TY - JOUR
T1 - Effect and Safety of Meropenem–Vaborbactam versus Best-Available Therapy in Patients with Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Infections
T2 - The TANGO II Randomized Clinical Trial
AU - Wunderink, Richard G.
AU - Giamarellos-Bourboulis, Evangelos J.
AU - Rahav, Galia
AU - Mathers, Amy J.
AU - Bassetti, Matteo
AU - Vazquez, Jose
AU - Cornely, Oliver A.
AU - Solomkin, Joseph
AU - Bhowmick, Tanaya
AU - Bishara, Jihad
AU - Daikos, George L.
AU - Felton, Tim
AU - Furst, Maria Jose Lopez
AU - Kwak, Eun Jeong
AU - Menichetti, Francesco
AU - Oren, Ilana
AU - Alexander, Elizabeth L.
AU - Griffith, David
AU - Lomovskaya, Olga
AU - Loutit, Jeffery
AU - Zhang, Shu
AU - Dudley, Michael N.
AU - Kaye, Keith S.
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding. This project has been funded in part by The Medicines Company and the Department of Health and Human Services; Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response; Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), under Contract No. HHSO100201400002C with Rempex Pharmaceuticals, a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Medicines Company and Agreement no. HHSO100201600026C with The Medicines Company. The funder of this study was responsible for study design and data collection. The funder was also responsible for the funding of the journal’s page processing charges. All coauthors were responsible for data interpretation and writing of this report. All authors had full access to all of the data in this study and take complete responsibility for the integrity of the data and accuracy of the data analysis.
Funding Information:
TANGO II investigators who made this study possible. A full list of TANGO II investigators is provided in the Supplemental Material. We thank Dan White, Elizabeth Morgan, Brian Murphy, and Carrie Messerschmidt for thoughtful contribution to this work. Medical writing and editorial support was provided by Purvi Kobawala Smith of Health and Wellness Partners, Upper Saddle River, NJ through funding by The Medicines Company.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, The Author(s).
PY - 2018/12/1
Y1 - 2018/12/1
N2 - Introduction: Treatment options for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections are limited and CRE infections remain associated with high clinical failure and mortality rates, particularly in vulnerable patient populations. A Phase 3, multinational, open-label, randomized controlled trial (TANGO II) was conducted from 2014 to 2017 to evaluate the efficacy/safety of meropenem–vaborbactam monotherapy versus best available therapy (BAT) for CRE. Methods: A total of 77 patients with confirmed/suspected CRE infection (bacteremia, hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal infection, complicated urinary tract infection/acute pyelonephritis) were randomized, and 47 with confirmed CRE infection formed the primary analysis population (microbiologic-CRE-modified intent-to-treat, mCRE-MITT). Eligible patients were randomized 2:1 to meropenem–vaborbactam (2 g/2 g over 3 h, q8h for 7–14 days) or BAT (mono/combination therapy with polymyxins, carbapenems, aminoglycosides, tigecycline; or ceftazidime-avibactam alone). Efficacy endpoints included clinical cure, Day-28 all-cause mortality, microbiologic cure, and overall success (clinical cure + microbiologic eradication). Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs) and laboratory findings. Results: Within the mCRE-MITT population, cure rates were 65.6% (21/32) and 33.3% (5/15) [95% confidence interval (CI) of difference, 3.3% to 61.3%; P = 0.03)] at End of Treatment and 59.4% (19/32) and 26.7% (4/15) (95% CI of difference, 4.6% to 60.8%; P = 0.02) at Test of Cure;.Day-28 all-cause mortality was 15.6% (5/32) and 33.3% (5/15) (95% CI of difference, − 44.7% to 9.3%) for meropenem–vaborbactam versus BAT, respectively. Treatment-related AEs and renal-related AEs were 24.0% (12/50) and 4.0% (2/50) for meropenem–vaborbactam versus 44.0% (11/25) and 24.0% (6/25) for BAT. Exploratory risk–benefit analyses of composite clinical failure or nephrotoxicity favored meropenem–vaborbactam versus BAT (31.3% [10/32] versus 80.0% [12/15]; 95% CI of difference, − 74.6% to − 22.9%; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Monotherapy with meropenem–vaborbactam for CRE infection was associated with increased clinical cure, decreased mortality, and reduced nephrotoxicity compared with BAT. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02168946. Funding: The Medicines Company.
AB - Introduction: Treatment options for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections are limited and CRE infections remain associated with high clinical failure and mortality rates, particularly in vulnerable patient populations. A Phase 3, multinational, open-label, randomized controlled trial (TANGO II) was conducted from 2014 to 2017 to evaluate the efficacy/safety of meropenem–vaborbactam monotherapy versus best available therapy (BAT) for CRE. Methods: A total of 77 patients with confirmed/suspected CRE infection (bacteremia, hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal infection, complicated urinary tract infection/acute pyelonephritis) were randomized, and 47 with confirmed CRE infection formed the primary analysis population (microbiologic-CRE-modified intent-to-treat, mCRE-MITT). Eligible patients were randomized 2:1 to meropenem–vaborbactam (2 g/2 g over 3 h, q8h for 7–14 days) or BAT (mono/combination therapy with polymyxins, carbapenems, aminoglycosides, tigecycline; or ceftazidime-avibactam alone). Efficacy endpoints included clinical cure, Day-28 all-cause mortality, microbiologic cure, and overall success (clinical cure + microbiologic eradication). Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs) and laboratory findings. Results: Within the mCRE-MITT population, cure rates were 65.6% (21/32) and 33.3% (5/15) [95% confidence interval (CI) of difference, 3.3% to 61.3%; P = 0.03)] at End of Treatment and 59.4% (19/32) and 26.7% (4/15) (95% CI of difference, 4.6% to 60.8%; P = 0.02) at Test of Cure;.Day-28 all-cause mortality was 15.6% (5/32) and 33.3% (5/15) (95% CI of difference, − 44.7% to 9.3%) for meropenem–vaborbactam versus BAT, respectively. Treatment-related AEs and renal-related AEs were 24.0% (12/50) and 4.0% (2/50) for meropenem–vaborbactam versus 44.0% (11/25) and 24.0% (6/25) for BAT. Exploratory risk–benefit analyses of composite clinical failure or nephrotoxicity favored meropenem–vaborbactam versus BAT (31.3% [10/32] versus 80.0% [12/15]; 95% CI of difference, − 74.6% to − 22.9%; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Monotherapy with meropenem–vaborbactam for CRE infection was associated with increased clinical cure, decreased mortality, and reduced nephrotoxicity compared with BAT. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02168946. Funding: The Medicines Company.
KW - Best available therapy
KW - Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae
KW - Meropenem–vaborbactam
KW - Randomized clinical trial
KW - TANGO II
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85056120314&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85056120314&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s40121-018-0214-1
DO - 10.1007/s40121-018-0214-1
M3 - Article
C2 - 30270406
AN - SCOPUS:85056120314
SN - 2193-8229
VL - 7
SP - 439
EP - 455
JO - Infectious Diseases and Therapy
JF - Infectious Diseases and Therapy
IS - 4
ER -