis caused by group A β-haemolytic streptococci (GABHS), with the aim of preventing both the suppurative and non-suppurative complications of this infection. This prospective, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy clinical trial was undertaken in order to compare the efficacy of, tolerability of and compliance with a 5-day course ofcefotiam hexetil (CTM) 200 mg bd with that of 10-day course of penicillin V (PEV) I megaunit (600 mg) tds, to investigate the significance of recovering GABHS during or after treatment and to evaluate the potential economic advantages of short-term regimens. Two hundred and fifty ambulatory adult patients with a presumptive diagnosis (based on a positive rapid antigen detection test) of GABHS tonsillitis were recruited in 60 centres ; the diagnosis was subsequently confirmed by a positive culture of a throat swab. At the time of entry into the trial there was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of clinical symptoms. In an intention-to-treat analysis, both the clinical and bacteriological response rates at days 10 and 30 were comparable for each group i.e. 106 of 119 (89.1%) patients and 90 of 109 (82.6%) patients respectively in the CTM group and 103 of 117 (88.0%) patients and 92 of 107 (86.0%) patients respectively in the PEV group. The times until defervescence and resolution of symptoms were also similar. Of the 115 patients in each group who were assessed at day 90, there were three clinical relapses in the CTM group and seven in the PEV group. No non-suppurative complications of GABHS infection were detected. Tolerance was significantly better in the CTM group than in the PEV group, 14 of 119 (11.8%) patients and 26 of 117 (22.2%) patients in the former and latter groups respectively reporting adverse events. In three cases in each group treatment was discontinued prematurely because of adverse events ; none of these in the CTM group was serious but one patient in the PEV group experienced a severe allergic reaction. Compliance in both groups was good during the first 5 days of therapy but, by the end of each course, 93.6% of patients in the CTM group had completed treatment, compared with 73.0% in the PEV group. Time lost from work was noted in respect of 68.0% ofpatients who were gainfully employed and prolonging treatment from 5 to 10 days would have led to a mean increase in the time away from work of 1.7 days. In conclusion, a 5 day course of cefotiam hexetil was shown to be effective and safe therapy for patients with GABHS tonsillitis. However, a more accurate estimate of the cost-effectiveness of this regimen will be required before AHA recommendations can be revised.
- Subjects :
- Adult
Male
Microbiology (medical)
medicine.medical_specialty
Adolescent
Streptococcus pyogenes
Cost effectiveness
Tonsillitis
Penicillins
law.invention
Double-Blind Method
Randomized controlled trial
Recurrence
law
Streptococcal Infections
Internal medicine
medicine
Humans
Prodrugs
Pharmacology (medical)
Prospective Studies
Adverse effect
Aged
Pharmacology
Intention-to-treat analysis
Cefotiam
business.industry
Pharyngitis
Middle Aged
medicine.disease
Surgery
Regimen
Infectious Diseases
Tolerability
Patient Compliance
Penicillin V
Female
medicine.symptom
business
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 14602091 and 03057453
- Volume :
- 35
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....9f981748908686f2b0ee7659bf5ddde9
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/35.6.843