Author
Listed:
- Samir Koirala
- Buddha Basnyat
- Amit Arjyal
- Olita Shilpakar
- Kabina Shrestha
- Rishav Shrestha
- Upendra Man Shrestha
- Krishna Agrawal
- Kanika Deshpande Koirala
- Sudeep Dhoj Thapa
- Abhilasha Karkey
- Sabina Dongol
- Abhishek Giri
- Mila Shakya
- Kamal Raj Pathak
- James Campbell
- Stephen Baker
- Jeremy Farrar
- Marcel Wolbers
- Christiane Dolecek
Abstract
Background: Fluoroquinolones are the most commonly used group of antimicrobials for the treatment of enteric fever, but no direct comparison between two fluoroquinolones has been performed in a large randomised trial. An open-label randomized trial was conducted to investigate whether gatifloxacin is more effective than ofloxacin in the treatment of uncomplicated enteric fever caused by nalidixic acid-resistant Salmonella enterica serovars Typhi and Paratyphi A. Methodology and Principal Findings: Adults and children clinically diagnosed with uncomplicated enteric fever were enrolled in the study to receive gatifloxacin (10 mg/kg/day) in a single dose or ofloxacin (20 mg/kg/day) in two divided doses for 7 days. Patients were followed for six months. The primary outcome was treatment failure in patients infected with nalidixic acid resistant isolates. 627 patients with a median age of 17 (IQR 9–23) years were randomised. Of the 218 patients with culture confirmed enteric fever, 170 patients were infected with nalidixic acid-resistant isolates. In the ofloxacin group, 6 out of 83 patients had treatment failure compared to 5 out of 87 in the gatifloxacin group (hazard ratio [HR] of time to failure 0.81, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.65, p = 0.73). The median time to fever clearance was 4.70 days (IQR 2.98–5.90) in the ofloxacin group versus 3.31 days (IQR 2.29–4.75) in the gatifloxacin group (HR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.18, p = 0.004). The results in all blood culture-confirmed patients and all randomized patients were comparable. Conclusion: Gatifloxacin was not superior to ofloxacin in preventing failure, but use of gatifloxacin did result in more prompt fever clearance time compared to ofloxacin. Trial registration: ISRCTN 63006567 (www.controlled-trials.com). Author Summary: Enteric fever, which comprises of typhoid and paratyphoid fevers, is common in many developing countries. It is also sometimes seen in the Western world in returning travellers. This present study of uncomplicated enteric fever in an outpatient setting in a hospital in Kathmandu, Nepal compared the newer gatifloxacin with the widely-used ofloxacin (two drugs of the fluroquinolone class) in the treatment of this illness. Although fluroquinolones are commonly considered the main group of drugs in the treatment of enteric fever, there have not been comparisons of efficacy between two drugs in this same class in the treatment of enteric fever. Furthermore, certain strains of enteric fever organism called nalidixic-acid resistant strains are proving very difficult to treat in both the local population and the Western travellers. The study focused primarily on the efficacy of the 2 drugs against these particular strains. The results revealed that both drugs were effective but gatifloxacin decreased the patient's fever more rapidly than ofloxacin. Dysglycemia was noted in a 35-year-old woman taking gatifloxacin who did not disclose a pre-existing diagnosis of diabetes at time of enrollment, but not in any other healthy child or young adult.
Suggested Citation
Samir Koirala & Buddha Basnyat & Amit Arjyal & Olita Shilpakar & Kabina Shrestha & Rishav Shrestha & Upendra Man Shrestha & Krishna Agrawal & Kanika Deshpande Koirala & Sudeep Dhoj Thapa & Abhilasha K, 2013.
"Gatifloxacin Versus Ofloxacin for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Enteric Fever in Nepal: An Open-Label, Randomized, Controlled Trial,"
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(10), pages 1-11, October.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pntd00:0002523
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002523
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0002523. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.