A novel study design for antibiotic trials in acute exacerbations of COPD: MAESTRAL methodology

Antibiotics, along with oral corticosteroids, are standard treatments for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). The ultimate aims of treatment are to minimize the impact of the current exacerbation, and by ensuring complete resolution, reduce the risk of relapse. In the absence of superiority studies of antibiotics in AECOPD, evidence of the relative efficacy of different drugs is lacking, and so it is difficult for physicians to select the most effective antibiotic. This paper describes the protocol and rationale for MAESTRAL (moxifloxacin in AECBs [acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis] trial; www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00656747), one of the first antibiotic comparator trials designed to show superiority of one antibiotic over another in AECOPD. It is a prospective, multinational, multicenter, randomized, double-blind controlled study of moxifloxacin (400 mg PO [ per os] once daily for 5 days) vs amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (875/125 mg PO twice daily for 7 days) in outpatients with COPD and chronic bronchitis suffering from an exacerbation. MAESTRAL uses an innovative primary endpoint of clinical failure: the requirement for additional or alternate treatment for the exacerbation at 8 weeks after the end of antibiotic therapy, powered for superiority. Patients enrolled are those at high-risk of treatment failure, and all are experiencing an Anthonisen type I exacerbation. Patients are stratified according to oral corticosteroid use to control their effect across antibiotic treatment arms. Secondary endpoints include quality of life, symptom assessments and health care resource use

Efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin in hospitalized patients with secondary peritonitis : pooled analysis of four randomized phase III trials

Background: Secondary peritonitis is an advanced form of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) requiring hospitalization, surgical source control, and empiric antibiotic therapy against causative aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. Methods: This pooled analysis of four prospective, active-controlled randomized clinical trials compared the efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin with that of comparator antibiotics in patients with confirmed secondary peritonitis. The primary efficacy endpoint was clinical success rate at test-of-cure (TOC) between day 10 and 45 post-therapy in the per-protocol (PP) population. Safety and clinical efficacy were assessed also in the intent-to-treat population (ITT). Bacteriological success was assessed at TOC in the microbiologically-valid population as a secondary efficacy endpoint. Results: Overall clinical success rates at TOC were 85.3% (431 of 505 patients) in the moxifloxacin and 88.4% (459 of 519 patients) in the comparator treatment groups (PP population, point estimate for the difference in success rates: -3.0%; 95% CI -7.06%, 1.05%), respectively. Similar clinical success rates between moxifloxacin and comparators were observed by anatomical site of infection, and ranged from 80.6% to 100% for moxifloxacin and from 71.4% to 96.6% for comparators, respectively. Bacteriologic success rates were similar with moxifloxacin (82.4%) and comparators (86.8%), respectively. The proportion of patients experiencing any treatment-emergent adverse events was slightly higher with moxifloxacin (67.3%) versus comparators (59.8%). Rates of drug-related adverse events (20.9% versus 20.0%) and deaths (4.3% versus 3.4%) were similar in moxifloxacin and comparator groups; none of the deaths were drug-related. Conclusions: The data suggests that once-daily IV (or IV/PO) moxifloxacin has a comparable efficacy and safety profile to antibiotic regimens approved previously in the subgroup of patients with secondary peritonitis of mild-to-moderate severity

A randomized trial of the efficacy and safety of sequential intravenous/oral moxifloxacin monotherapy versus intravenous piperacillin/tazobactam followed by oral amoxicillin/clavulanate for complicated skin and skin structure infections

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVES: The primary aim of the RELIEF study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two sequential intravenous (iv)/oral regimens: moxifloxacin iv/oral versus piperacillin/tazobactam (TZP) iv followed by oral amoxicillin/clavulanate (AMC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study had a prospective, randomized, double-dummy, double-blind, multicentre design. Patients >/=18 years were prospectively stratified according to complicated skin and skin structure infection (cSSSI) subtype/diagnosis (major abscess, diabetic foot infection, wound infection or infected ischaemic ulcer), surgical intervention and severity of illness. Diagnoses and disease severity were based on predetermined criteria, documented by repeated photographs, and confirmed by an independent data review committee. Patients were randomized to receive either 400 mg of moxifloxacin iv once daily followed by 400 mg of moxifloxacin orally once daily or 4.0/0.5 g of TZP iv thrice daily followed by 875/125 mg of AMC orally twice daily for 7-21 days. The primary efficacy variable was clinical response at test of cure (TOC) for the per-protocol (PP) population. Clinical efficacy was assessed by the data review committee based on repeated photographs and case descriptions. Clinical trials registry number: NCT 00402727. RESULTS: A total of 813 patients were randomized. Clinical success rates at TOC were similar for moxifloxacin and TZP-AMC in the PP [320/361 (88.6%) versus 275/307 (89.6%), respectively; P = 0.758] and intent-to-treat (ITT) [350/426 (82.2%) versus 305/377 (80.9%), respectively; P = 0.632] populations. Thus, moxifloxacin was non-inferior to TZP-AMC. Bacteriological success rates were high in both treatment arms [moxifloxacin: 432/497 (86.9%) versus TZP-AMC: 370/429 (86.2%), microbiologically valid (MBV) population]. Moxifloxacin was non-inferior to TZP-AMC at TOC in both the MBV and the ITT populations. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily iv/oral moxifloxacin monotherapy was clinically and bacteriologically non-inferior to iv TZP thrice daily followed by oral AMC twice daily in patients with cSSSIs

Fully phased human genome assembly without parental data using single-cell strand sequencing and long reads

Human genomes are typically assembled as consensus sequences that lack information on parental haplotypes. Here we describe a reference-free workflow for diploid de novo genome assembly that combines the chromosome-wide phasing and scaffolding capabilities of single-cell strand sequencing with continuous long-read or high-fidelity sequencing data. Employing this strategy, we produced a completely phased de novo genome assembly for each haplotype of an individual of Puerto Rican descent (HG00733) in the absence of parental data. The assemblies are accurate (quality value > 40) and highly contiguous (contig N50 > 23 Mbp) with low switch error rates (0.17%), providing fully phased single-nucleotide variants, indels and structural variants. A comparison of Oxford Nanopore Technologies and Pacific Biosciences phased assemblies identified 154 regions that are preferential sites of contig breaks, irrespective of sequencing technology or phasing algorithms

Utilisation des hépatocytes en culture pour le criblage toxico-pharmacologique de substances naturelles hépatotropes

Not availablePour évaluer la cytotoxicité et l'éventuelle activité hépatotrope de phytomédicaments, différents modèles in vitro sur hépatocytes de rat et hépatocytes humains en culture ont été mis au point. Comparaison avec deux substances hépatotoxiques de référence, tétrachlorure de carbone et D-galactosamin

Utilisation des hepatocytes en culture pour le criblage toxico-pharmacologique de substancesnaturelles hepatotropes

CNRS T Bordereau / INIST-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et TechniqueSIGLEFRFranc

Moxifloxacin safety: An analysis of 14 years of clinical data

Background: Moxifloxacin, a fluoroquinolone antibiotic, is used for the treatment of respiratory tract, pelvic inflammatory disease, skin, and intra-abdominal infections. Its safety profile is considered favorable in most reviews but has been challenged with respect to rare but potentially fatal toxicities (e.g. hepatic, cardiac, or skin reactions). Objective: To analyze and compare the safety profile of moxifloxacin versus comparators in the entire clinical database of the manufacturer. Setting: Data on the valid-for-safety population from phase II-IV actively controlled studies (performed between 1996 and 2010) were analyzed. Studies were either double blind (n = 22 369) or open label (n = 7635) and included patients with indications that have been approved in at least one country [acute bacterial sinusitis, acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis, communityacquired pneumonia, uncomplicated pelvic inflammatory disease, complicated and uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections, and complicated intra-abdominal infections] (n = 27 824) and patients with other indications (n = 2180), using the recommended daily dose (400 mg) and route of administration (oral, intravenous/oral, intravenous only). The analysis included patients at risk (age ≥65 years, diabetes mellitus, renal impairment, hepatic impairment, cardiac disorders, or body mass index <18 kg/m 2). Patients with known contraindications were excluded from enrollment by study protocol design, but any patient having entered a study, even if inappropriately, was included in the analysis. Main Outcome Measure: Crude incidences and relative risk estimates (Mantel' Haenszel analysis) of patients with any adverse event (AE), adverse drug reaction (ADR), serious AE (SAE), serious ADR (SADR), treatment discontinuation due to an AE or ADR, and fatal outcomes related to an AE or ADR. Results: Overall incidence rates of AEs were globally similar in the moxifloxacin and comparator groups. By filtering the data for differences in disfavor of moxifloxacin (i) at ≥2.5% for events with an incidence ≥2.5% or at ≥2-fold for events with an incidence <2.5% in one or both groups and (ii) affecting ≥10 patients in either group, we observed slightly more (i) AEs in double-blind intravenous-only and open-label oral studies, (ii) SAEs in double-blind intravenous-only studies, (iii) ADRs and SADRs in open-label oral studies, (iv) SADRs in open-label intravenous/oral studies, and (v) premature discontinuation due to AEs in open-label intravenous-only studies. The actual numbers of SADRs (in all studies) were small, with clinically relevant differences noted only in intravenous/oral studies and mainly driven by 'gastrointestinal disorders' (15 versus 7 patients) and 'changes observed during investigations' (23 versus 7 patients [asymptomatic QT prolongation: 11 versus 4 patients in double-blind studies]). Analysis by comparator (including another fluoroquinolone) did not reveal medically relevant differences, even in patients at risk. Incidence rates of hepatic disorders, tendon disorders, clinical surrogates of QT prolongation, serious cutaneous reactions, and Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea were similar with moxifloxacin and comparators. Conclusion: The safety of moxifloxacin is essentially comparable to that of standard therapies for patients receiving the currently registered dosage and for whom contraindications and precautions of use (as in the product label) are taken into account. © 2012 Krenzelok & Royal, publisher and licensee Springer International Publishing AG

Characterisation of patients receiving moxifloxacin for acute bacterial rhinosinusitis in clinical practice: results from an international, observational cohort study.

We conducted a prospective, non-controlled, multi-centre Phase IV observational cohort study of patients with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis who were treated with moxifloxacin in clinical practice in 19 countries in Asia Pacific, Europe and the Middle East. With the data collected we evaluated the presentation and course of the current disease episode, particularly in terms of the principal clinical signs and symptoms of acute rhinosinusitis and diagnostic procedures. A final assessment of moxifloxacin therapy was made to evaluate the impact of the sinusitis episode on activities of daily life and on sleep disturbance, and to evaluate the clinical outcome of treatment. A total of 7,090 patients were enrolled, of whom 3909 (57.6%) were included in the valid for clinical outcome and safety population. Regional differences were observed in the main symptoms of acute rhinosinusitis and, according to several characteristics, disease episodes appeared to be more severe in patients in Europe than in the Asia Pacific or Middle East regions. The sinusitis episode impacted on daily living for mean (SD) periods of 3.6 (3.2), 4.6 (3.9) and 3.1 (3.0) days and disturbed sleep for 3.6 (3.2), 4.6 (3.9) and 3.1 (3.0) nights in the Asia Pacific, Europe and Middle East regions, respectively. With moxifloxacin treatment, the mean (SD) time to improvement of symptoms was 3.0 (1.5), 3.4 (1.6) and 3.2 (1.5) days, and the time to resolution of symptoms was 4.8 (2.6) days, 5.7 (2.4) days and 5.5 (2.5) days, in the Asia Pacific, Europe and Middle East regions, respectively. In conclusion, acute rhinosinusitis remains a substantial health burden with significant impact on patients' quality of life, and there are differences between global regions in the clinical presentation, diagnosis and clinical course of disease episodes. Moxifloxacin was an effective and well-tolerated treatment option in the overall population.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00930488

Evaluation of LoRa technology in 433-MHz and 868-MHz for underground to aboveground data transmission

International audienc