Trial reportMedicine2017
Efficacy and safety of micafungin for the treatment of patients with proven or probable invasive aspergillosis: A non-comparative, multicenter, phase IV, open-label study.
Trial report in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02646774 (A Multi-center, Open-label, Non-comparative Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Micafungin Against Invasive Aspergillosis), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
A Multi-center, Open-label, Non-comparative Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Micafungin Against Invasive Aspergillosis (CFDA Commitment)
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pulmonary aspergilloma coexisting with hamartoma in post pulmonary tuberculosis: A case report.Respiratory medicine case reports · 2022Article
- Comparative Pharmacodynamics of Echinocandins against Aspergillus fumigatus Using anAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2021Article
- Distribution ofTherapeutic advances in infectious diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFew studies have assessed the efficacy and safety of micafungin in patients with proven or probable invasive aspergillosis (IA). This was the aim of the current study, which was conducted in 22 hospitals in China, where micafungin was approved for treatment of IA in 2006.
methodsThis was a non-comparative, phase IV open-label study (NCT02646774). Eligible patient were adults with proven or probable IA. Efficacy endpoints included rates of overall treatment success (primary endpoint) and clinical improvement, fungal clearance, mortality, and the site of Aspergillus infection (all secondary endpoints). Safety endpoints included incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). These endpoints were reported descriptively with associated 95% confidence intervals (CI); no hypotheses were tested.
resultsThe study was discontinued early due to low patient recruitment, which did not allow for the planned sample size to be reached. In total, 68 patients were enrolled: 42 into the full analysis set (for efficacy) and 61 into the safety analysis set. All patients were Han Chinese; the majority were male (n = 26; 61.9%) and ≤60 years of age (n = 35; 83.3%). Rates of overall treatment success, clinical improvement, fungal clearance, and mortality were 45.2% (n = 19/42; 95% CI: 29.85-61.33); 59.5% (n = 25/42; 95% CI: 43.28-74.37), 80.0% (n = 4/5; 95% CI: 28.36-99.49), and 7.1% (n = 3/42; 95% CI: 1.50-19.48), respectively. All patients were diagnosed with pulmonary Aspergillus infection. Overall, 155 TEAEs and 8 SAEs were reported by 37 (60.7%) and 7 (11.5%) patients. The most common TEAEs were decreased platelet count and fatigue (both n = 5; 8.2%) and the most common SAEs were intracranial hemorrhage and lung infection (n = 3; 4.9% and n = 2; 3.3%). Eight ADRs (n = 6; 9.8%) were reported but all were completely remitted or remitting during follow-up.
conclusionsResults suggest that micafungin is efficacious and well-tolerated in patients with proven or probable IA in China. However, these findings should be interpreted with care, due to the small number of patients included in this study. Further comparative trials should be used to confirm the efficacy and safety of micafungin in patients with proven or probable IA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.