Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35388666›Full record

Trial reportThe New England journal of medicine2022

Oral Tebipenem Pivoxil Hydrobromide in Complicated Urinary Tract Infection.

Paul B Eckburg, Lori Muir, Ian A Critchley, Susannah Walpole, Hanna Kwak, Anne-Marie Phelan, Gary Moore, Akash Jain, Tim Keutzer, Aaron Dane and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The New England journal of medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03788967 (A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-blind, Double-dummy, Multicenter, Prospective Study to Assess the Efficacy, Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Orally Administered Tebipenem Pivoxil Hydrobromide), which is not on this map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.6field-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.

NCT03788967 phase3completednot on this map

A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-blind, Double-dummy, Multicenter, Prospective Study to Assess the Efficacy, Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Orally Administered Tebipenem Pivoxil Hydrobromide (SPR994) Compared to Intravenous Ertapenem in Patients With Complicated Urinary Tract Infection (cUTI) or Acute Pyelonephritis (AP)

TypeinterventionalSponsorSpero TherapeuticsRan2019 to 2020Enrolled1,372ConditionsComplicated Urinary Tract Infection, Acute PyelonephritisArmsTBPM-PI-HBr, Ertapenem, Dummy Infusion, Dummy tablets
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Sulopenem for the Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections Including Pyelonephritis: A Phase 3, Randomized Trial.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2023
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. In vitro and in vivo antibacterial activity of oral tebipenem in combination with novel β-lactamase inhibitors (avibactam, relebactam, vaborbactam) against KPC-producing Enterobacterales.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. [New antimicrobial substances to combat increasing resistance].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  12. The oral penems and carbapenems.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2025
    Review
  13. [Beta-lactams and beta-lactamase inhibitors-current developments].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Toward better cures forClinical microbiology reviews · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Paul B EckburgFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
Lori MuirFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
Ian A CritchleyFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
Susannah WalpoleFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
Hanna KwakFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
Anne-Marie PhelanFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
Gary MooreFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
Akash JainFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
Tim KeutzerFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
Aaron DaneFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
David MelnickFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
Angela K TalleyFrom Spero Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA (P.B.E., L.M., I.A.C., S.W., H.K., A.-M.P., A.J., T.K., D.M., A.K.T.); Moore Computing Services, Little Rock, AR (G.M.); and DaneStat Consulting, Macclesfield, United Kingdom (A.D.).
Spero Therapeutics (United States) · US

Funding

HHS HHSO-100201800015C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a need for oral antibiotic agents that are effective against multidrug-resistant gram-negative uropathogens. Tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide is an orally bioavailable carbapenem with activity against uropathogenic Enterobacterales, including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing and fluoroquinolone-resistant strains.

methodsIn this phase 3, international, double-blind, double-dummy trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of orally administered tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide as compared with intravenous ertapenem in patients with complicated urinary tract infection or acute pyelonephritis. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive oral tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide (at a dose of 600 mg every 8 hours) or intravenous ertapenem (at a dose of 1 g every 24 hours) for 7 to 10 days (or up to 14 days in patients with bacteremia). The primary efficacy end point was overall response (a composite of clinical cure and favorable microbiologic response) at a test-of-cure visit (on day 19, within a ±2-day window) in the microbiologic intention-to-treat population. The noninferiority margin was 12.5%.

resultsA total of 1372 hospitalized adult patients were enrolled; 868 patients (63.3%) were included in the microbiologic intention-to-treat population (50.8% of whom had complicated urinary tract infections and 49.2% of whom had pyelonephritis). An overall response was seen in 264 of 449 patients (58.8%) who received tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide, as compared with 258 of 419 patients (61.6%) who received ertapenem (weighted difference, -3.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9.7 to 3.2). Clinical cure at the test-of-cure visit was observed in 93.1% of the patients in the microbiologic intention-to-treat population who received tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide and 93.6% of patients who received ertapenem (weighted difference, -0.6 percentage point; 95% CI, -4.0 to 2.8); the majority of patients with microbiologic response failures at the test-of-cure visit were asymptomatic patients with recurrent bacteriuria. Secondary and subgroup analyses were supportive of the primary analysis. Adverse events were observed in 25.7% of patients who received tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide and in 25.6% of patients who received ertapenem; the most common adverse events were mild diarrhea and headache.

conclusionsOral tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide was noninferior to intravenous ertapenem in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infection and acute pyelonephritis and had a similar safety profile. (Funded by Spero Therapeutics and the Department of Health and Human Services; ADAPT-PO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03788967.).

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsCarbapenemsPyelonephritisUrinary Tract InfectionsAdministration, IntravenousAdministration, OralAdultDouble-Blind MethodDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialErtapenemHumansAnti-Bacterial AgentsCarbapenemsErtapenemtebipenem

Identifiers

PMID35388666
OpenAlexW4224092216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.