Randomized non-inferiority trial to compare trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole plus rifampicin versus linezolid for the treatment of MRSA infection
- PMID: 25209610
- DOI: 10.1093/jac/dku352
Randomized non-inferiority trial to compare trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole plus rifampicin versus linezolid for the treatment of MRSA infection
Abstract
Objectives: The therapeutic arsenal for MRSA infections is limited. The aim of this study was to assess the non-inferiority of a combination of trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole plus rifampicin versus linezolid alone for the treatment of MRSA infection.
Methods: We conducted a randomized, open-label, single-centre, non-inferiority trial comparing trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (160 mg/800 mg three times daily) plus rifampicin (600 mg once a day) versus linezolid (600 mg twice a day) alone in adult patients with various types of MRSA infection. Patients were allocated 1:1 to either regimen. The primary outcome was clinical cure at 6 weeks after the end of treatment (non-inferiority margin 20%) assessed by both ITT and PP analyses. Secondary outcomes included the microbiologically documented persistence of MRSA in clinical cultures, mortality and adverse events. The study protocol has been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00711854).
Results: Overall, 150 patients were randomized to one of the two treatment arms between January 2009 and December 2013 and were included in the ITT analysis. Of these 56/75 (74.7%) in the linezolid group and 59/75 (78.7%) in the trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole and rifampicin group experienced clinical success (risk difference 4%, 95% CI -9.7% to 17.6%). The results were confirmed by the PP analysis, with 54/66 (81.8%) cured patients in the linezolid group versus 52/59 (88.1%) in the trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole and rifampicin group (risk difference 6.3%, 95% CI -6.8% to 19.2%). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in any of the secondary outcomes, including microbiologically documented failure. Four adverse drug reactions attributed to the study medication occurred in the linezolid group versus nine in the trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole and rifampicin group.
Conclusions: Compared with linezolid, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole and rifampicin seems to be non-inferior in the treatment of MRSA infection.
Keywords: Switzerland; adults; drug therapy; humans; multidrug-resistant organisms; prospective clinical studies; staphylococcal infections.
© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Similar articles
-
Comparing the cost-effectiveness of linezolid to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole plus rifampicin for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection: a healthcare system perspective.Clin Microbiol Infect. 2017 Sep;23(9):659-666. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2017.02.011. Epub 2017 Feb 20. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2017. PMID: 28232163
-
Treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections with a minimal inhibitory concentration of 2 μg/mL to vancomycin: old (trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole) versus new (daptomycin or linezolid) agents.Ann Pharmacother. 2012 Dec;46(12):1587-97. doi: 10.1345/aph.1R211. Epub 2012 Dec 4. Ann Pharmacother. 2012. PMID: 23212935
-
Linezolid versus vancomycin for meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2013 May;41(5):426-33. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2012.12.012. Epub 2013 Mar 26. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2013. PMID: 23537580
-
Interventions for the eradication of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in people with cystic fibrosis.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jul 21;7(7):CD009650. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009650.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Dec 13;12:CD009650. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009650.pub5 PMID: 30030966 Free PMC article. Updated. Review.
-
Treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus surgical site infections.AACN Adv Crit Care. 2011 Jan-Mar;22(1):5-12; quiz 14. doi: 10.1097/NCI.0b013e3181ef86fe2049019. AACN Adv Crit Care. 2011. PMID: 21297385 Review. No abstract available.
Cited by
-
The effect of combining antibiotics on resistance: A systematic review and meta-analysis.medRxiv [Preprint]. 2024 Jun 28:2023.07.10.23292374. doi: 10.1101/2023.07.10.23292374. medRxiv. 2024. PMID: 37503165 Free PMC article. Preprint.
-
Linezolid-associated serotonin toxicity: a systematic review.Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2023 Jul;79(7):875-883. doi: 10.1007/s00228-023-03500-9. Epub 2023 May 2. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2023. PMID: 37129603 Review.
-
Teicoplanin and vancomycin as treatment for glycopeptide-susceptible Enterococcus faecium bacteraemia: a propensity score-adjusted non-inferior comparative study.J Antimicrob Chemother. 2023 May 3;78(5):1231-1240. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkad079. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2023. PMID: 36918748 Free PMC article.
-
Oral minocycline plus rifampicin versus oral linezolid for complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: The AIDA open label, randomized, controlled Phase 4 trial.EClinicalMedicine. 2022 Dec 26;56:101790. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101790. eCollection 2023 Feb. EClinicalMedicine. 2022. PMID: 36618892 Free PMC article.
-
A Narrative Review of Early Oral Stepdown Therapy for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: Yay or Nay?Open Forum Infect Dis. 2020 May 5;7(6):ofaa151. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofaa151. eCollection 2020 Jun. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2020. PMID: 32523971 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
