Cefepime–Taniborbactam in Complicated Urinary Tract Infection
Florian M. Wagenlehner, Leanne B. Gasink, Paul C. McGovern, et al
N Engl J Med 2024; 390:611-622
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2304748
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales species and multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosaare global health threats. Cefepime–taniborbactam is an investigational β-lactam and β-lactamase inhibitor combination with activity against Enterobacterales species and P. aeruginosaexpressing serine and metallo-β-lactamases.
METHODS
In this phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned hospitalized adults with complicated urinary tract infection (UTI), including acute pyelonephritis, in a 2:1 ratio to receive intravenous cefepime–taniborbactam (2.5 g) or meropenem (1 g) every 8 hours for 7 days; this duration could be extended up to 14 days in case of bacteremia. The primary outcome was both microbiologic and clinical success (composite success) on trial days 19 to 23 in the microbiologic intention-to-treat (microITT) population (patients who had a qualifying gram-negative pathogen against which both study drugs were active). A prespecified superiority analysis of the primary outcome was performed after confirmation of noninferiority.
RESULTS
Of the 661 patients who underwent randomization, 436 (66.0%) were included in the microITT population. The mean age of the patients was 56.2 years, and 38.1% were 65 years of age or older. In the microITT population, 57.8% of the patients had complicated UTI, 42.2% had acute pyelonephritis, and 13.1% had bacteremia. Composite success occurred in 207 of 293 patients (70.6%) in the cefepime–taniborbactam group and in 83 of 143 patients (58.0%) in the meropenem group. Cefepime–taniborbactam was superior to meropenem regarding the primary outcome (treatment difference, 12.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 3.1 to 22.2; P=0.009). Differences in treatment response were sustained at late follow-up (trial days 28 to 35), when cefepime–taniborbactam had higher composite success and clinical success. Adverse events occurred in 35.5% and 29.0% of patients in the cefepime–taniborbactam group and the meropenem group, respectively, with headache, diarrhea, constipation, hypertension, and nausea the most frequently reported; the frequency of serious adverse events was similar in the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Cefepime–taniborbactam was superior to meropenem for the treatment of complicated UTI that included acute pyelonephritis, with a safety profile similar to that of meropenem. (Funded by Venatorx Pharmaceuticals and others; CERTAIN-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03840148. opens in new tab.)
