Randomized controlled trial of sequential intravenous (i.v.) and oral moxifloxacin compared with sequential i.v. and oral co-amoxiclav with or without clarithromycin in patients with community-acquired pneumonia requiring initial parenteral treatment

Respiratory Fluoroquinolones Monotherapy vs. β-Lactams With or Without Macrolides for Hospitalized Community-Acquired Pneumonia Patients: A Meta-Analysis

Background: The choice of empirical antibiotic treatment for patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) who are admitted to non-intensive care unit (ICU) hospital wards is complicated by the limited availability of evidence. We systematically reviewed the efficacy and safety of strategies of empirical treatment with respiratory fluoroquinolone monotherapy and β-lactam with or without macrolide for non-ICU hospitalized CAP patients. Methods: We searched databases including PubMed, the Cochrane Library (Issue11, 2018), EMbase, China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI), WanFang Data, VIP, and China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving the comparison of respiratory fluoroquinolone monotherapy and β-lactam with or without macrolide for the non-ICU hospitalized patients with CAP up to November 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. A meta-analysis was performed with the outcomes. Results: A total of 22 studies involving 6,235 patients were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed a non-significant trend toward an advantage to the respiratory fluoroquinolone in overall mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65-1.02). No significant difference was found between the two strategies in clinical success (the intention-to-treat population: RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.99-1.08; the clinically evaluable population: RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.999-1.055; the population in which it was unclear whether intention-to-treat or per-protocol analysis was used: RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.99-1.09), microbiological treatment success (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.997-1.092), and length of stay (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.04). The advantage of respiratory fluoroquinolone was statistically significant on the drug-related adverse events (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.97). Conclusions: Current evidence shows that fluoroquinolone monotherapy has similar efficacy and favorable safety compared with β-lactam with or without macrolide for non-ICU hospitalized CAP patients. Since the limitation of region, quantity and quality of included studies, more RCTs with large scale and high quality are needed to verify the above conclusion.

Recommendations and guidelines for the treatment of pneumonia in Taiwan

Pneumonia is a leading cause of death worldwide, ranking third both globally and in Taiwan. This guideline was prepared by the 2017 Guidelines Recommendations for Evidence-based Antimicrobial agents use in Taiwan (GREAT) working group, formed under the auspices of the Infectious Diseases Society of Taiwan (IDST). A consensus meeting was held jointly by the IDST, Taiwan Society of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine (TSPCCM), the Medical Foundation in Memory of Dr. Deh-Lin Cheng, the Foundation of Professor Wei-Chuan Hsieh for Infectious Diseases Research and Education and CY Lee's Research Foundation for Pediatric Infectious Diseases and Vaccines. The final guideline was endorsed by the IDST and TSPCCM. The major differences between this guideline and the 2007 version include the following: the use of GRADE methodology for the evaluation of available evidence whenever applicable, the specific inclusion of healthcare-associated pneumonia as a category due to the unique medical system in Taiwan and inclusion of recommendations for treatment of pediatric pneumonia. This guideline includes the epidemiology and recommendations of antimicrobial treatment of community-acquired pneumonia, hospital-acquired pneumonia, ventilator-associated pneumonia, healthcare-associated pneumonia in adults and pediatric pneumonia.

Moxifloxacin monotherapy versus combination therapy in patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia evoked ARDS

Background

We tested the hypothesis that moxifloxacin monotherapy is equally effective and safe as a betalactam antibiotic based combination therapy in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) evoked by severe community acquired pneumonia (CAP).

Methods

In a retrospective chart review study of 229 patients with adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) admitted to our intensive care unit between 2001 and 2011, 169 well-characterized patients were identified to suffer from severe CAP. Patients were treated with moxifloxacin alone, moxifloxacin in combination with ß-lactam antibiotics, or with another antibiotic regimen based on ß-lactam antibiotics, at the discretion of the admitting attending physician. The primary endpoint was 30-day survival. To assess potential drug-induced liver injury, we also analyzed biomarkers of liver cell integrity.

Results

30-day survival (69% overall) did not differ (p = 0.89) between moxifloxacin monotherapy (n = 42), moxifloxacin combination therapy (n = 44), and other antibiotic treatments (n = 83). We found significantly greater maximum activity of aspartate transaminase (p = 0.048), alanine aminotransferase (p = 0.003), and direct bilirubin concentration (p = 0.01) in the moxifloxacin treated groups over the first 10–20 days. However, these in-between group differences faded over time, and no differences remained during the last 10 days of observation.

Conclusions

In CAP evoked ARDS, moxifloxacin monotherapy and moxifloxacin combination therapy was not different to a betalactam based antibiotic regimen with respect to 30-day mortality, and temporarily increased markers of liver cell integrity had no apparent clinical impact. Thus, in contrast to the current S3 guidelines, moxifloxacin may also be safe and effective even in patients with severe CAP evoked ARDS while providing coverage of an extended spectrum of severe CAP evoking bacteria. However, further prospective studies are needed for definite recommendations.

Effect of fluoroquinolones on melanogenesis in normal human melanocytes HEMn-DP: a comparative in vitro study

PURPOSE

Fluoroquinolones are one of the most commonly prescribed classes of antibiotics. However, their use is often connected with high risk of phototoxic reactions that lead to various skin or eye disorders. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of ciprofloxacin, lomefloxacin, moxifloxacin and fluoroquinolone derivatives with different phototoxic potential, on the viability and melanogenesis in melanocytes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Normal human epidermal melanocytes, dark pigmented (HEMn-DP) were used as an in vitro model system. The effect of the tested antibiotics on cell viability and melanization in pigmented cells was investigated using a spectrophotometric method. The WST-1 assay was used to detect the cytotoxic effect of antibiotics.

RESULTS

Ciprofloxacin, lomefloxacin and moxifloxacin induced the concentration-dependent loss in melanocytes viability. The values of EC₅₀ for the tested fluoroquinolone derivatives were found to be 2.0 mM for ciprofloxacin, 0.51 mM for lomefloxacin and 0.27 mM for moxifloxacin. The exposure of cells to different concentrations of the analyzed drugs resulted in decrease in melanin content and tyrosinase activity. The highest decrease was observed for lomefloxacin which may explain its high phototoxic potential in vivo. The role of melanin in the mechanism of the toxicity of fluoroquinolones was discussed and the obtained results were compared with the previously obtained data concerning light-pigmented melanocytes (HEMa-LP).

CONCLUSIONS

The results obtained in vitro suggest that the phototoxic potential of fluoroquinolones in vivo depends on specific drug-melanin interaction, the ability of drugs to affect melanogenesis as well as on the degree of melanocytes pigmentation.

Efficacy and safety of oral solithromycin versus oral moxifloxacin for treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia: a global, double-blind, multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial (SOLITAIRE-ORAL)

BACKGROUND

Community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality, and treatment recommendations, each with specific limitations, vary globally. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of solithromycin, a novel macrolide, with moxifloxacin for treatment of CABP.

METHODS

We did this global, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial at 114 centres in North America, Latin America, Europe, and South Africa. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with clinically and radiographically confirmed pneumonia of Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk class II, III, or IV were randomly assigned (1:1), via an internet-based central block randomisation procedure (block size of four), to receive either oral solithromycin (800 mg on day 1, 400 mg on days 2-5, placebo on days 6-7) or oral moxifloxacin (400 mg on days 1-7). Randomisation was stratified by geographical region, PORT risk class (II vs III or IV), and medical history of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The study sponsor, investigators, staff, and patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was early clinical response, defined as an improvement in at least two of four symptoms (cough, chest pain, sputum production, dyspnoea) with no worsening in any symptom at 72 h after the first dose of study drug, with a 10% non-inferiority margin. The primary analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT-01756339.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 3, 2013, and Sept 24, 2014, we randomly assigned 860 patients to receive solithromycin (n=426) or moxifloxacin (n=434). Patients were followed up to days 28-35 after first dose. Solithromycin was non-inferior to moxifloxacin in achievement of early clinical response: 333 (78·2%) patients had an early clinical response in the solithromycin group versus 338 (77·9%) patients in the moxifloxacin group (difference 0·29, 95% CI -5·5 to 6·1). Both drugs had a similar safety profile. 43 (10%) of 155 treatment-emergent adverse events in the solithromycin group and 54 (13%) of 154 such events in the moxifloxacin group were deemed to be related to study drug. The most common adverse events, mostly of mild severity, were gastrointestinal disorders, including diarrhoea (18 [4%] patients in the solithromycin group vs 28 [6%] patients in the moxifloxacin group), nausea (15 [4%] vs 17 [4%] patients) and vomiting (ten [2%] patients in each group); and nervous system disorders, including headache (19 [4%] vs 11 [3%] patients) and dizziness (nine [2%] vs seven [2%] patients).

INTERPRETATION

Oral solithromycin was non-inferior to oral moxifloxacin for treatment of patients with CABP, showing the potential to restore macrolide monotherapy for this indication.

FUNDING

Cempra.

Update on the combination effect of macrolide antibiotics in community-acquired pneumonia

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a leading cause of death from an infectious cause worldwide. Guideline-concordant antibiotic therapy initiated in a timely manner is associated with improved treatment responses and patient outcomes. In the post-antibiotic era, much of the morbidity and mortality of CAP is as a result of the interaction between bacterial virulence factors and host immune responses. In patients with severe CAP, or who are critically ill, there is a lot of emerging observational evidence demonstrating improved survival rates when treatment using combination therapy with a β-lactam and a macrolide is initiated, as compared to other antibiotic regimes without a macrolide. Macrolides in combination with a β-lactam antibiotic provide broader coverage for the atypical organisms implicated in CAP, and may contribute to antibacterial synergism. However, it has been postulated that the documented immunomodulatory effects of macrolides are the primary mechanism for improved patient outcomes through attenuation of bacterial virulence factors and host systemic inflammatory responses. Despite concerns regarding the limitations of observational evidence and the lack of confirmatory randomized controlled trials, the potential magnitude of mortality benefits estimated at 20-50% cannot be overlooked. In light of recent data from a number of trials showing that combination treatment with a macrolide and a suitable second agent is justified in all patients with severe CAP, such treatment should be obligatory for those admitted to an intensive care setting.

Enrofloxacin and macrolides alone or in combination with rifampicin as antimicrobial treatment in a bovine model of acute Chlamydia psittaci infection

Chlamydia psittaci is a zoonotic bacterium with a wide host range that can cause respiratory disease in humans and cattle. In the present study, effects of treatment with macrolides and quinolones applied alone or in combination with rifampicin were tested in a previously established bovine model of respiratory C. psittaci infection. Fifty animals were inoculated intrabronchially at the age of 6-8 weeks. Seven served as untreated controls, the others were assigned to seven treatment groups: (i) rifampicin, (ii) enrofloxacin, (iii) enrofloxacin + rifampicin, (iv) azithromycin, (v) azithromycin + rifampicin, (vi) erythromycin, and (vii) erythromycin + rifampicin. Treatment started 30 hours after inoculation and continued until 14 days after inoculation (dpi), when all animals were necropsied. The infection was successful in all animals and sufficient antibiotic levels were detected in blood plasma and tissue of the treated animals. Reisolation of the pathogen was achieved more often from untreated animals than from other groups. Nevertheless, pathogen detection by PCR was possible to the same extent in all animals and there were no significant differences between treated and untreated animals in terms of local (i.e., cell count and differentiation of BALF-cells) and systemic inflammation (i.e. white blood cells and concentration of acute phase protein LBP), clinical signs, and pathological findings at necropsy. Regardless of the reduced reisolation rate in treated animals, the treatment of experimentally induced respiratory C. psittaci infection with enrofloxacin, azithromycin or erythromycin alone or in combination with rifampicin was without obvious benefit for the host, since no significant differences in clinical and pathological findings or inflammatory parameters were detected and all animals recovered clinically within two weeks.

Moxifloxacin pharmacokinetic profile and efficacy evaluation in empiric treatment of community-acquired pneumonia

When antimicrobials are used empirically, pathogen MICs equal to clinical breakpoints or epidemiological cutoff values must be considered. This is to ensure that the most resistant pathogen subpopulation is appropriately targeted to prevent emergence of resistance. Accordingly, we determined the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of moxifloxacin at 400 mg/day in 18 patients treated empirically for community-acquired pneumonia. We developed a population pharmacokinetic model to assess the potential efficacy of moxifloxacin and to simulate the maximal MICs for which recommended pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) estimates are obtained. Moxifloxacin plasma concentrations were determined the day after therapy initiation using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography. Peak drug concentrations (Cmax) and area under the free drug concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (fAUC0-24) values predicted for each patient were evaluated against epidemiological cutoff MIC values for Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, and Legionella pneumophila. PK-PD targets adopted were a Cmax/MIC of ≥12.2 for all pathogens, an fAUC0-24/MIC of >34 for S. pneumoniae, and an fAUC0-24/MIC of >75 for H. influenzae and L. pneumophila. Individual predicted estimates for Cmax/MIC and fAUC0-24/MIC as well as simulated maximal MICs resulting in target attainment for oral and intravenous administration of the drug were suitable for S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae but not for L. pneumophila. These results indicate that caution must be taken when moxifloxacin is used as monotherapy to treat community-acquired pneumonia caused by L. pneumophila. In conclusion, this report reveals key information relevant to the empirical treatment of community-acquired pneumonia while highlighting the robust and flexible nature of this population pharmacokinetic model to predict therapeutic success. (Clinical Trials Registration no. NCT01983839.).

Evaluation of antimicrobial treatment in a bovine model of acute Chlamydia psittaci infection: tetracycline versus tetracycline plus rifampicin

Antimicrobial treatment of chlamydial infections is known to be of limited efficacy. In this study, effects of doxycycline (D), usually the drug of choice, were compared with the combined therapy of doxycycline and rifampicin (R) in a bovine model of respiratory Chlamydia psittaci infection. After intrabronchial inoculation of the pathogen, 30 animals were assigned to five groups (n = 6 per group): untreated controls, monotherapy with D (5 mg kg(-1)day(-1) or 10 mg kg(-1)day(-1)), and combination therapy of D and R (600 mg day(-1)). Treatment continued until day 14 post inoculation (d.p.i.). Clinical signs, inflammatory markers, and pathological findings confirmed successful infection in all animals. Reisolation of the pathogen was possible in 4/6 untreated animals and in 4/12 animals treated with D alone until 4 d.p.i., but in none of the calves of the two D + R groups. Pathogen detection was possible in all animals without significant differences among groups. Severity of disease and time course of its resolution, assessed by clinical and pathological findings as well as inflammatory parameters, were not significantly different between untreated controls and calves receiving D alone or in combination with R. Regardless of the treatment regimen, all groups recovered clinically and cleared the infection within 2 weeks.

Efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin in community acquired pneumonia: a prospective, multicenter, observational study (CAPRIVI)

Background

Community acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a major cause of morbidity, hospitalization, and mortality worldwide. Management of CAP for many patients requires rapid initiation of empirical antibiotic treatment, based on the spectrum of activity of available antimicrobial agents and evidence on local antibiotic resistance. Few data exist on the severity profile and treatment of hospitalized CAP patients in Eastern and Central Europe and the Middle East, in particular on use of moxifloxacin (Avelox®), which is approved in these regions.

Methods

CAPRIVI (Community Acquired Pneumonia: tReatment wIth AVelox® in hospItalized patients) was a prospective observational study in 12 countries: Croatia, France, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russia, Ukraine, and Macedonia. Patients aged >18 years were treated with moxifloxacin 400 mg daily following hospitalization with a CAP diagnosis. In addition to efficacy and safety outcomes, data were collected on patient history and disease severity measured by CRB-65 score.

Results

2733 patients were enrolled. A low severity index (i.e., CRB-65 score <2) was reported in 87.5% of CAP patients assessed (n = 1847), an unexpectedly high proportion for hospitalized patients. Moxifloxacin administered for a mean of 10.0 days (range: 2.0 to 39.0 days) was highly effective: 96.7% of patients in the efficacy population (n = 2152) improved and 93.2% were cured of infection during the study. Severity of infection changed from “moderate” or “severe” in 91.8% of patients at baseline to “no infection” or “mild” in 95.5% at last visit. In the safety population (n = 2595), 127 (4.9%) patients had treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and 40 (1.54%) patients had serious TEAEs; none of these 40 patients died. The safety results were consistent with the known profile of moxifloxacin.

Conclusions

The efficacy and safety profiles of moxifloxacin at the recommended dose of 400 mg daily are characterized in this large observational study of hospitalized CAP patients from Eastern and Central Europe and the Middle East. The high response rate in this study, which included patients with a range of disease severities, suggests that treatment with broader-spectrum drugs such as moxifloxacin is appropriate for patients with CAP who are managed in hospital.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00987792

Community-acquired pneumonia and tuberculosis: differential diagnosis and the use of fluoroquinolones

The respiratory fluoroquinolones moxifloxacin, gemifloxacin, and high-dose levofloxacin are recommended in guidelines for effective empirical antimicrobial therapy of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The use of these antibiotics for this indication in areas with a high prevalence of tuberculosis (TB) has been questioned due to the perception that they contribute both to delays in the diagnosis of pulmonary TB and to the emergence of fluoroquinolone-resistant strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. In this review, we consider some of the important questions regarding the potential use of fluoroquinolones for the treatment of CAP where the burden of TB is high. The evidence suggests that the use of fluoroquinolones as recommended for 5-10 days as empirical treatment for CAP, according to current clinical management guidelines, is appropriate even in TB-endemic regions. It is critical to quickly exclude M. tuberculosis as a cause of CAP using the most rapid relevant diagnostic investigations in the management of all patients with CAP.

Treatment of community-acquired pneumonia with moxifloxacin: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world. To investigate whether moxifloxacin monotherapy is associated with better clinical outcomes than other antibiotics recommended for CAP among adults with mild-to-moderate or severe CAP, we performed a meta-analysis. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized control trials (RCTs). The efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin were compared with other antimicrobial agents used to treat CAP. Fourteen RCTs, consisting of 6923 total patients, were included in the meta-analysis. No difference was found regarding the incidence of adverse events and mortality between moxifloxacin and the compared regimens. We found that moxifloxacin is as effective and well-tolerated as other recommended antibiotics for the treatment of CAP and possesses a better pathogen eradication rate than beta-lactam-based therapy.

Efficacy and tolerability of moxifloxacin in 2338 patients with acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis

OBJECTIVE

A post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of moxifloxacin 400mg once daily in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis (AECB) treated by pulmonologists and pulmonary specialists in community-based practice settings.

PATIENT AND METHODS

2338 patients with AECB (54% male; 46% female) were included in the analysis. PMS studies are prospective, open, uncontrolled and observational in design. All therapeutic decisions were made by the attending physician, based on their clinical practice and experience. This approach was adopted in order to provide valuable information on the safety and efficacy of moxifloxacin therapy in routine clinical practice.

RESULTS

The main symptoms of AECB (cough, expectoration, dyspnoea, chest pain and fever) were either resolved or improved in 80-97% of patients. Most patients (65%) improved within 3 days of starting moxifloxacin therapy and 91.6% by day 5. Mean time to improvement was 3.2±1.6 days. Overall, 96.1% of patients were judged by their physician to be either cured or improved following moxifloxacin therapy. Approximately 57% of patients had previously been treated with an antibiotic for their last episode of AECB. The antibiotics used were mostly macrolides (18.2% of patients), beta-lactams (16.9%), tetracycline/ doxycycline (9.9%) and quinolones (9.5%). The tolerability of moxifloxacin therapy was rated as 'very good' or 'good' in 95.4% of patients. Adverse events were reported in only 1.5% of patients.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, moxifloxacin 400mg once daily was effective and well tolerated in this group of patients with AECB, combined with a rapid onset of action and a similarly high clinical success rate to that observed in controlled comparative clinical trials.

Update on the cardiac safety of moxifloxacin

Cardiac safety was compared in patients receiving moxifloxacin and other antimicrobials in a large patient population from Phase II-IV randomized active-controlled clinical trials. Moxifloxacin 400 mg once-daily monotherapy was administered orally (PO) or sequentially (intravenous/oral, IV/PO). Across 64 trials, 21,298 patients received PO therapy (10,613 moxifloxacin, 10,685 comparators) while 6846 received sequential IV/PO therapy (3431 moxifloxacin, 3415 comparators). Treatment-emergent cardiac adverse event (AE) rates were similar for moxifloxacin and comparators in PO (6.6% vs 5.8%) and IV/PO (11.0% vs 12.0%) trials. Treatment-emergent cardiac adverse drug reactions were rare in PO (moxifloxacin 3.2% vs comparators 2.4%) and IV/PO (moxifloxacin 1.4% vs comparators 1.5%) patients. There were five (<0.02%) treatment-emergent drug-related deaths due to cardiac events out of 28,144 patients; one PO patient died treated with comparators, one patient died treated with IV/PO moxifloxacin, and three patients died after treatment with IV/PO comparators. Only one case of treatment-related non-fatal torsade de pointes occurred in the comparator arm. Incidence rates of cardiac AEs remained low in populations at elevated risk of cardiac events predisposed to QTc prolongation (i.e. community-acquired pneumonia patients admitted to the intensive care unit and/or mechanical ventilation, patients with documented prolongation of baseline QTc interval, women, and patients ≥ 65 years old). There was no evidence of unexpected cardiac events. After moxifloxacin treatment, an expected small prolongation in QTcB and QTcF was found. This analysis of numerous clinical trials shows the favorable cardiac safety profile of moxifloxacin, when used appropriately and according to its label, versus other antibiotics.

Once-daily moxifloxacin therapy for community-acquired pneumonia in general practice : evidence from a post-marketing surveillance study of 1467 patients

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of oral moxifloxacin in outpatients with respiratory tract infections treated in general practices in Germany with the focus on community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). METHODS, DESIGN AND PATIENTS: This was an open-label, prospective, uncontrolled, post-marketing surveillance study undertaken between October 2001 and June 2002. Symptoms associated with pneumonia were documented at baseline and at follow-up visits. A general assessment was given and the number of days until improvement/cure were recorded by the attending physician at the end of therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 9036 patients were treated with moxifloxacin, of which 1467 had CAP. The recommended dosage of moxifloxacin (400mg once daily) was used in 97.8% of all CAP patients. Between the initial and final follow-up visits, symptoms of CAP were either improved or cured in 90-99% of patients. More than half of the patients showed improvement after 3 days (54.2%); 89.2% of patients were improved after 5 days. The mean time for patients to recover was 8.0 +/- 2.7 days, with 88.7% of patients recovered by day 10 of treatment. Physicians rated moxifloxacin therapy as 'very good' or 'good' in 96.6% of patients and virtually all favoured prescribing moxifloxacin again. Ten patients (0.7%) reported adverse events during moxifloxacin therapy, mostly gastrointestinal disturbances.

CONCLUSIONS

Moxifloxacin is a very effective and safe treatment for patients with CAP and is highly accepted by physicians and patients because of rapid symptom improvement and good tolerability.

Efficacy and tolerability of moxifloxacin in patients with sinusitis treated in general practice : results of a post-marketing surveillance study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of moxifloxacin, an 8-methoxy fluoroquinolone, in patients with respiratory tract infections (RTIs) treated in general practice in Germany. Different RTIs were analysed separately, and this paper focuses on patients with acute sinusitis. METHODS, DESIGN AND PATIENTS: This was an open-label, prospective, uncontrolled, post-marketing surveillance study undertaken between October 2001 and June 2002. Symptoms of sinusitis (fever, cough, nasal obstruction, nasal secretion and headache) were assessed at baseline and at follow-up visits, and classified as 'absent', 'mild' or 'severe' by the attending physician.

RESULTS

Altogether 9036 patients were treated with moxifloxacin, of whom 2405 adult men and women had sinusitis. Sinusitis symptoms were improved or cured in at least 92% of patients. Moxifloxacin produced significant improvements after only 3 days (71.6% of patients); 96.2% of patients were improved after 5 days. Most patients (89.5%) had recovered by day 8 and 97.3% by day 10. Physicians rated moxifloxacin therapy as 'good' or 'very good' in 96.6% of patients and almost all favoured prescribing moxifloxacin in the future. Very few adverse events were reported with moxifloxacin (<0.4%), and were mostly gastrointestinal disturbances.

CONCLUSIONS

Moxifloxacin is a very effective and safe treatment for patients with acute sinusitis in general practice and is highly regarded by both physicians and patients because of rapid symptom improvement and good tolerability.

Efficacy and tolerability of sequential intravenous/oral moxifloxacin therapy in pneumonia: results of the first post-marketing surveillance study with intravenous moxifloxacin in hospital practice

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of sequential intravenous (IV)/oral therapy with moxifloxacin in pneumonia under general hospital treatment conditions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with pneumonia were documented in this non-interventional multicentre study. The patients were treated with IV moxifloxacin or moxifloxacin sequential therapy (IV and oral) in hospitals throughout Germany. Exclusion criteria were limited to the contraindications mentioned in the summary of product characteristics. The participating hospital-based physicians documented the patients' demography, anamnesis, antibiotic pretreatment, concomitant diseases and medications. Moxifloxacin therapy and symptom status were recorded daily up to the ninth day and on the last day of treatment. The physicians assessed the efficacy and tolerability of IV moxifloxacin therapy and reported all adverse events observed within the treatment period.

RESULTS

The 1749 documented patients had a mean age of 66.2 (SD 15.5) years; 56.4% were males and 43.5% females. The majority (99.3%) were treated with moxifloxacin 400mg once daily. On average, moxifloxacin was given for 7.6 days (SD 3.2). In cases of sequential therapy (78.9% of patients), IV moxifloxacin was switched to oral moxifloxacin after a mean of 4.1 days (SD 1.8). Moxifloxacin produced a significant clinical improvement in 58.2% of patients by day 3 of therapy, in 84.2% by day 5 and in 89.4% by day 7. Recovery occurred in 27.0% of patients by day 5, in 54.0% by day 7 and in 87.0% by day 14. It took a mean of 3.4 days (SD 1.9) until improvement and 7.2 days (SD 3.0) until cure. Overall efficacy of IV moxifloxacin therapy was rated by the physicians as 'very good' or 'good' in 82.9% of patients. Tolerability was rated in 94.3% of patients as 'very good' or 'good'. Adverse events were recorded for 92 (5.3%) patients, but events were considered by the attending physician to be related to moxifloxacin therapy for only 45 patients (2.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

IV moxifloxacin shows high efficacy in the treatment of pneumonia under routine clinical treatment conditions. IV moxifloxacin relieves pneumonia-associated symptoms rapidly and allows an early switch to oral administration. Because of its high efficacy and very good safety and tolerability profile, moxifloxacin delivers excellent benefits as first-line therapy for pneumonia.

Elderly patients with community-acquired pneumonia: optimal treatment strategies

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a common infectious disease that still causes substantial morbidity and mortality. Elderly people are frequently affected, and several issues related to care of this condition in the elderly have to be considered. This article reviews current recommendations of guidelines with a special focus on aspects of the care of elderly patients with CAP. The most common pathogen in CAP is still Streptococcus pneumoniae, followed by other pathogens such as Haemophilus influenzae, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Legionella species. Antimicrobial resistance is an increasing problem, especially with regard to macrolide-resistant S. pneumoniae and fluoroquinolone-resistant strains. With regard to β-lactam antibacterials, resistance by H. influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis is important, as is the emergence of multidrug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. The main management decisions should be guided by the severity of disease, which can be assessed by validated clinical risk scores such as CURB-65, a tool for measuring the severity of pneumonia based on assessment of confusion, serum urea, respiratory rate and blood pressure in patients aged ≥65 years. For the treatment of low-risk pneumonia, an aminopenicillin such as amoxicillin with or without a β-lactamase inhibitor is frequently recommended. Monotherapy with macrolides is also possible, although macrolide resistance is of concern. When predisposing factors for special pathogens are present, a β-lactam antibacterial combined with a β-lactamase inhibitor, or the combination of a β-lactam antibacterial, a β-lactamase inhibitor and a macrolide, may be warranted. If possible, patients who have undergone previous antibacterial therapy should receive drug classes not previously used. For hospitalized patients with non-severe pneumonia, a common recommendation is empirical antibacterial therapy with an aminopenicillin in combination with a β-lactamase inhibitor, or with fluoroquinolone monotherapy. With proven Legionella pneumonia, a combination of β-lactams with a fluoroquinolone or a macrolide is beneficial. In severe pneumonia, ureidopenicillins with β-lactamase inhibitors, broad-spectrum cephalosporins, macrolides and fluoroquinolones are used. A combination of a broad-spectrum β-lactam antibacterial (e.g. cefotaxime or ceftriaxone), piperacillin/tazobactam and a macrolide is mostly recommended. In patients with a predisposition for Pseudomonas aeruginosa, a combination of piperacillin/tazobactam, cefepime, imipenem or meropenem and levofloxacin or ciprofloxacin is frequently used. Treatment duration of more than 7 days is not generally recommended, except for proven infections with P. aeruginosa, for which 15 days of treatment appears to be appropriate. Further care issues in all hospitalized patients are timely administration of antibacterials, oxygen supply in case of hypoxaemia, and fluid management and dose adjustments according to kidney function. The management of elderly patients with CAP is a challenge. Shifts in antimicrobial resistance and the availability of new antibacterials will change future clinical practice. Studies investigating new methods to detect pathogens, determine the optimal antimicrobial regimen and clarify the duration of treatment may assist in further optimizing the management of elderly patients with CAP.

Fluoroquinolones in the management of community-acquired pneumonia in primary care

A literature search was conducted to evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of the respiratory fluoroquinolones (gemifloxacin, levofloxacin and moxifloxacin) and their efficacy and safety in the management of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Data show that CAP is a common presentation in primary care practice, and is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality, particularly in the elderly. Although the causative pathogens differ depending on treatment setting and patient factors, Streptococcus pneumoniae is the primary pathogen in all treatment settings. As a class, the respiratory fluoroquinolones have a very favorable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile. Pharmacodynamic criteria suggest that moxifloxacin and gemifloxacin are more potent against S. pneumoniae, which may have the added benefit of reducing resistance selection and enhancing bacterial eradication. The respiratory fluoroquinolones are also generally well tolerated, and are first-line options for outpatient treatment of CAP in patients with comorbidities or previous antibiotic use.

Corticosteroids for pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Pneumonia is an acute inflammation of the lungs and treatments differ depending on the type and severity. Corticosteroids can influence immune regulation, carbohydrate metabolism, protein catabolism, electrolyte balance and stress response. However, the benefits of corticosteroids for patients with pneumonia remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in the treatment of pneumonia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 11) which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1966 to December week 4, 2010), EMBASE (1974 to December 2010), the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) (1978 to December 2010) and VIP (1986 to December 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of corticosteroids for pneumonia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors selected studies. We telephoned the trial authors to confirm the randomisation method used. We extracted and analysed the methodological details and data from the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies including 437 participants in the review. Two studies were of high methodological quality and three were of poor quality. All studies involved small numbers of participants. Two small studies provided weak evidence that corticosteroids did not significantly reduce mortality (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.26; 95% CI 0.05 to 1.37), but accelerated the resolution of symptoms or time to clinical stability, and decreased the rate of relapse of the disease. Steroids can improve the oxygenation and reduce the need for mechanical ventilation in severe pneumonia. There was no significant difference between treatment groups with regards to the time to discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU). There were insufficient data to report the time to pneumonia resolution and admission to ICU. Typical adverse events associated with corticosteroid therapy were infrequent.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In most patients with pneumonia, corticosteroids are generally beneficial for accelerating the time to resolution of symptoms. However, evidence from the included studies was not strong enough to make any recommendations.

Analysis of computer alerts suggesting oral medication use during computerized order entry of i.v. medications

PURPOSE

Compliance with computer alerts suggesting oral medication use during computerized order entry of i.v. medications was analyzed.

SUMMARY

Using automated computerized clinical decision support (CDS) to suggest converting i.v. medications to oral alternatives can reduce medication costs for hospitalized patients, but prescriber noncompliance limits the effectiveness of such interventions. Clearer understanding of the factors associated with noncompliance to alerts may facilitate the design of more effective CDS systems. Electronic medical record data were retrospectively analyzed to measure the rate of compliance with a CDS alert that suggested converting to an equivalent oral form of a drug at the time of ordering the i.v. formulation. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine the associations among medication type, clinician characteristics, hospital service type, time of order, and compliance with the i.v.-to-oral conversion recommendation. The main outcome was compliance with the alert, measured at the level of the individual medication order. The mean +/- S.E. overall compliance rate was 18.7% +/- 0.6%. Compliance varied among the medications, with methyl-prednisolone having the lowest (8%) and famotidine the highest (32%) (p < 0.05). Nurses had the highest compliance rate (35%) while pharmacists had the lowest (10%) (p < 0.05). Medical house staff (19%) and medical faculty (21%) complied at similar rates. The intensive care units had lower compliance rates than did the medical-surgical ward (15% versus 21%, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

CDS alerts to convert 12 i.v. medications to oral alternatives were developed and implemented in an urban tertiary hospital. Compliance rates for the alerts were relatively low and varied by medication, location, and clinician type.

Community-acquired pneumonia

INTRODUCTION

In the northern hemisphere about 12/1000 people a year (on average) contract pneumonia while living in the community, with most cases caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae. Mortality ranges from about 5% to 35% depending on severity of disease, with a worse prognosis in older people, men, and people with chronic diseases.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to prevent community-acquired pneumonia? What are the effects of treatments for community-acquired pneumonia in outpatient settings, in people admitted to hospital, and in people receiving intensive care? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to January 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

RESULTS

We found 15 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antibiotics (oral, intravenous), different combinations, and prompt administration of antibiotics in intensive-care settings, early mobilisation, influenza vaccine, and pneumococcal vaccine.

Advances in the prevention, management, and treatment of community-acquired pneumonia

Despite the availability of powerful antibiotics, community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains one of the leading reasons for morbidity and mortality worldwide, and despite the availability of powerful antibiotics, there has been only little improvement in case fatality rates for many years. Consequently, it cannot be expected that novel antibiotics will substantially improve outcomes in CAP. Therefore, this review focuses on novel approaches that may reduce CAP-related mortality: the impact of immunomodulation by macrolides and fluoroquinolones and the prevention of CAP by pneumococcal vaccines.

Moxifloxacin: update and perspectives after 8 years of usage

Moxifloxacin has a broad spectrum of activity, including Gram-positive and Gram-negative organisms, atypical respiratory pathogens, anaerobes and penicillin- and macrolide-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae. It achieves good tissue penetration and high concentrations in clinically relevant tissues and fluids. It is available in both an oral and intravenous formulation, has a once-daily administration and a good tolerance and safety profile. Moxifloxacin is used mainly for the treatment of acute bacterial exacerbation of chronic bronchitis, community-acquired pneumonia, acute bacterial sinusitis, complicated skin and skin-structure infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections, as well as pulmonary TB, although it is not approved in this indication. The most recent studies covering these clinical indications are discussed.

Fluoroquinolones in the management of community-acquired pneumonia

AIMS

Review of the current guidelines for the use of respiratory fluoroquinolones in the management of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).

METHODS

Data were collected from recent clinical trials on fluoroquinolone therapy in patients with CAP and from updated recommendations of antimicrobial therapy in managing CAP, with a focus on current North American guidelines.

RESULTS

Randomised clinical trials of respiratory fluoroquinolones (moxifloxacin, levofloxacin and gemifloxacin) in the treatment of CAP were identified and analysed. The bacteriology of CAP, and susceptibility rates, resistance rates and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of fluoroquinolones against causative pathogens in CAP, and adverse event profiles of these agents were described. Respiratory fluoroquinolones have broad-spectrum antibacterial activities against common causative pathogens in CAP and provide an important treatment option as monotherapy for outpatients with comorbidities and inpatients who are not admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), including those with risk factors of drug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae. For treatment of ICU patients with severe CAP, it is recommended that fluoroquinolones be used in combination with a beta-lactam. Recent studies also demonstrated a more rapid resolution of clinical symptoms with the use of highly potent respiratory fluoroquinolones.

DISCUSSION

Appropriate use of fluoroquinolone agents may shorten the duration of antimicrobial therapy and the length of hospital stay and contribute to the decreased development of resistance in patients with CAP. Adverse event profiles of these agents should be considered to facilitate the selection of an appropriate fluoroquinolone for appropriate CAP patients.

CONCLUSION

The fluoroquinolone class, specifically those with adequate activity against respiratory pathogens, represents an important and convenient treatment option for patients with CAP.

Comparative analysis of length of stay, total costs, and treatment success between intravenous moxifloxacin 400 mg and levofloxacin 750 mg among hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the length of stay (LOS), costs, and treatment consistency among patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) initially treated with intravenous (IV) moxifloxacin 400 mg or IV levofloxacin 750 mg.

METHODS

Adults with CAP receiving IV moxifloxacin or IV levofloxacin for > or =3 days were identified in the Premier Perspective comparative database. Primary outcomes were LOS and costs. Secondary outcomes included treatment consistency, which was defined as 1) no additional IV moxifloxacin or levofloxacin after > or =1 day off study drug; 2) no switch to another IV antibiotic; and 3) no addition of another IV antibiotic.

RESULTS

A total of 7720 patients met inclusion criteria (6040 receiving moxifloxacin; 1680 receiving levofloxacin). Propensity matching created two cohorts (1300 patients each) well matched for demographic, clinical, hospital, and payor characteristics. Before the patients were matched, mean LOS (5.87 vs. 5.46 days; P = 0.0004) and total costs per patient ($7302 vs. $6362; P < 0.0001) were significantly greater with moxifloxacin. After the patients were matched, mean LOS (5.63 vs. 5.51 days; P = 0.462) and total costs ($6624 vs. $6473; P = 0.476) were comparable in both cohorts. Treatment consistency was higher for moxifloxacin before (81.0% vs. 78.9%; P = 0.048) and after matching (82.8% vs. 78.0%; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital treatment of CAP with IV moxifloxacin 400 mg or IV levofloxacin 750 mg was associated with similar hospital LOS and costs in propensity-matched cohorts.

Microbiological efficacy of 3-day treatment with azithromycin 1.5% eye-drops for purulent bacterial conjunctivitis

PURPOSE

Antibacterial efficacy of topically applied azithromycin 1.5% was compared with tobramycin 0.3% in a multicenter, randomized, investigator-masked study for the treatment of purulent bacterial conjunctivitis.

METHODS

A total of 1043 adults and children received either azithromycin twice daily for 3 days (n=524) or tobramycin every 2 hours while awake for 2 days, then four times daily for 5 days (n=519). Conjunctival swabbing was taken at days 0, 3, and 9, using alginate swabs resuspended in a dissolution-transport medium, providing rapid and reproducible results. Cagle's criteria were used to define the pathogenicity level for each isolated bacterium.

RESULTS

In the per-protocol set, the rate of bacteriologic resolution was 85.2% for azithromycin versus 83.8% for tobramycin on day 3, and 92.8% for azithromycin versus 94.6% for tobramycin on day 9. Azithromycin was demonstrated to be noninferior to tobramycin according to the 10% noninferiority margin. Although some bacteria were categorized as resistant to tested antibiotics, eradication was observed (for azithromycin: Acinetobacter, Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas), highlighting the specific pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of the ocular route.

CONCLUSIONS

In total, topical therapy with azithromycin 1.5% administered only twice daily for 3 days effectively eradicates most pathogenic bacteria associated with bacterial conjunctivitis. These microbiologic results are in accordance with the observed clinical outcome. This new anti-infective product has the advantage of a short treatment course which could lead to an improvement in patient compliance.

Clinical end points of therapy for patients with mild community-acquired pneumonia

Approximately 80% of patients with community-acquired pneumonia receive treatment as outpatients. The question is what are valid, reproducible, and quantifiable clinical end points that can be used in prospective clinical trials of the safety and efficacy of antibacterials. Patient-reported outcomes and measurements of time to end point are reasonable methods that, according to the limited data available, appear to work in clinical trials of therapy for mild-to-moderate community-acquired pneumonia among outpatients.

What can we learn from the time course of untreated and partially treated community-onset Streptococcus pneumoniae pneumonia? A clinical perspective on superiority and noninferiority trial designs for mild community-acquired pneumonia

There are no well-designed placebo-controlled clinical trials in the recent era that precisely define the magnitude of the drug effect of antimicrobial therapy for mild community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). However, there is evidence that ineffective therapies, selected on the basis of the ratio of 24-h area under the concentration curve to minimum inhibitory concentration, associated with a discordant (nonsusceptible in vitro) specific agent (or no therapy) for mild CAP due to Streptococcus pneumoniae are associated with increased risk of progression to serious CAP. The relatively high rate of clinical success associated with appropriate antimicrobial treatment of mild CAP renders a standard outcome measure of clinical success an unlikely way to differentiate new agents. However, there may be an advantage in composite outcome assessments for mild CAP. Composite-outcomes end points that include time to resolution of morbidity, the use of patient reported-outcomes instruments, and biomarkers are recommended for future studies. Because the composite rate of success in recent randomized clinical trials exceeds 90%, it would seem that a noninferiority margin of 10% is reasonable for trials for mild CAP.

Respiratory fluoroquinolones for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

We investigated whether the use of respiratory fluoroquinolones was associated with better clinical outcomes compared with the use of macrolides and beta- lactams among adults with pneumonia.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Current Contents, Scopus, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane with no language restrictions. Two reviewers independently extracted data from published trials that compared fluoroquinolones (levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, gemifloxacin) with macrolides or beta-lactams or both. A meta-analysis was performed with the clinical outcomes of mortality, treatment success and adverse outcomes.

RESULTS

We included 23 trials in our meta-analysis. There was no difference in mortality among patients who received fluoroquinolones or the comparator antibiotics (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65-1.12). Pneumonia resolved in more patients who received fluoroquinolones compared with the comparator antibiotics for the included outcomes in the intention-to-treat population (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.00-1.36), clinically evaluable population (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.06-1.50) and the microbiologically assessed population (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.28-2.20). Fluoroquinolones were more effective than a combination of beta-lactam and macrolide (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.02-1.90). They were also more effective for patients with severe pneumonia (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.02-3.29), those who required admission to hospital (OR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.04-1.61) and those who required intravenous therapy (OR = 1.44, 15% CI 1.13-1.85). Fluoroquinolones were more effective than beta-lactam and macrolide in open-label trials (OR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.08-1.69) but not in blinded randomized controlled trials (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.85-1.50).

INTERPRETATION

Fluoroquinolones were associated with higher success of treatment for severe forms of pneumonia; however, a benefit in mortality was not evident. A randomized controlled trial that includes patients with severe pneumonia with or without bacteremia is needed.

Moxifloxacin: a respiratory fluoroquinolone

BACKGROUND

Respiratory quinolones are a class of antimicrobials with a high activity against most respiratory pathogens. Moxifloxacin is a fourth-generation fluoroquinolone that has been shown to be effective against Gram-positive, Gram-negative, and atypical strains, as well as multi-drug resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae.

OBJECTIVE

To review and update the clinical efficacy of moxifloxacin in the treatment of respiratory infections.

METHOD

To perform a systematic review of publications on the clinical efficacy of moxifloxacin in respiratory infections.

RESULTS

The clinical efficacy of moxifloxacin has been shown in controlled studies of community-acquired pneumonia, exacerbations of chronic bronchitis and acute bacterial rhinosinusitis. Moxifloxacin has demonstrated a faster resolution of symptoms in community-acquired pneumonia and exacerbations of chronic bronchitis patients compared with first-line therapy together with excellent eradication rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of moxifloxacin as first-line therapy for moderate to severe respiratory infections in the community and the hospital has been recognized in international guidelines.

Community-acquired pneumonia

INTRODUCTION

In the northern hemisphere about 12/1000 people a year (on average) contract pneumonia while living in the community, with most cases caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae. Mortality ranges from about 5-35% depending on severity of disease, with a worse prognosis in older people, men, and people with chronic diseases.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to prevent community-acquired pneumonia? What are the effects of treatments for community-acquired pneumonia in outpatient settings, in people admitted to hospital, and in people receiving intensive care? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2007 (BMJ Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

RESULTS

We found 21 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antibiotics (oral, intravenous), different combinations, and prompt administration of antibiotics in intensive-care settings, early mobilisation, influenza vaccine, and pneumococcal vaccine.