Adjunctive rifampicin for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (ARREST): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection. Methods In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants. Findings Between Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18–45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference −1·4%, 95% CI −7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68–1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3–4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005). Interpretation Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia

Follow-on rifaximin for the prevention of recurrence following standard treatment of infection with clostridium fifficile (RAPID): a randomised placebo controlled trial

©2018 The Authors. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2018-316794Background Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) recurs after initial treatment in approximately one in four patients. A single-centre pilot study suggested that this could be reduced using ’follow-on’ rifaximin treatment. We aimed to assess the efficacy of rifaximin treatment in preventing recurrence. Methods A multisite, parallel group, randomised, placebo controlled trial recruiting patients aged ≥18 years immediately after resolution of CDI through treatment with metronidazole or vancomycin. Participants received either rifaximin 400mg three times a day for 2weeks, reduced to 200mg three times a day for a further 2weeks or identical placebo. The primary endpoint was recurrence of CDI within 12 weeks of trial entry. Results Between December 2012 and March 2016, 151 participants were randomised to either rifaximin or placebo. Primary outcome data were available on 130. Mean age was 71.9 years (SD 15.3). Recurrence within 12 weeks was 29.5% (18/61) among participants allocated to placebo compared with 15.9% (11/69) among those allocated to rifaximin, a difference between groups of 13.7% (95% CI −28.1% to 0.7%, p=0.06). The risk ratio was 0.54 (95% CI 0.28 to 1.05, p=0.07). During 6-month safety follow-up, nine participants died in each group (12%). Adverse event rates were similar between groups. Conclusion While ’follow-on’ rifaximin after CDI appeared to halve recurrence rate, we failed to reach our recruitment target in this group of frail elderly patients, so the estimated effect of rifaximin lacks precision. A meta-analysis including a previous trial suggests that rifaximin may be effective; however, further, larger confirmatory studies are needed.The trial was sponsored by the University of Nottingham, was coordinated from the Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit and was supported by the National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network

The effects of ultra-selective beta1-antagonism on the metabolic and cytokine profile in septic shock patients receiving noradrenaline: a sub-investigation from the STRESS-L Randomised Study

Purpose The landiolol and organ failure in patients with septic shock (STRESS-L study) included a pre-planned sub-study to assess the effect of landiolol treatment on inflammatory and metabolomic markers. Methods Samples collected from 91 patients randomised to STRESS-L were profiled for immune and metabolomic markers. A panel of pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines were measured through commercially acquired multiplex Luminex assays and statistically analysed by individual and cluster-level analysis (patient). Metabolite fingerprinting was carried out by flow infusion electrospray ionisation high-resolution mass spectrometry and metabolomic data were analysed using the R-based platform MetaboAnalyst. The metabolites were identified using DIMEdb (dimedb.ibers.aber.ac.uk) from their mass/charge ratios. These metabolomic data were also re-analysed using individual and cluster-level analysis. The individual-level models were adjusted for confounders, such as age, sex, noradrenaline dosage and patient (random effect). Results Analysis was undertaken at cluster- and individual-level. There were no significant differences in cytokine concentration level between trial arms nor survivors and non-survivors over the duration of the observations from day 1 to day 4. Metabolomic analysis showed some separation in the levels of ceramides and cardiolipins between those who survived and those who died. Following adjusted analysis for confounders, plasma metabolite concentrations remained statistically different between landiolol and standard care arms for succinic acid, l-tryptophan, l-alanine, 2,2,2-trichloroethanol, lactic acid and d-glucose. Conclusions In a study of ICU patients with established septic shock and a tachycardia, landiolol treatment used to reduce the heart rate from above 95 to a range between 80 and 94 beats per minute did not induce significant cytokine changes. d-Glucose, lactic acid, succinic acid, l-alanine, l-tryptophan and trichloroethanol were pathways that may merit further investigation. Trial Registration: EU Clinical Trials Register Eudra CT: 2017-001785-14 (https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2017-001785-14/GB); ISRCTN registry Identifier: ISRCTN12600919 (https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12600919)

Tranexamic acid versus placebo to prevent bleeding in patients with haematological malignancies and severe thrombocytopenia (TREATT): a randomised, double-blind, parallel, phase 3 superiority trial

Background: Bleeding is common in patients with haematological malignancies undergoing intensive therapy. We aimed to assess the effect of tranexamic acid on preventing bleeding and the need for platelet transfusions. Methods: TREATT was an international, randomised, double-blind, parallel, phase 3 superiority trial conducted at 27 haematology centres in Australia and the UK. We enrolled adults (aged ≥18 years) receiving intensive chemotherapy or haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for a haematological malignancy, with a platelet count of 10 × 109 platelets per L or less for 5 days or longer. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using block randomisation, stratified by site, to tranexamic acid (1 g every 8 h intravenously or 1·5g every 8 h orally) or placebo when their platelet count was less than 30 × 109 platelets per L. Treatment was continued until platelet recovery or day 30. Prophylactic platelet transfusions were maintained as standard of care. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who died or had WHO grade 2 or higher bleeding up to day 30. A modified intention-to-treat population including randomly assigned patients whose platelet count decreased to 30 × 109 platelets per L or less was used for analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03136445), ISRCTN (ISRCTN73545489), and the European Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2014-001513-35). Findings: Between June 23, 2015, and Feb 17, 2022, 1736 patients were screened for eligibility, 616 of whom were enrolled and randomly assigned (310 to tranexamic acid and 306 to placebo). 19 participants were excluded from the modified intention-to-treat analysis, leaving 300 participants in the tranexamic acid group and 297 in the placebo group. Participant median age was 58 years (IQR 49–65), 380 (62%) of 616 participants were male, and 235 (38%) were female. The proportion of participants who died or had WHO grade 2 or higher bleeding was 31·7% (90/298 [95% CI 26·6–37·4]) in the tranexamic acid group and 34·2% (98/295 [29·0–40·0]) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·92 [95% CI 0·67–1·27]; p=0·62). There were no differences in thrombotic events or veno-occlusive disease. 94 serious adverse events in 77 participants were reported up to day 60 in the tranexamic acid group and 103 events in 82 participants in the placebo group. Interpretation: There is insufficient evidence to support routine use of tranexamic acid to reduce bleeding in patients with haematological malignancies undergoing intensive chemotherapy. Funding: UK National Health Service Blood and Transplant and Australian National Health and Medical Research Council