Literature DB >> 8106768

A randomized double-blind trial of vancomycin versus teicoplanin for the treatment of gram-positive bacteremia in patients with cancer.

K V Rolston1, H Nguyen, G Amos, L Elting, V Fainstein, G P Bodey.   

Abstract

In a prospective, randomized, double-blind study comparing teicoplanin and vancomycin for the treatment of gram-positive bacteremias in neutropenic patients, teicoplanin was given at 6 mg/kg of body weight every 24 h intravenously (i.v.) after initial loading every 12 h for three doses, while vancomycin was administered at 15 mg/kg every 12 h i.v. At enrollment, both groups were comparable in age, sex, underlying hematologic or neoplastic disorder, baseline renal functions, and incidence of neutropenia. Treatment was successful in 19 (90%) of 21 patients who received teicoplanin and 24 (96%) of 25 who received vancomycin (P = .58). Adverse reactions occurred more often in the vancomycin group (31%) than in the teicoplanin group (9%; P = .06) and were primarily cutaneous or gastrointestinal. In conclusion, teicoplanin was better tolerated than vancomycin, and no statistically significant difference in efficacy was detected with the sample size in this study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8106768     DOI: 10.1093/infdis/169.2.350

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Infect Dis        ISSN: 0022-1899            Impact factor:   5.226


  10 in total

1.  Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of vancomycin for the treatment of patients with gram-positive infections: focus on the study design.

Authors:  Konstantinos Z Vardakas; Michael N Mavros; Nikolaos Roussos; Matthew E Falagas
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 7.616

2.  Using pharmacoeconomics to assess the comparative value of antibacterials. A UK perspective.

Authors:  P Davey
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  A survey of the use of teicoplanin in patients with haematological malignancies and solid tumours.

Authors:  J M Davies
Journal:  Infection       Date:  1998 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.553

Review 4.  Teicoplanin. A pharmacoeconomic evaluation of its use in the treatment of gram-positive infections.

Authors:  C M Spencer; H M Bryson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 5.  A risk-benefit assessment of teicoplanin in the treatment of infections.

Authors:  F de Lalla; A Tramarin
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 6.  Future challenges and treatment of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia with emphasis on MRSA.

Authors:  Rasmus V Rasmussen; Vance G Fowler; Robert Skov; Niels E Bruun
Journal:  Future Microbiol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.165

Review 7.  Comparative efficacy and safety of vancomycin versus teicoplanin: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Shuli Svetitsky; Leonard Leibovici; Mical Paul
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2009-07-13       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 8.  Teicoplanin: 10 years of clinical experience.

Authors:  M Trautmann; H Wiedeck; M Ruhnke; M Oethinger; R Marre
Journal:  Infection       Date:  1994 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.553

Review 9.  [Febrile neutropenia: practical aspects].

Authors:  P Harten; B Seyfarth; N Schmitz
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  1998-10-15

10.  Interventional antimicrobial therapy in febrile neutropenic patients. Study Group of the Paul Ehrlich Society for Chemotherapy.

Authors:  H Link; G Maschmeyer; P Meyer; W Hiddemann; W Stille; M Helmerking; D Adam
Journal:  Ann Hematol       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 3.673

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.