Comparative test of the effctiveness of cefroxadine (cgp-9000) and cephalexin on acute respiratory tract infection by double blind method

Kenzo Shiota, Fumio Miki, Kbnji Kubo, Masakazu Kohno, Kenji Takamatsu, Yasumichi Kato, Akira Saito, Masumi Tomizawa, Ichiro Nakayama, Mikiya Sato, Morikuni Abe, Hiroyuki Tokunaka, Shuichi Yoshitani, Aiji Kojima, Takashi Sakuraba, Yoshio Kinoshita, Kiyofumi Ishikawa, Fumio Nagahama, Takahisa Saito, Kazuo TakebeMikihiko Kudo, Mitsuo Masuda, Ichiro Hirai, Hiroshi Saito, Kenichi Imamura, Yuzuru Fujioka, Tsuneharu Baba, Yoshihiro Kumasaka, Hisashi Nakahata, Kiyoshi Konno, Kohtaro Oizumi, Akira Watanabe, Masako Sasaki, Seiichi Aomuma, Kikuo Ohnuma, Shigeru Tamaki, Izumi Hayashi, Osamu Sekine, Fusanosuke Yamasaku, Yasutoshi Suzuki, Masataka Katsu, Masanori Adachi, Takashi Sohma, Keimei Mashimo, Sumio Yamaoka, Yasushi Ueda, Atsushi Saito, Jingoro Shimada, Keiichi Nakagawa, Masaru Koyama, Hideo Ikemoto, Kazuyoshi Watanabe, Takashi Mori, Akira Izumi, Junko Hibino, Hiroichi Tanimoto, Hiroyuki Kobayashi, Junzaburo Kabe, Mikihisa Suihara, Hiroyoshi Ishibashi, Otsuhjko Kunii, Kazufuto Fukaya, Ippei Fujimori, Toshio Sekimoto, Fuyuhiko Azuma, Michinori Kohno, Kohkichi Fukushima, Akira Ito, Kunihiko Shindo, Makio Kurihara, Ryuichiro Yamazaki, Toshiyuki Yamamoto, Masahito Kato, Hirohiko Nagasaka, Kohzo Mow, Saburo Kitaura, Kunio Nanjo, Jojchi Kato, Kaoru Ohyama, Kuniyasu Suzuki, Nobuo Maekawa, Michiyasu Nakanishi, Tsuneo Matsubara, Ryoichi Amita Yoshiro Oda, Fumiaki Uchihira, Hitoshi Nakai, Takehiro Tsujimoto, Iiroshi Okubo, Yuruko Okamoto, Yoshihiro Ueda, Fumihiko Uba, Keigo Maehara, Tooru Kurimura, Hideo Sasaki, Kazue Tamaki, Yusuke Morioka, Rinzo Soejima, Yoshihiko Tano, Yoshito Niki, Ejro Tsubura, Yoshiro Takishita, Katsuhito Kozai, Toshihiro Goto, Masahiko Nii, Masakazu Tamura, Yoshiro Sawae, Kohei Hara, Atsushi Saito, Masaru Nasu, Masao Nakatomi, Kinichi Izumikawa, Hisashi Ishikawa, Hiromaro Iwasaki, Kazuhiro Okuno, Masamoto Nakano, Akira Ikebe, Takeshi Ishizaki, Tsuneo Tsutsumi, Munrkazu Kiya, Takenori Matsumoto, Mitsunobu Akashi, Tohru Ishino, Rokushi Oka, Akimitsu Tomonaga, Toshio Fujioka, Yukio Imamura, Keizo Matsumoto, Kimitoshi Tamaki, Masashi Yamamoto, Haruhiko Tokuomi, Kiyoshi Shima, Yasutsugu Fukuda, Katsumasa Tokunaga, Kazuhiro Hamada, Kazuo Ishizaka, Yoshio Takaba, Yasumasa Hiro, Noritaka Tateishi, Ryuzo Kaku, Sadanobu Higuchi, Norihiko Nakahara, Tatsuo Tomita, Haruo Nozute

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    2 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    In order to compare the efficacy and side effect of cefroxadine with those of cephalexin on acute respiratory tract infection, cefroxadine at a daily dose of 750 mg (t. I. d.) and cephalexin at a daily dose of l,000mg (q.i. d.) were administered orally for 7 days in the treatment of acute pharyngitis, acute tonsillitis, and acute bronchitis, and a comparative double blind study on therapeutic effectiveness; side effect, and usefulness of both drugs was performed at 30 institutions. Total administered cases were 329 (163 cases on cefroxadine, 166 cases on cephalexin). Out of 329 cases, cases adopted by the committee members for assessment of effectiveness were 275 (134 cases on cefroxadine; 141 cases on cephalexin), and cases for evaluation of side effects numbered to 314 (154 cases on cefroxadine, 160 cases on cephalexin), and cases for assessment of effectiveness as well as of usefulness by physicians in charge totalled to 303 (147 cases on cefroxadine, 156 cases on cephalexin). The results obtained were as follows : 1. As to the therapeutic effect of cefroxadine (750 mg daily) and cephalexin (1,000 mg daily) in the treatment of acute respiratory tract infection, 63.5% in the cefroxadine group and 68.8% in the cephalexin group were rated as effective according to the assessment by the committee members and 68.0% in the cefroxadine group and 71.8% in the cephalexin group were rated effective according to the assessment by physicians in charge. No significant difference in any of them was noted between both groups. 2. Regarding the incidence of side effects, the number of the cases including the ones in which laboratory tests showed abnormal values was 22 cases (14.3%) in the cefroxadine group and 27 cases (16.9%) in the cephalexin group. There was no significant difference between both groups. 3 In respect to the usefulness of the drugs, in 90.5% of the cefroxadine group and 86.5% of the cephalexin group, each drug was regarded as “slightly useful” or more. No significant difference was noted between both groups.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)918-963
    Number of pages46
    JournalChemotherapy
    Volume28
    Issue number7
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1980

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Pharmacology (medical)
    • Infectious Diseases
    • Pharmacology
    • Drug Discovery
    • Oncology

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative test of the effctiveness of cefroxadine (cgp-9000) and cephalexin on acute respiratory tract infection by double blind method'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this