Flag of the European Union EU Clinical Trials Register Help

Clinical trials

The European Union Clinical Trials Register   allows you to search for protocol and results information on:
  • interventional clinical trials that were approved in the European Union (EU)/European Economic Area (EEA) under the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC
  • clinical trials conducted outside the EU/EEA that are linked to European paediatric-medicine development

  • EU/EEA interventional clinical trials approved under or transitioned to the Clinical Trial Regulation 536/2014 are publicly accessible through the
    Clinical Trials Information System (CTIS).


    The EU Clinical Trials Register currently displays   43871   clinical trials with a EudraCT protocol, of which   7290   are clinical trials conducted with subjects less than 18 years old.   The register also displays information on   18700   older paediatric trials (in scope of Article 45 of the Paediatric Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006).

    Phase 1 trials conducted solely on adults and that are not part of an agreed paediatric investigation plan (PIP) are not publicly available (see Frequently Asked Questions ).  
     
    Examples: Cancer AND drug name. Pneumonia AND sponsor name.
    How to search [pdf]
    Search Tips: Under advanced search you can use filters for Country, Age Group, Gender, Trial Phase, Trial Status, Date Range, Rare Diseases and Orphan Designation. For these items you should use the filters and not add them to your search terms in the text field.
    Advanced Search: Search tools
     

    < Back to search results

    Download PDF

    Clinical Trial Results:
    A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multi-Center Study to Evaluate the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Cefepime- AAI101 Compared to Piperacillin/Tazobactam in the Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections, Including Acute Pyelonephritis, in Adults

    Summary
    EudraCT number
    2017-004868-35
    Trial protocol
    LT   LV   ES   BG   SK   PL   HU   HR  
    Global end of trial date
    26 Nov 2019

    Results information
    Results version number
    v1(current)
    This version publication date
    14 Nov 2021
    First version publication date
    14 Nov 2021
    Other versions

    Trial information

    Close Top of page
    Trial identification
    Sponsor protocol code
    AT-301
    Additional study identifiers
    ISRCTN number
    -
    US NCT number
    NCT03687255
    WHO universal trial number (UTN)
    -
    Other trial identifiers
    IND: 122269
    Sponsors
    Sponsor organisation name
    Allecra Therapeutics SAS
    Sponsor organisation address
    10, rue Alexandre Freund, Saint-Louis, France, 68300
    Public contact
    Head of Regulatory Affairs, Allecra Therapeutics SAS, +33 389689876 , oml@allecra.com
    Scientific contact
    Head of Regulatory Affairs, Allecra Therapeutics SAS, +33 389689876 , oml@allecra.com
    Paediatric regulatory details
    Is trial part of an agreed paediatric investigation plan (PIP)
    No
    Does article 45 of REGULATION (EC) No 1901/2006 apply to this trial?
    No
    Does article 46 of REGULATION (EC) No 1901/2006 apply to this trial?
    No
    Results analysis stage
    Analysis stage
    Final
    Date of interim/final analysis
    30 Jan 2020
    Is this the analysis of the primary completion data?
    Yes
    Primary completion date
    26 Nov 2019
    Global end of trial reached?
    Yes
    Global end of trial date
    26 Nov 2019
    Was the trial ended prematurely?
    No
    General information about the trial
    Main objective of the trial
    The primary objective of this study is to assess the efficacy of cefepime-AAI101 compared to Piperacillin/Tazobactam in the treatment of cUTI, including acute pyelonephritis (AP).
    Protection of trial subjects
    Patients were monitored for safety throughout the duration of the study. Safety assessments included vital signs, physical examinations, laboratory assessments, adverse event (AE) assessments, and electrocardiograms (ECGs). A triplicate 12-lead ECG was performed at Screening and Day 4. A pregnancy test was performed at Screening and TOC for female patients of childbearing potential. A Data Safety and Monitoring Board (DSMB) was established with the aim to safeguard the interests of the study participants, Investigators, and the Sponsor; to assess the safety of the study’s interventions; to monitor the overall conduct of the study; and to protect its integrity and validity. The DSMB worked under an approved DSMB Charter.
    Background therapy
    -
    Evidence for comparator
    Piperacillin/tazobactam has been the mainstay of empiric treatment of serious hospital infections; however, in many regions its efficacy has eroded due to local emergence or spread of new, more aggressive ESBLs and carbapenemases.
    Actual start date of recruitment
    28 Sep 2018
    Long term follow-up planned
    No
    Independent data monitoring committee (IDMC) involvement?
    Yes
    Population of trial subjects
    Number of subjects enrolled per country
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Argentina: 4
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Belarus: 70
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Georgia: 66
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Poland: 40
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Slovakia: 24
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Spain: 4
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Croatia: 41
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Bulgaria: 103
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Estonia: 50
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Hungary: 34
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Latvia: 36
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Lithuania: 67
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Mexico: 49
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Peru: 20
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Russian Federation: 164
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Serbia: 27
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    South Africa: 1
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    Ukraine: 240
    Country: Number of subjects enrolled
    United States: 1
    Worldwide total number of subjects
    1041
    EEA total number of subjects
    399
    Number of subjects enrolled per age group
    In utero
    0
    Preterm newborn - gestational age < 37 wk
    0
    Newborns (0-27 days)
    0
    Infants and toddlers (28 days-23 months)
    0
    Children (2-11 years)
    0
    Adolescents (12-17 years)
    0
    Adults (18-64 years)
    639
    From 65 to 84 years
    380
    85 years and over
    22

    Subject disposition

    Close Top of page
    Recruitment
    Recruitment details
    Study Sites: 90 sites in Argentina, Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Mexico, Peru, Poland, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Ukraine, and the United States Study Period: Approximately 61 weeks Initiation Date: 24 September 2018 Completion Date: 26 November 2019

    Pre-assignment
    Screening details
    Adult patients ≥18 years of age with a clinical diagnosis of cUTI or AP requiring hospitalisation and at least 7 days of IV treatment were screened. Patients who received potentially effective systemic antibacterial therapy for a continuous duration of >24 hours during the previous 72 hours before the study-qualifying baseline urine were excluded.

    Period 1
    Period 1 title
    Treatment period (overall period)
    Is this the baseline period?
    Yes
    Allocation method
    Randomised - controlled
    Blinding used
    Double blind
    Roles blinded
    Investigator, Monitor, Assessor, Subject
    Blinding implementation details
    Randomization was coordinated through a centralized Interactive Response Technology system. To ensure balance among the treatment groups, randomization was stratified by: Type of infection, prior antibiotic therapy, and geographic region.

    Arms
    Are arms mutually exclusive
    Yes

    Arm title
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam
    Arm description
    2 g cefepime (FEP) plus 500 mg enmetazobactam (EMT) infused over a period of 2 hours once every 8 hours (q8h) for 7 days (up to 14 days in patients with a positive blood culture at baseline). In patients with moderate renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 30 mL/min/1.73 m2) the dose of FEP-EMT was adjusted to 1 g FEP plus 250 mg EMT, infused over a period of 2 hours q8h.
    Arm type
    Experimental

    Investigational medicinal product name
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam
    Investigational medicinal product code
    FPE
    Other name
    Enmetazobactam = formerly AAI101
    Pharmaceutical forms
    Powder for infusion
    Routes of administration
    Intravenous use
    Dosage and administration details
    Study drug was prepared by an unblinded pharmacist (or qualified designee) according to the Pharmacy Manual. Cefepime-enmetazobactam was reconstituted in 20 mL normal saline (NS) and immediately mixed in the 250 mL saline bag for infusion. The i.v. bags were transferred to the blinded study staff for administration to the patient. At each administration of i.v. study drug, patients received a 270 mL infusion administered via a pump over a period of 2 hours. In patients with moderate renal impairment (eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 30 mL/min/1.73 m2) the dose of cefepime-enmetazobactam was adjusted to 1 g cefepime plus 250 mg enmetazuobactam, infused over a period of 2 hours q8h.

    Arm title
    Piperacillin/Tazobactam
    Arm description
    4.5 g piperacillin/tazobactam infused over a period of 2 hours q8h for 7 days (up to 14 days in patients with a positive blood culture at baseline). Dosing of piperacillin/tazobactam followed the recommendations as per the respective summary of product characteristics, which did not require adjustment of the 4.5 g dose in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment.
    Arm type
    Active comparator

    Investigational medicinal product name
    Piperacillin / Tazobactam
    Investigational medicinal product code
    Other name
    PipTazo
    Pharmaceutical forms
    Powder for infusion
    Routes of administration
    Intravenous use
    Dosage and administration details
    Dosing of piperacillin/tazobactam followed the recommendations as per the respective summary of product characteristics, which did not require adjustment of the 4.5 g dose in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment.

    Number of subjects in period 1
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam Piperacillin/Tazobactam
    Started
    520
    521
    Completed
    494
    501
    Not completed
    26
    20
         Adverse event, serious fatal
    -
    3
         Consent withdrawn by subject
    7
    6
         Physician decision
    -
    1
         Adverse event, non-fatal
    3
    2
         Other
    12
    6
         Lost to follow-up
    3
    2
         Lack of efficacy
    1
    -

    Baseline characteristics

    Close Top of page
    Baseline characteristics reporting groups
    Reporting group title
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam
    Reporting group description
    2 g cefepime (FEP) plus 500 mg enmetazobactam (EMT) infused over a period of 2 hours once every 8 hours (q8h) for 7 days (up to 14 days in patients with a positive blood culture at baseline). In patients with moderate renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 30 mL/min/1.73 m2) the dose of FEP-EMT was adjusted to 1 g FEP plus 250 mg EMT, infused over a period of 2 hours q8h.

    Reporting group title
    Piperacillin/Tazobactam
    Reporting group description
    4.5 g piperacillin/tazobactam infused over a period of 2 hours q8h for 7 days (up to 14 days in patients with a positive blood culture at baseline). Dosing of piperacillin/tazobactam followed the recommendations as per the respective summary of product characteristics, which did not require adjustment of the 4.5 g dose in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment.

    Reporting group values
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam Piperacillin/Tazobactam Total
    Number of subjects
    520 521 1041
    Age categorical
    Units: Subjects
        Adults (18-64 years)
    314 325 639
        from 65-74 years
    128 119 247
        75 years and older
    78 77 155
    Age continuous
    Mean age
    Units: years
        arithmetic mean (standard deviation)
    55.0 ± 18.97 54.3 ± 19.13 -
    Gender categorical
    Units: Subjects
        Female
    284 289 573
        Male
    236 232 468
    Region
    Units: Subjects
        Eastern Europe
    364 364 728
        Americas
    36 38 74
        Other Countries
    120 119 239
    Type of Infection
    AP = Acute Pyelonephritis cUTI = complicated Urinary Tract Infection * ...but with other risk factors
    Units: Subjects
        AP
    252 249 501
        cUTI with removable source of infection
    122 127 249
        cUTI without removable source of infection*
    146 145 291
    Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) at Baseline
    Units: Subjects
        <3
    311 307 618
        >=3
    202 202 404
        not reported
    7 12 19
    Concurrent Bacteraemia at Baseline
    Units: Subjects
        Yes
    41 30 71
        No
    479 491 970
    Baseline Diabetic Status
    Units: Subjects
        Yes
    79 78 157
        No
    441 443 884
    eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate at Baseline)
    Units: mL/min/1.73m^2
        arithmetic mean (standard deviation)
    72.91 ± 22.141 72.38 ± 24.759 -
    Subject analysis sets

    Subject analysis set title
    ITT Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Intention-to-treat
    Subject analysis set description
    The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population included all patients who were randomized.

    Subject analysis set title
    MITT Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Modified intention-to-treat
    Subject analysis set description
    The Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population included all patients who met ITT criteria and received any amount of study drug.

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Modified intention-to-treat
    Subject analysis set description
    The microbiological Modified Intention-to-treat (m-MITT) Population included all randomized patients who met MITT criteria and who had a baseline Gram-negative pathogen >=10^5 CFU/mL in urine culture or the same pathogen present in concurrent blood and urine cultures that caused the cUTI that was not resistant to cefepime-AAI101 (MIC determined with AAI101 at a fixed concentration of 8 µg/mL) or piperacillin/tazobactam (defined as MIC <=8 µg/mL or MIC <=64 µg/mL, respectively.

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT+R Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Modified intention-to-treat
    Subject analysis set description
    m-MITT+R Population included all randomized patients who met MITT criteria and who had a non-contaminated culture with a baseline Gram-negative pathogen >=10^5 CFU/mL in urine culture or the same pathogen present in concurrent blood and urine cultures that caused the cUTI, including isolates resistant to cefepime-AAI101 or piperacillin/tazobactam.

    Subject analysis set title
    ME Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    The Microbiological Evaluable (ME) Population included patients who met the definition for both the m-MITT and the Clinically Evaluable (CE*) Populations. In addition, to have been included in the ME Population, patients must not have had a microbiological outcome at Test of Cure of Indeterminate. *The CE Population, defined as patients who met the MITT criteria as well as the specified criteria as detailed in the SAP, included 950 (91.3%) patients: 479 (92.1%) in the cefepime-AAI101 group and 471 (90.4%) patients in the piperacillin/tazobactam group.

    Subject analysis set title
    ME+R Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    ME+R Population included patients who met the definition for both the m-MITT+R and CE Populations. In addition, to be have been included in the ME+R Population, patients must not have had a microbiological outcome at TOC of Indeterminate.

    Subject analysis set title
    Safety Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Safety analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    Safety Population included all patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the study. All safety analyses were based on actual treatment received.

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL co-producing
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL co-producing

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL co-producing (CTX-M-type)
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    Subgroup ESBL co-producing (CTX-M-type)

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing (CTX-M-type)
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing (CTX-M-type)

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Subgroup Non-ESBL-, non-carbapenemase-, non-AmpC-prod.
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    m-MITT Subgroup Non-ESBL-,non-carbapenemase-, and non-AmpC-producing

    Subject analysis sets values
    ITT Population MITT Population m-MITT Population m-MITT+R Population ME Population ME+R Population Safety Population m-MITT Subgroup ESBL co-producing m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing m-MITT Subgroup ESBL co-producing (CTX-M-type) m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing (CTX-M-type) m-MITT Subgroup Non-ESBL-, non-carbapenemase-, non-AmpC-prod.
    Number of subjects
    1041
    1034
    678
    771
    606
    684
    1034
    142
    137
    141
    133
    26
    Age categorical
    Units: Subjects
        Adults (18-64 years)
    639
    636
    429
    487
    385
    435
    636
        from 65-74 years
    247
    244
    155
    176
    140
    158
    244
        75 years and older
    155
    154
    94
    108
    81
    91
    154
    Age continuous
    Mean age
    Units: years
        arithmetic mean (standard deviation)
    54.7 ± 19.04
    54.7 ± 19.05
    53.9 ± 19.22
    54.3 ± 18.95
    54.0 ± 18.96
    54.3 ± 18.69
    54.7 ± 19.05
    ±
    ±
    ±
    ±
    ±
    Gender categorical
    Units: Subjects
        Female
    573
    568
    407
    440
    358
    385
    568
        Male
    468
    466
    271
    331
    248
    299
    466
    Region
    Units: Subjects
        Eastern Europe
    728
    723
    478
    552
    442
    508
    723
        Americas
    74
    74
    44
    58
    36
    44
    74
        Other Countries
    239
    237
    156
    161
    128
    132
    237
    Type of Infection
    AP = Acute Pyelonephritis cUTI = complicated Urinary Tract Infection * ...but with other risk factors
    Units: Subjects
        AP
    501
    498
    349
    391
    312
    350
    498
        cUTI with removable source of infection
    249
    247
    148
    170
    130
    148
    247
        cUTI without removable source of infection*
    291
    289
    181
    210
    164
    186
    289
    Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) at Baseline
    Units: Subjects
        <3
    618
    618
    403
    462
    357
    410
    618
        >=3
    404
    404
    270
    302
    246
    270
    404
        not reported
    19
    12
    5
    7
    3
    4
    12
    Concurrent Bacteraemia at Baseline
    Units: Subjects
        Yes
    71
    71
    66
    71
    51
    56
    71
        No
    970
    963
    612
    700
    555
    628
    963
    Baseline Diabetic Status
    Units: Subjects
        Yes
    157
    157
    96
    112
    88
    99
    157
        No
    884
    877
    582
    659
    518
    585
    877
    eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate at Baseline)
    Units: mL/min/1.73m^2
        arithmetic mean (standard deviation)
    72.65 ± 23.470
    72.65 ± 23.470
    71.38 ± 23.436
    71.32 ± 22.992
    71.81 ± 22.984
    71.82 ± 22.516
    72.65 ± 23.470
    ±
    ±
    ±
    ±
    ±

    End points

    Close Top of page
    End points reporting groups
    Reporting group title
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam
    Reporting group description
    2 g cefepime (FEP) plus 500 mg enmetazobactam (EMT) infused over a period of 2 hours once every 8 hours (q8h) for 7 days (up to 14 days in patients with a positive blood culture at baseline). In patients with moderate renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 30 mL/min/1.73 m2) the dose of FEP-EMT was adjusted to 1 g FEP plus 250 mg EMT, infused over a period of 2 hours q8h.

    Reporting group title
    Piperacillin/Tazobactam
    Reporting group description
    4.5 g piperacillin/tazobactam infused over a period of 2 hours q8h for 7 days (up to 14 days in patients with a positive blood culture at baseline). Dosing of piperacillin/tazobactam followed the recommendations as per the respective summary of product characteristics, which did not require adjustment of the 4.5 g dose in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment.

    Subject analysis set title
    ITT Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Intention-to-treat
    Subject analysis set description
    The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population included all patients who were randomized.

    Subject analysis set title
    MITT Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Modified intention-to-treat
    Subject analysis set description
    The Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) Population included all patients who met ITT criteria and received any amount of study drug.

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Modified intention-to-treat
    Subject analysis set description
    The microbiological Modified Intention-to-treat (m-MITT) Population included all randomized patients who met MITT criteria and who had a baseline Gram-negative pathogen >=10^5 CFU/mL in urine culture or the same pathogen present in concurrent blood and urine cultures that caused the cUTI that was not resistant to cefepime-AAI101 (MIC determined with AAI101 at a fixed concentration of 8 µg/mL) or piperacillin/tazobactam (defined as MIC <=8 µg/mL or MIC <=64 µg/mL, respectively.

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT+R Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Modified intention-to-treat
    Subject analysis set description
    m-MITT+R Population included all randomized patients who met MITT criteria and who had a non-contaminated culture with a baseline Gram-negative pathogen >=10^5 CFU/mL in urine culture or the same pathogen present in concurrent blood and urine cultures that caused the cUTI, including isolates resistant to cefepime-AAI101 or piperacillin/tazobactam.

    Subject analysis set title
    ME Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    The Microbiological Evaluable (ME) Population included patients who met the definition for both the m-MITT and the Clinically Evaluable (CE*) Populations. In addition, to have been included in the ME Population, patients must not have had a microbiological outcome at Test of Cure of Indeterminate. *The CE Population, defined as patients who met the MITT criteria as well as the specified criteria as detailed in the SAP, included 950 (91.3%) patients: 479 (92.1%) in the cefepime-AAI101 group and 471 (90.4%) patients in the piperacillin/tazobactam group.

    Subject analysis set title
    ME+R Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    ME+R Population included patients who met the definition for both the m-MITT+R and CE Populations. In addition, to be have been included in the ME+R Population, patients must not have had a microbiological outcome at TOC of Indeterminate.

    Subject analysis set title
    Safety Population
    Subject analysis set type
    Safety analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    Safety Population included all patients who received at least 1 dose of study drug during the study. All safety analyses were based on actual treatment received.

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL co-producing
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL co-producing

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL co-producing (CTX-M-type)
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    Subgroup ESBL co-producing (CTX-M-type)

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing (CTX-M-type)
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing (CTX-M-type)

    Subject analysis set title
    m-MITT Subgroup Non-ESBL-, non-carbapenemase-, non-AmpC-prod.
    Subject analysis set type
    Sub-group analysis
    Subject analysis set description
    m-MITT Subgroup Non-ESBL-,non-carbapenemase-, and non-AmpC-producing

    Primary: Overall Response at TOC - m-MITT Population

    Close Top of page
    End point title
    Overall Response at TOC - m-MITT Population
    End point description
    The primary efficacy parameter was the proportion of patients in the m-MITT Population (678 patients) who achieved overall treatment success at TOC. Overall treatment success was defined as the composite of clinical outcome of Cure and the microbiological outcome of Eradication (<10^3 CFU/mL in urine culture). The majority of patients in the cefepime-enmetazobactam group (273 [79.1%] patients) had an overall response of success at TOC compared to the piperacillin/tazobactam group (196 [58.9%] patients), with a treatment difference of 21.2% (95% CI: 14.3, 27.9), demonstrating superiority of cefepime-enmetazobactam compared to piperacillin/tazobactam.
    End point type
    Primary
    End point timeframe
    Table summarizes the primary efficacy analysis of overall response at Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit for the m-MITT Population.
    End point values
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam Piperacillin/Tazobactam m-MITT Population
    Number of subjects analysed
    345
    333
    678
    Units: Number of Subjects
        Success
    273
    196
    469
        Failure
    51
    116
    167
        Indeterminate
    21
    21
    42
    Attachments
    Untitled (Filename: Forest Overall Success at TOC_m-MITT.pdf)
    Statistical analysis title
    Treatment Difference in Overall Success
    Statistical analysis description
    The non-inferiority assessment was based on the stratified Newcombe 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in the proportions of patients with overall treatment successes, calculated as the rate in the cefepime-AAI101 group minus that of the piperacillin/tazobactam group. The non-inferiority margin was a difference of 10 percentage points. Non-inferiority was concluded if the lower limit of the 2-sided 95% CI was >-10.
    Comparison groups
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam v Piperacillin/Tazobactam
    Number of subjects included in analysis
    678
    Analysis specification
    Pre-specified
    Analysis type
    non-inferiority
    Method
    Parameter type
    Mean difference (final values)
    Point estimate
    21.2
    Confidence interval
         level
    95%
         sides
    2-sided
         lower limit
    14.3
         upper limit
    27.9
    Statistical analysis title
    Treatment Difference in Overall Success Sup
    Statistical analysis description
    If non-inferiority was demonstrated, an assessment for superiority on the primary endpoint was performed as a secondary objective without the need for type I error alpha correction. Superiority was shown if the treatment difference was positive and the lower bound of the 95% CI around this difference was greater than zero.
    Comparison groups
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam v Piperacillin/Tazobactam
    Number of subjects included in analysis
    678
    Analysis specification
    Pre-specified
    Analysis type
    superiority
    Method
    Parameter type
    Mean difference (final values)
    Point estimate
    21.2
    Confidence interval
         level
    95%
         sides
    2-sided
         lower limit
    14.3
         upper limit
    27.9

    Primary: Overall Response at TOC - m-MITT+R Population

    Close Top of page
    End point title
    Overall Response at TOC - m-MITT+R Population
    End point description
    In the m-MITT+R population, the majority of patients in the cefepime-enmetazobactam group (305 [78.6%] patients) had an overall response of success at TOC compared to the piperacillin/tazobactam group (225 [58.7%] patients) with a treatment difference of 20.7% (95% CI: 14.1, 27.0), demonstrating superiority of cefepime-enmetazobactam compared to piperacillin/tazobactam.
    End point type
    Primary
    End point timeframe
    Table summarizes the primary efficacy analysis of overall response at Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit for the m-MITT+R Population.
    End point values
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam Piperacillin/Tazobactam m-MITT Population
    Number of subjects analysed
    388
    383
    771
    Units: Number of Subjects
        Success
    305
    225
    530
        Failure
    58
    128
    186
        Indeterminate
    25
    30
    55
    Statistical analysis title
    Treatment Difference in Overall Success
    Comparison groups
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam v Piperacillin/Tazobactam
    Number of subjects included in analysis
    771
    Analysis specification
    Pre-specified
    Analysis type
    non-inferiority
    Method
    Parameter type
    Mean difference (final values)
    Point estimate
    20.7
    Confidence interval
         level
    95%
         sides
    2-sided
         lower limit
    14.1
         upper limit
    27
    Statistical analysis title
    Treatment Difference in Overall Success Sup
    Comparison groups
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam v Piperacillin/Tazobactam
    Number of subjects included in analysis
    771
    Analysis specification
    Pre-specified
    Analysis type
    superiority
    Method
    Parameter type
    Mean difference (final values)
    Point estimate
    20.7
    Confidence interval
         level
    95%
         sides
    2-sided
         lower limit
    14.1
         upper limit
    27

    Secondary: Overall Response at Other Timepoints - m-MITT Population - Categorical

    Close Top of page
    End point title
    Overall Response at Other Timepoints - m-MITT Population - Categorical
    End point description
    Descriptive statistics are provided for secondary efficacy endpoints.
    End point type
    Secondary
    End point timeframe
    This table summarizes the proportion of patients with overall response at Day 3, End of Treatment, and Late Follow-up for the m-MITT Population.
    End point values
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam Piperacillin/Tazobactam
    Number of subjects analysed
    345
    333
    Units: Number of Subjects
        Day 3 - Success
    318
    293
        Day 3 - Failure
    16
    24
        Day 3- Indeterminate
    11
    16
        End of Treatment - Success
    318
    311
        End of Treatment - Failure
    12
    12
        End of Treatment - Indeterminate
    15
    10
        Late Follow-up - Success
    236
    196
        Late Follow-up - Failure
    88
    113
        Late Follow-up - Indeterminate
    21
    24
    No statistical analyses for this end point

    Secondary: Overall Response at Other Timepoints - m-MITT Population - Treatment Comparison

    Close Top of page
    End point title
    Overall Response at Other Timepoints - m-MITT Population - Treatment Comparison
    End point description
    Descriptive statistics are provided for secondary efficacy endpoints. At Day 3, the treatment difference between the two arms was 4.1% (95% CI: -0.6, 8.9) demonstrating non-inferiority of cefepime-enmetazobactam compared to piperacillin/tazobactam. At End of Treatment, the treatment difference between the two arms was -1.3% (95% CI: -5.3, 2.9) demonstrating non-inferiority of cefepime-enmetazobactam compared to piperacillin/tazobactam. At Late Follow-up, the treatment difference between the two arms was 10.7% (95% CI: 3.4, 17.8) demonstrating superiority of cefepime-enmetazobactam compared to piperacillin/tazobactam.
    End point type
    Secondary
    End point timeframe
    Table shows the treatment differences in the m-MITT population between the two arms at Day 3, End of Treatment, and Late Follow-up.
    End point values
    m-MITT Population
    Number of subjects analysed
    678
    Units: Difference (%)
    arithmetic mean (confidence interval 95%)
        Day 3
    4.1 (-0.6 to 8.9)
        End of Treatment
    -1.3 (-5.3 to 2.9)
        Late Follow-up
    10.7 (3.4 to 17.8)
    No statistical analyses for this end point

    Secondary: Microbiological Response - m-MITT Population - Categorical

    Close Top of page
    End point title
    Microbiological Response - m-MITT Population - Categorical
    End point description
    Descriptive statistics are provided for secondary efficacy endpoints. At Day 3, End of Treatment, Test of Cure, and Late Follow-up, the majority of patients in both treatment groups had a microbiological response of Eradication: 323 (93.6%), 332 (96.2%), 286 (82.9%), and 258 (74.8%) patients, respectively, in the cefepime-enmetazobactam group; and 299 (89.8%), 322 (96.7%), 216 (64.9%), and 221 (66.4%) patients, respectively, in the piperacillin/tazobactam group.
    End point type
    Secondary
    End point timeframe
    Table summarizes the proportion of patients with a microbiological response by visit for the m-MITT Population.
    End point values
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam Piperacillin/Tazobactam
    Number of subjects analysed
    345
    333
    Units: Number of Subjects
        Day 3 - Eradication
    323
    299
        Day 3 - Persistence
    11
    21
        Day 3 - Indeterminate
    11
    13
        End of Treatment - Eradication
    332
    322
        End of Treatment - Persistence
    1
    2
        End of Treatment - Recurrence
    1
    1
        End of Treatment - Indeterminate
    11
    8
        Test of Cure - Eradication
    286
    216
        Test of Cure - Persistence
    1
    2
        Test of Cure - Recurrence
    39
    98
        Test of Cure - Indeterminate
    19
    17
        Late Follow-up - Eradication
    258
    221
        Late Follow-up - Persistence
    1
    1
        Late Follow-up - Recurrence
    71
    90
        Late Follow-up - Indeterminate
    15
    21
    No statistical analyses for this end point

    Secondary: Microbiological Response - m-MITT Population - Treatment Comparison

    Close Top of page
    End point title
    Microbiological Response - m-MITT Population - Treatment Comparison
    End point description
    Descriptive statistics are provided for secondary efficacy endpoints. A treatment difference of 3.8% (95% CI: -0.6, 8.3), -0.7% (95% CI: -3.7, 2.5), 19.0% (95% CI: 12.3, 25.4), and 9.5% (95% CI: 2.6, 16.3) was observed between the cefepime-enmetazobactam group and the piperacillin/tazobactam group at Day 3, EOT, TOC, and LFU, respectively. The treatment difference demonstrated superiority of cefepime-enmetazobactam compared to piperacillin/tazobactam at TOC and LFU, and non-inferiority of cefepime-enmetazobactam compared to piperacillin/tazobactam at Day 3 and EOT. EOT = End of Treatment; TOC = Test of Cure; LFU = Late Follow-up.
    End point type
    Secondary
    End point timeframe
    Table shows treatment difference in the microbiological response between the two arms at Day 3, End-of-Treatment, Test-of-Cure, and Late Follow-up.
    End point values
    m-MITT Population
    Number of subjects analysed
    678
    Units: Difference (%)
    arithmetic mean (confidence interval 95%)
        Day 3
    3.8 (-0.6 to 8.3)
        End-of-Treatment
    -0.7 (-3.7 to 2.5)
        Test-of-Cure
    19.0 (12.3 to 25.4)
        Late Follow-up
    9.5 (2.6 to 16.3)
    No statistical analyses for this end point

    Secondary: Clinical Response - m-MITT Population - Categorical

    Close Top of page
    End point title
    Clinical Response - m-MITT Population - Categorical
    End point description
    Descriptive statistics are provided for secondary efficacy endpoints. At Day 3, End of Treatment, Test of Cure, and Late Follow-up, the majority of patients in both treatment groups had a clinical response of Cure: 323 (93.6%), 319 (92.5%), and 299 (86.7%) patients, respectively, in the cefepime-enmetazobactam group; and 315 (94.6%), 296 (88.9%), and 279 (83.8%) patients, respectively, in the piperacillin/tazobactam group.
    End point type
    Secondary
    End point timeframe
    Table summarizes the proportion of patients with a clinical response by visit for the m-MITT Population.
    End point values
    Cefepime-Enmetazobactam Piperacillin/Tazobactam
    Number of subjects analysed
    345
    333
    Units: Number of Subjects
        Day 3 - Cure
    18
    16
        Day 3 - Improvement
    317
    302
        Day 3 - Failure
    5
    4
        Day 3 - Indeterminate
    5
    11
        End of Treatment - Cure
    323
    315
        End of Treatment - Improvement
    2
    1
        End of Treatment - Failure
    10
    9
        End of Treatment - Indeterminate
    10
    8
        Test of Cure - Cure
    319
    296
        Test of Cure - Failure
    17
    23
        Test of Cure - Indeterminate
    9
    14
        Late Follow-up - Cure
    299
    279
        Late Follow-up - Failure
    25
    39
        Late Follow-up - Indeterminate
    21
    15
    No statistical analyses for this end point

    Secondary: Clinical Response - m-MITT Population - Treatment Comparison

    Close Top of page
    End point title
    Clinical Response - m-MITT Population - Treatment Comparison
    End point description
    Descriptive statistics are provided for secondary efficacy endpoints. A treatment difference of -1.1% (95% CI: -4.8, 2.7), 3.5% (95% CI: -1.0, 8.0), and 2.8% (95% CI: -2.7, 8.3) was observed between the cefepime-enmetazobactam group and the piperacillin/tazobactam group at EOT, TOC, and LFU, respectively. The treatment difference demonstrated non-inferiority of cefepime-enmetazobactam compared to piperacillin/tazobactam at EOT, TOC, and LFU. EOT = End of Treatment; TOC = Test of Cure; LFU = Late Follow-up.
    End point type
    Secondary
    End point timeframe
    Table shows treatment difference in the clinical response between the two arms at Day 3, End-of-Treatment, Test-of-Cure, and Late Follow-up.
    End point values
    m-MITT Population
    Number of subjects analysed
    678
    Units: Difference (%)
    arithmetic mean (confidence interval 95%)
        Day 3
    0.5 (-3.1 to 4.0)
        End of Treatment
    -1.1 (-4.8 to 2.7)
        Test of Cure
    3.5 (-1.0 to 8.0)
        Late Follow-up
    2.8 (-2.7 to 8.3)
    No statistical analyses for this end point

    Secondary: ESBL Subgroup Analysis at Test of Cure - m-MITT Population

    Close Top of page
    End point title
    ESBL Subgroup Analysis at Test of Cure - m-MITT Population
    End point description
    Descriptive statistics are provided here. For overall response of success* at TOC Visit, the subgroups of patients with ESBL co-producing (ESBL-genotype, combined with or without any other non-ESBL genotype), ESBL-only producing, ESBL co-producing (CTX-M-type), and ESBL-only producing (CTX-M-type) at baseline had a treatment difference that demonstrated superiority of cefepime-AAI101 compared to piperacillin/tazobactam. The following sub-groups were not evaluable due to low numbers: ESBL co-producing (non-CTX-M-type), ESBL-only producing (non-CTX-M-type), AmpC co-producing, AmpC-only producing. Results of the subgroup analysis of overall response for all ESBL-producing isolates of enterobacteriaceae subgroups at TOC Visit (m-MITT Population) is provided in the attached table, together with a Forest Plot illustrating overall success at TOC Visit by various subgroups. *Overall Success was defined as clinical cure or improvement and microbiological eradication.
    End point type
    Secondary
    End point timeframe
    Table summarizes the treatment differences for success within the ESBL subgroup analysis of overall response at Test-of-Cure Visit.
    End point values
    m-MITT Subgroup ESBL co-producing m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing m-MITT Subgroup ESBL co-producing (CTX-M-type) m-MITT Subgroup ESBL-only producing (CTX-M-type) m-MITT Subgroup Non-ESBL-, non-carbapenemase-, non-AmpC-prod.
    Number of subjects analysed
    142
    137
    141
    133
    26
    Units: Difference (%)
    arithmetic mean (confidence interval 95%)
        Difference (%)
    30.2 (13.4 to 45.1)
    31.8 (14.6 to 46.6)
    30.8 (13.9 to 45.7)
    32.6 (15.3 to 47.6)
    11.5 (-23.0 to 43.8)
    Attachments
    Forest Plot of Microbiological Eradication
    No statistical analyses for this end point

    Adverse events

    Close Top of page
    Adverse events information
    Timeframe for reporting adverse events
    Adverse events for the Safety Population are documented from the time of first study drug administration until completion of study participation.
    Adverse event reporting additional description
    The safety and tolerability profile was determined by incidence and severity of Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events, vital signs, laboratory tests, ECGs, and physical examinations from Screening through Late Follow-Up (End of Treatment + 14 days [±2 days]). Threshold for non-serious adverse event reporting is: 2%
    Assessment type
    Systematic
    Dictionary used for adverse event reporting
    Dictionary name
    MedDRA
    Dictionary version
    21.0
    Reporting groups
    Reporting group title
    Cefepime / Enmetazobactam Treatment Arm
    Reporting group description
    This reporting group includes all patients in the Safety Population who received at least one dose of Cefepime / Enmetazobactam. The total number of subjects affected by any non-serious adverse events in this safety population is 258. Number of subjects reported here corresponds to non-serious adverse events with an occurrence of >=2%.

    Reporting group title
    Piperacillin / Tazobactam Treatment Arm
    Reporting group description
    This reporting group includes all patients in the Safety Population who received at least one dose of Piperacillin / Tazobactam The total number of subjects affected by any non-serious adverse events in this safety population is 228. Number of subjects reported here corresponds to non-serious adverse events with an occurrence of >=2%.

    Serious adverse events
    Cefepime / Enmetazobactam Treatment Arm Piperacillin / Tazobactam Treatment Arm
    Total subjects affected by serious adverse events
         subjects affected / exposed
    22 / 516 (4.26%)
    19 / 518 (3.67%)
         number of deaths (all causes)
    3
    3
         number of deaths resulting from adverse events
    3
    3
    Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
    Lung cancer metastatic
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
    Lung carcinoma cell type unspecified recurrent
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
    Vascular disorders
    Hypertensive crisis
         subjects affected / exposed
    2 / 516 (0.39%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 2
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Surgical and medical procedures
    Nephrectomy
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    General disorders and administration site conditions
    Chest pain
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Sudden death
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
    Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
    Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Investigations
    Glomerular filtration rate decreased
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    1 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Cardiac disorders
    Atrial fibrillation
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    1 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Cardiac arrest
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
    Cardiac failure
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Nervous system disorders
    Cerebrovascular insufficiency
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
    Gastrointestinal disorders
    Duodenal ulcer
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
    Urticaria
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Renal and urinary disorders
    Bladder neck obstruction
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Haematuria
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Nephrolithiasis
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Renal colic
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Renal haematoma
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Urethral stenosis
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
    Groin pain
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Neck pain
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Infections and infestations
    Clostridium difficile colitis
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    1 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Epididymitis
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Pneumonia
         subjects affected / exposed
    2 / 516 (0.39%)
    2 / 518 (0.39%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 2
    0 / 2
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Pseudomembranous colitis
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    1 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Pyelonephritis acute
         subjects affected / exposed
    4 / 516 (0.78%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 4
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Renal abscess
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    2 / 518 (0.39%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 2
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Septic shock
         subjects affected / exposed
    0 / 516 (0.00%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 1
    Staphylococcal infection
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Toxic shock syndrome
         subjects affected / exposed
    1 / 516 (0.19%)
    0 / 518 (0.00%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 1
    0 / 0
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Urinary tract infection
         subjects affected / exposed
    2 / 516 (0.39%)
    3 / 518 (0.58%)
         occurrences causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 2
    0 / 3
         deaths causally related to treatment / all
    0 / 0
    0 / 0
    Frequency threshold for reporting non-serious adverse events: 2%
    Non-serious adverse events
    Cefepime / Enmetazobactam Treatment Arm Piperacillin / Tazobactam Treatment Arm
    Total subjects affected by non serious adverse events
         subjects affected / exposed
    238 / 516 (46.12%)
    215 / 518 (41.51%)
    Investigations
    Alanine aminotransferase increased
         subjects affected / exposed
    59 / 516 (11.43%)
    60 / 518 (11.58%)
         occurrences all number
    59
    60
    Aspartate aminotransferase increased
         subjects affected / exposed
    47 / 516 (9.11%)
    46 / 518 (8.88%)
         occurrences all number
    47
    46
    Blood bilirubin increased
         subjects affected / exposed
    30 / 516 (5.81%)
    20 / 518 (3.86%)
         occurrences all number
    30
    20
    Transaminases increased
         subjects affected / exposed
    13 / 516 (2.52%)
    19 / 518 (3.67%)
         occurrences all number
    13
    19
    Vascular disorders
    Phlebitis
         subjects affected / exposed
    14 / 516 (2.71%)
    1 / 518 (0.19%)
         occurrences all number
    14
    1
    Nervous system disorders
    Headache
         subjects affected / exposed
    25 / 516 (4.84%)
    12 / 518 (2.32%)
         occurrences all number
    25
    12
    Blood and lymphatic system disorders
    Anaemia
         subjects affected / exposed
    13 / 516 (2.52%)
    15 / 518 (2.90%)
         occurrences all number
    13
    15
    Gastrointestinal disorders
    Diarrhoea
         subjects affected / exposed
    21 / 516 (4.07%)
    26 / 518 (5.02%)
         occurrences all number
    21
    26
    Infections and infestations
    Urinary tract infection
         subjects affected / exposed
    5 / 516 (0.97%)
    8 / 518 (1.54%)
         occurrences all number
    5
    8
    Metabolism and nutrition disorders
    Hypokalaemia
         subjects affected / exposed
    11 / 516 (2.13%)
    8 / 518 (1.54%)
         occurrences all number
    11
    8

    More information

    Close Top of page

    Substantial protocol amendments (globally)

    Were there any global substantial amendments to the protocol? Yes
    Date
    Amendment
    05 Apr 2018
    Amendment no.1: Piperacillin/tazobactam was selected to be used as a comparator in this complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) trial due to its antibacterial spectrum, its pharmacokinetic properties and due to the fact that it is a beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combination very similar to the cefepime/AAI101 combination. Inclusion Criterion 3 was revised to define permanent sterilization for women who are no longer of childbearing potential. A new Exclusion Criterion 1 was added to exclude patients who have qualifying Gram-positive primary pathogen at >=10^5 colony-forming units (CFU)/mL. Exclusion Criterion 2 was revised to reflect piperacillin/tazobactam as the comparator drug. Exclusion Criterion 7 was revised to define the exceptions to the receipt of potentially effective systemic antibacterial therapy for continuous duration of >24 hours during the previous 72 hours before study-qualifying baseline urine is collected. Exclusion Criterion 10 was adjusted to match the extended duration of treatment. Exclusion Criterion 15 was revised to note glomerular filtration rate rather than creatinine clearance. Exclusion Criterion 25 was revised to further define the time prior to Screening regarding the administration of experimental medication. Piperacillin/tazobactam will be administered over a period of 2 hours once every 8 hours (q8h) for 7 days. Possible treatment duration was extended from 7 to 10 days to 7 to 14 days in patients with a positive blood culture at baseline. The criteria for microbiological outcome were revised. Prothrombin and partial thromboplastin time were added to clinical laboratory assessments. The number of sites was reduced from 120 to 115. The schedule of procedures and clinical laboratory analytes was updated to reflect the changes specified herein, where applicable. Other minor edits were made throughout the document to improve clarity, consistency, and to correct grammatical errors.
    19 Jun 2018
    Amendment no.2: This amendment was developed in response to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) feedback during the end of Phase 2 meeting and a review of the amended protocol. Other minor edits were made throughout the document to correct grammatical errors and inconsistencies. The study population was updated to specify that at least 50% of patients will have complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) and at least 30% will have acute pyelonephritis (AP). Exclusion Criterion 15 was revised to specify that patients with impairment of renal function with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 are excluded from the study. In Exclusion Criterion 22, it was specified that patients with current clinically significant liver disease, including any form of known liver cirrhosis are also excluded from the study. Dosing in patients with renal insufficiency was updated to be consistent with Exclusion Criterion 15. It was specified that a triplicate 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) will be performed at Screening and Day 4. It was clarified that up to 2 Gram-negative bacterial isolates per urine culture (at concentrations of >=10^5 CFU/mL of urine) will be considered as qualifying pathogens. The overall response to a clinical outcome of Cure and microbiological outcome of Indeterminate was updated to Indeterminate. Secondary efficacy parameters were updated to include additional subsets of patients. Protocol Section was added to clarify adverse events of special interest. Sample size determination was revised. Direct bilirubin and C-reactive protein were added to the clinical laboratory analysis. The relevant protocol tables and schedule of procedures were updated to reflect the changes specified herein, where applicable.
    02 Aug 2018
    Amendment no.3: This amendment was developed in response to Food and Drug Administration feedback during the end of Phase 2 meeting and a review of the amended protocol. Other minor edits were made throughout the document to correct grammatical errors and inconsistencies. Inclusion Criterion 7 was updated to clarify that if the patient has met the criteria for complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) and acute pyelonephritis (AP), the infection type would be considered cUTI for randomization and analysis purposes. Collection of blood samples for PK analysis was clarified for Day 7 and the Early Termination visit. A Study Scheme figure was added. Dosing in patients with renal insufficiency was updated to clarify confirmation for patients with normal renal function or mild or moderate renal impairment at baseline. Collection of laboratory assessments was updated to clarify collections on Day 7; Days 8, 9, 11, 12, or 13; and Day 10. Adverse events of special interest were updated for the new laboratory assessment collected on Day 10. Criteria for study drug discontinuation were updated. Expedited reporting was clarified. The relevant protocol tables and schedule of procedures were updated to reflect the changes specified herein, where applicable.
    06 Sep 2018
    Amendment no.4: This amendment was developed in response to Food and Drug Administration feedback during the End of Phase 2 meeting and a review of the amended protocol. Other minor edits were made throughout the document to correct grammatical errors and inconsistencies. Study design was updated to include that the Test of Cure (TOC) visit will occur 7 days after End of Treatment (EOT) (EOT + 7 days [±2 days]) for patients receiving 7 days of treatment and 19 days after randomization (randomization + 19 days [±2 days]) for patients receiving more than 7 days of treatment. The Late Follow-up (LFU) visit was also updated to clarify that the LFU visit should not take place earlier than 3 days after the TOC visit. It was specified that for patients without bacteremia, treatment cannot be prolonged for more than 7 days. The blood samples collection time for laboratory assessments on Day 1 was clarified. It was clarified that in patients with moderate renal impairment, dose adjustment is applicable from Day 1 of dosing. Direct bilirubin was removed from the screening laboratory assessments for eligibility. The relevant protocol tables and schedule of procedures were updated to reflect the changes specified herein, where applicable.

    Interruptions (globally)

    Were there any global interruptions to the trial? No

    Limitations and caveats

    Limitations of the trial such as small numbers of subjects analysed or technical problems leading to unreliable data.
    None reported
    For support, Contact us.
    The status and protocol content of GB trials is no longer updated since 1 January 2021. For the UK, as of 31 January 2021, EU Law applies only to the territory of Northern Ireland (NI) to the extent foreseen in the Protocol on Ireland/NI. Legal notice
    As of 31 January 2023, all EU/EEA initial clinical trial applications must be submitted through CTIS . Updated EudraCT trials information and information on PIP/Art 46 trials conducted exclusively in third countries continues to be submitted through EudraCT and published on this website.

    European Medicines Agency © 1995-Fri May 03 16:04:25 CEST 2024 | Domenico Scarlattilaan 6, 1083 HS Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    EMA HMA