Comparative test of the effectiveness of cefoperazone and cefazolin on respiratory tract infection by double blind method

Keiich Nakagawa, Watanabe Kentaro, Masaru Koyama, Norio Kihara, Tatsuo Suzuki, Hoshihara Yoshio, Akira Fukui, Yasumichi Kato, Akira Saito, Masumi Tomizawa, Ichiro Nakayama, Yoshio Kinoshita, Kiyofumi Ishikawa, Fumio Nagahama, Nakabayashi Takehito, Masumi Tomizawa, Shinya Yasuda, Tetsuji Koroku, Toshio Yokoi, Seiji AbeKazunori Harada, Hiroshi Kon, Takashi Mikami, Nobuo Watanabe, Yasumasa Yokota, Kazuo Takebe, Imamur Kenichi, Yoshid Kenichi, Kumasak Yoshihiro, Onuma Tomio, Uehara Osamu, Baba Tsuneharu, Abe Yasuhisa, Nakamur Mitsuo, Kashiwamura Hideaki, Kobayash Masashi, Masaki Naoyoshi, Inooka Hajime, Kawabe Yasuhiro, Kosaka Shiro, Takeshi Kimura, Katsuhiko Amano, Tsukasa Yoshida, Tamura Toyoichi, Hiromi Yaoi, Tamotsu Takishima, Sumio Arm, Kazukj Konishi, Yoshio Goto, Takakane Toyota, Masahiro Sato, Tatsuo Sato, Hitoshi Kikuchi, Tadashi Toma, Nobuo Sato, Sanemori Hayashi, Toru Nunokawa, Tsuneharu Ono, Kunio Tada, Kiyoshi Konno, Kotaro Ooizumi, Akira Watanabe, Seiichi Aonuma, Tetsuko Ishikawa, Fumio Arizi, Noboru Aso, Fusanosuke Yamasaku, Yasunori Suzuki, Osamu Sekine, Yoshimaru Usuda, Nobuki Aoki, Yasuko Yuma, Masataka Katsu, Toshinori Fujii, Otohiko Kunii, Kazufuto Fukaya, Yasushi Ueda, Atsushi Saito, Hideo Ikemoto, Ikko Watanabe, Osamu Kitamoto, Hiroyuki Kobayashi, Shinichi Tanimoto, Akio Tachibana, Koichiro Nakata, Mikizo Suzuki, Kaoru Shimada, Takashi Inamatsu, Kyoko Urayama, Keimei Mashimo, Junzaburo Kabe, Ippei Fujimori, Kojiro Sekita, Yoshio Kobayashi, Koukichi Fukushima, Akira Ito, Hideyuki Hasegawa, Kouichi Yamanaka, Kunihiko Shindo, Ryuichiro Yamazaki, Makio Kurihara, Takashi Suyama, Raw Yamamoto, Yukihiko Obigane, Shizuo Abe, Tadashi Takigami, Kaoru Ooyama, Kuninori Suzuki, Toshiyuki Yamamoto, Masahito Kato, Hiroyuki Nagasaka, Kozo Mori, Saburo Kitaura, Kunio Nam, Joichi Kato, Nobuo Maekawa, Michiyasu Nakanishi, Shigemitsu Kado, Yoshiro Oda, Takuya Kurasawa, Humiaki Uchihira, Kenzo Shiota, Fumio Miki, Kenji Kubo, Masakazu Kono, Kenji Takamatsu, Keizo Beppu, Hiroshi Okubo, Yuruko Okamoto, Fumihiko Uba, Yoshihiro Ueda, Keigo Maehara, Nobuya Konishi, Tadayuki Terada, Rinzo Soejima, Toshiharu Matsushima, Yoshihiko Tano, Yoshihito Niki, Susumu Yagi, Hironori Hara, Yukimasa Soda, Naomi Kimura, Kazuaki Takeuchi, Takanobu Matsumoto, Eiro Tsubura, Yoshihiro Takishita, Toshihiro Goto, Tsuneo Ishibashi, Masanori Takamoto, Kohei Hara, Masao Nakatomi, Masaru Nasu, Atsushi Saito, Tsuneo Tsutsumi, Yoshiteru Shigeno, Kinichi Izumikawa, Masaki Hirota, Keizo Matsumoto, Harumi Shishido, Keiichi Tadokoro, Hisao Kimura, Kouichi Yokoyama, Masato Hayashi, Chiyohiko Shindo, Kiyonori Sato, Haruhiko Tokuomi, Yasutsugu Fukuda, Katsumasa Tokunaga, Masayuki Ando, Mineharu Sugimoto

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    6 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The clinical effectiveness and safety of Cefoperazone (CPZ, T-1551) and Cefazolin (CEZ) were compared in this randomized, double-blind multi-clinical study of 239 patients with respiratory tract infections. Patients were assigned to treatment with either CPZ or CEZ by drip infusion for 7 to 14 days at a daily dose of 4 g. The results obtained were as follows: 1. One hundred and eighty-eight patients were selected for evaluation by committee members. 90 of these patients were treated with CPZ and 98 were treated with CEZ. Each number of patients administered either CPZ or CEZ was 40 and 36 in bacterial pneumonia, 9 and 9 in mycoplasmal pneumonia and primary atypical pneumonia (PAP), and 31 and 27 in chronic respiratory tract infections, respectively. 2. On the other hand, one hundred and ninty-five patients were selected, excepting that was remarkably against the rule, the number of cases adopted as able as possible by doctors in charge. 95 of these patients were treated with CPZ and 100 were treated with ABPC. 3. The clinical efficacy rate (excellent and good results) in all cases adopted by committee members was 85.5% in CPZ group and 56.2% in CEZ group, respectively. The effectiveness in CPZ group was significantly superior to that of CEZ group. 4. The clinical efficacy of CPZ was significantly superior to that of CEZ in all cases adopted by doctors in charge. 5. CPZ showed an excellent effect for improvement of symptoms and findings of chest roentgenogram, property of sputum dyspnea and rales in bacterial pneumonia, and body temperature, property of sputum, WBC and CRP in chronic respiratory tract infections. The results obtained in CPZ group was significantly superior to that in CEZ group. 6. No significant difference was observed in the occurrence of side effect between both groups. 7. The utility of CPZ was significantly superior to that of CEZ. The results indicated thus that CPZ is more useful for therapy of respiratory tract infection than CEZ.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)375-424
    Number of pages50
    JournalChemotherapy
    Volume29
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1981

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

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

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative test of the effectiveness of cefoperazone and cefazolin on respiratory tract infection by double blind method'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Nakagawa, K., Kentaro, W., Koyama, M., Kihara, N., Suzuki, T., Yoshio, H., Fukui, A., Kato, Y., Saito, A., Tomizawa, M., Nakayama, I., Kinoshita, Y., Ishikawa, K., Nagahama, F., Takehito, N., Tomizawa, M., Yasuda, S., Koroku, T., Yokoi, T., ... Sugimoto, M. (1981). Comparative test of the effectiveness of cefoperazone and cefazolin on respiratory tract infection by double blind method. Chemotherapy, 29(4), 375-424. https://doi.org/10.11250/chemotherapy1953.29.375