Clinafloxacin monotherapy (CI-960) versus ceftazidime plus amikacin for empirical treatment of febrile neutropenic cancer patients

Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of clinafloxacin as a single agent for the empirical treatment of febrile episodes and bacterial infections in neutropenic cancer patients. Methods An open label, active-controlled, randomized, parallel treatment, multicenter study was conducted where clinafloxacin monotherapy was compared to the combination of ceftazidime plus amikacin (plus optional vancomycin or teicoplanin). Four hundred and nineteen patients were randomized to receive either intravenous clinafloxacin 200 mg every 12 h or intravenous ceftazidime (2 g) iv every 8 h plus intravenous amikacin (15 mg/kg) per day in divided doses. All randomized patients were to receive a minimum of 48 h of primary study drug treatment, after which the primary treatment could be modified. Clinical and microbiological responses were evaluated at 7-21 days post-treatment after study treatment and long term (maximum 28 days), in intent-to-treat and modified intent-to-treat populations. Result Clinafloxacin and ceftazidime-amikacin were statistically equivalent for the 72-h defervescence rate, overall defervescence rate, time to defervescence, clinical success rate, by-pathogen microbiological eradication rate, and survival rate. Clinical cure was achieved in 84% (59/70) of patients who received clinafloxacin monotherapy. There were no significant differences between treatments in rates of adverse events or treatment discontinuation rates due to adverse events. Conclusions Clinafloxacin appears to be an appropriate agent for empirical treatment in febrile neutropenic cancer patients.