Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26809813›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Infectious diseases2016

Gatifloxacin versus ceftriaxone for uncomplicated enteric fever in Nepal: an open-label, two-centre, randomised controlled trial.

Amit Arjyal, Buddha Basnyat, Ho Thi Nhan, Samir Koirala, Abhishek Giri, Niva Joshi, Mila Shakya, Kamal Raj Pathak, Saruna Pathak Mahat, Shanti Pradhan Prajapati and 18 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01421693 (Randomized, Open-label, Superiority Trial of the Effectiveness of Gatifloxacin Versus Ceftriaxone for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Enteric Fever.), which is not on this map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
14.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01421693 phase4completednot on this map

Randomized, Open-label, Superiority Trial of the Effectiveness of Gatifloxacin Versus Ceftriaxone for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Enteric Fever.

TypeinterventionalSponsorOxford University Clinical Research Unit, VietnamRan2011 to 2015Enrolled300ConditionsEnteric Fever, Typhoid FeverArmsCeftriaxone, Gatifloxacin
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

28 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Amit ArjyalOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Buddha BasnyatOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal; Global Antibiotic Resistance Partnership, Kathmandu, Nepal; Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK. Electronic address: buddha.basnyat@ndm.ox.ac.uk.
Ho Thi NhanThe Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Samir KoiralaOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Abhishek GiriOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Niva JoshiOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Mila ShakyaOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Kamal Raj PathakOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Saruna Pathak MahatOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Shanti Pradhan PrajapatiOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Nabin AdhikariOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Rajkumar ThapaPatan Hospital, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Laura MersonThe Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam; Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Damodar GajurelCivil Services Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Kamal LamsalCivil Services Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Dinesh LamsalCivil Services Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Bharat Kumar YadavPatan Hospital, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Ganesh ShahPatan Hospital, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Poojan ShresthaOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Sabina DongolOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Abhilasha KarkeyOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Corinne N ThompsonThe Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam; Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Nga Tran Vu ThieuCentre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Duy Pham ThanhCentre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Stephen BakerThe Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam; Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK; the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Guy E ThwaitesThe Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam; Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Marcel WolbersThe Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam; Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Christiane DolecekThe Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam; Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK; Department of Zoology, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Patan Academy of Health Sciences · NPUniversity of Oxford · GBCivil Service Hospital · NPOxford University Clinical Research Unit · VNHospital for Tropical Diseases · VNPatan Hospital · NP

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBecause treatment with third-generation cephalosporins is associated with slow clinical improvement and high relapse burden for enteric fever, whereas the fluoroquinolone gatifloxacin is associated with rapid fever clearance and low relapse burden, we postulated that gatifloxacin would be superior to the cephalosporin ceftriaxone in treating enteric fever.

methodsWe did an open-label, randomised, controlled, superiority trial at two hospitals in the Kathmandu valley, Nepal. Eligible participants were children (aged 2-13 years) and adult (aged 14-45 years) with criteria for suspected enteric fever (body temperature ≥38·0°C for ≥4 days without a focus of infection). We randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) without stratification to 7 days of either oral gatifloxacin (10 mg/kg per day) or intravenous ceftriaxone (60 mg/kg up to 2 g per day for patients aged 2-13 years, or 2 g per day for patients aged ≥14 years). The randomisation list was computer-generated using blocks of four and six. The primary outcome was a composite of treatment failure, defined as the occurrence of at least one of the following: fever clearance time of more than 7 days after treatment initiation; the need for rescue treatment on day 8; microbiological failure (ie, blood cultures positive for Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi, or Paratyphi A, B, or C) on day 8; or relapse or disease-related complications within 28 days of treatment initiation. We did the analyses in the modified intention-to-treat population, and subpopulations with either confirmed blood-culture positivity, or blood-culture negativity. The trial was powered to detect an increase of 20% in the risk of failure. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01421693, and is now closed.

findingsBetween Sept 18, 2011, and July 14, 2014, we screened 725 patients for eligibility. On July 14, 2014, the trial was stopped early by the data safety and monitoring board because S Typhi strains with high-level resistance to ciprofloxacin and gatifloxacin had emerged. At this point, 239 were in the modified intention-to-treat population (120 assigned to gatifloxacin, 119 to ceftriaxone). 18 (15%) patients who received gatifloxacin had treatment failure, compared with 19 (16%) who received ceftriaxone (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04 [95% CI 0·55-1·98]; p=0·91). In the culture-confirmed population, 16 (26%) of 62 patients who received gatifloxacin failed treatment, compared with four (7%) of 54 who received ceftriaxone (HR 0·24 [95% CI 0·08-0·73]; p=0·01). Treatment failure was associated with the emergence of S Typhi exhibiting resistance against fluoroquinolones, requiring the trial to be stopped. By contrast, in patients with a negative blood culture, only two (3%) of 58 who received gatifloxacin failed treatment versus 15 (23%) of 65 who received ceftriaxone (HR 7·50 [95% CI 1·71-32·80]; p=0·01). A similar number of non-serious adverse events occurred in each treatment group, and no serious events were reported.

interpretationOur results suggest that fluoroquinolones should no longer be used for treatment of enteric fever in Nepal. Additionally, under our study conditions, ceftriaxone was suboptimum in a high proportion of patients with culture-negative enteric fever. Since antimicrobials, specifically fluoroquinolones, are one of the only routinely used control measures for enteric fever, the assessment of novel diagnostics, new treatment options, and use of existing vaccines and development of next-generation vaccines are now a high priority.

fundingWellcome Trust and Li Ka Shing Foundation.

Indexed as

AdolescentAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftriaxoneFemaleFluoroquinolonesGatifloxacinHumansMaleNepalSalmonella entericaSalmonella typhiTreatment FailureTyphoid FeverYoung AdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftriaxoneFluoroquinolonesGatifloxacin

Identifiers

PMID26809813
PMCPMC4835582
OpenAlexW2269036868

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.