EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

A multi-center, randomized, controlled, double blind and double dummy clinical trial of antofloxacin hydrochloride tablet versus levofloxacin tablet for the treatment of acute bacterial infections



A multi-center, randomized, controlled, double blind and double dummy clinical trial of antofloxacin hydrochloride tablet versus levofloxacin tablet for the treatment of acute bacterial infections



Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi 50(3): 225-229



To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of antofloxacin hydrochloride tablet for the treatment of acute bacterial infections. A multi-center randomized control, double blind and double dummy clinical trial was conducted; levofloxacin tablet was closed as controlled drug. The duration of treatment was 7-14 days in both groups. A total of 719 patients were enrolled in the study, in which 359 patients treated with antofloxacin and 360 patients treated with levofloxacin were included. Three hundred and thirty and 337 patients completed the study and met with all the criteria for per-protocol analysis, respectively. By the end of chemotherapy, the cured rates in per protocol set (PPS) population were 79.7% and 77.4%, the effective rates were 95.2% and 96.7%, and the bacterial clearance were 96.7% and 97.5% for the treating and control group, respectively. The clinical and bacterial efficacy of antofloxacin and levofloxacin was comparable by the analysis of infectious sites. Three hundred and fifty-seven and 356 patients in antofloxacin and levofloxacin groups were evaluated the safety. The drug adverse events occurred both in 10.1%, and drug adverse reactions occurred in 7.8% and 7.9% patients in the two groups. The most common drug adverse reactions were mild gastroenteric symptoms. No QTc prolongation was detected in all the patients. One patient in each group had mild blood glucose increase at the end of therapy, but the glucose returned to normal level without any intervention. No statistic significant difference between the two groups in clinical efficacy and safety was detected (P > 0.05). Antofloxacin hydrochloride tablet was effective and safe for the treatment of acute bacterial infections.

(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 051167443

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 21600087



Related references

A multicenter double blind double dummy randomized controlled clinical study of prulifloxacin versus levofloxacin in the treatment of acute bacterial infections. Zhongguo Kangshengsu Zazhi 32(3): 181-186, 2007

Zhengtian Capsule versus flunarizine in patients with migraine: a multi-center, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized controlled, non-inferior clinical trial. Bmc Complementary and Alternative Medicine 16(): 356-356, 2016

A multiple center, randomized, controlled, double-blinded and double-dummy trial of Yiqing Shuangjie Capsule and Tablet in treating acute upper respiratory tract infection with the syndrome of heat attacking the lung and Weifen. Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Xue Bao 6(2): 139-147, 2008

Safety and efficacy of oral nemonoxacin versus levofloxacin in treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: A phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Journal of Microbiology, Immunology, and Infection, 2018

Bupropion-sustained release in treatment of depression (72 patients): a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multi-center clinical trial. Zhongguo Xinyao yu Linchuang Zazhi 24(8): 614-618, 2005

A randomized controlled double-blind clinical study of gatifloxacin versus levofloxacin in the treatment of bacterial infections. Zhongguo Kangshengsu Zazhi 32(2): 108-112, 2007

Treatment of acute hepatic encephalopathy with rifaximin in comparison with lactitol A multi-centre, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized controlled trial. Journal of Hepatology 30(SUPPL 1): 81, 1999

Treatment of major depressive disorders with generic duloxetine and paroxetine: a multi-centered, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized controlled clinical trial. Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry 27(4): 228-236, 2015

Comparison of inhibition of cutaneous histamine reaction of ebastine fast-dissolving tablet [20 mg] versus desloratadine capsule [5 mg]: a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, three-period crossover study in healthy, nonatopic adults. Clinical Therapeutics 29(12): 2774-5, Author Reply 2775-6, 2008

Comparison of inhibition of cutaneous histamine reaction of ebastine fast-dissolving tablet (20 mg) versus desloratadine capsule (5 mg): a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, three-period crossover study in healthy, nonatopic adults. Clinical Therapeutics 29(5): 814-822, 2007

Prulifloxacin versus levofloxacin in the treatment of respiratory and urinary tract infections: a multicentre, double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial. ChemoTherapy 58(3): 249-256, 2013

Comparison of rifaximin and lactitol in the treatment of acute hepatic encephalopathy: results of a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled clinical trial. Journal of Hepatology 38(1): 51-58, 2002

Comparison of rifaximin and lactitol in the treatment of acute hepatic encephalopathy: Results of a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled clinical trial. Journal of Hepatology 38(1): 51-58, January, 2003

Tramadol/paracetamol combination tablet for postoperative pain following ambulatory hand surgery: a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, parallel-group trial. Journal of Pain Research 4: 103-110, 2011

Efficacy and Safety of Zhuanggu Joint Capsules in Combination with Celecoxib in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Multi-center, Randomized, Double-blind, Double-dummy, and Parallel Controlled Trial. Chinese Medical Journal 129(8): 891-897, 2016