Double blind comparative study on cefetamet pivoxil vs cefixime in chronic respiratory tract infections

Fumio Matsumoto, Takeo Imai, Akira Saito, Yohmei Hiraga, Mitsuhide Ohmichi, Kazuo Takebe, Kenichi Imamura, Kotaro Oizumi, Akira Watanabe, Hiroyuki Nakai, Junichi Saito, Kazunao Niizuma, Kikuo Ohnuma, Masataka Katsu, Akira Ohishi, Shinji Okui, Shoichiro Irimajiri, Yasuo Matsuoka, Seiji Mita, Osamu SakaiJingoro Shimada, Kohya Shiba, Shinichi Tanimoto, Kazuo Ohara, Hideo Ikemoto, Takeshi Mori, Tsukasa Ebe, Hiroyuki Kobayashi, Hiroaki Takeda, Hiroshi Oshitani, Izumi Hayashi, Koichiro Nakata, Masayuki Noguchi, Masaru Koyama, Harumi Shishido, Hideaki Nagai, Shigeki Odagiri, Kaneo Suzuki, Hiroshi Takahashi, Kenichi Takahashi, Masaaki Arakawa, Koichi Wada, Takashi Kawashima, Toshiyuki Yamamoto, Kanzo Suzuki, Toru Matsuura, Nobuhiro Narita, Masayoshi Sawaki, Keiichi Mikasa, Fumio Miki, Rinzo Soejima, Niro Okimoto, Takao Sasaki, Yukio Matsumoto, Yuji Sugimoto, Michio Yamakido, Shinichi Ishioka, Yoshiro Sawae, Yukio Kumagai, Kohei Hara, Keizo Matsumoto, Hirofumi Tanaka, Atsushi Shinoda, Yoshinari Kitahara, Atsushi Saito, Yoshiteru Shigeno, Yuei Irabu, Hiroshi Fukuhara, Masakiyo Ishihara, Koichi Deguchi, Nobuya Ogawa, Jingoro Shimada

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    1 Citation (Scopus)

    Abstract

    We carried out a double-blind comparative study on cefetamet pivoxil (CEMT-PI) to evaluate its clinical efficacy and safety in the treatment of bacterial respiratory tract infections (RTI) namely, infectious exacerbation of chronic respiratory disease, using cefixime (CFIX) as the active reference drug. Either CEMT-PI at 1,000 mg/day or CFIX at 400 mg/day was given orally in two divided doses for 14 days in principle. The results obtained were as follows. (1) The efficacy rates were 83.3 % (55/66) in the CEMT-PI group and 72.7 % (48/66) in the CFIX group as judged by the committee, and 81.8% (54/66) in the CEMT-PI group, and 69.7% (46/66) in the CFIX group as judged by the doctor in charge. No significant differences were observed in efficacy rates between the two treatment groups. (2) The rates of eradication of the causative organisms were 82.4 % (28/34) in the CEMT-PI group and 71.9 % (23/32) in the CFIX group as judged by the committee, with no significant difference between the two treatment groups. (3) The incidence of side effects was 9.3 % (7/75) in the CEMT-PI group and 3.9 % (3/77) in the CFIX group, and that of abnormal laboratory findings was 15.1 % (11/73) in the CEMT-PI group and 14.7% (11/75) in the CFIX group as judged by the committee. No significant differences were observed in the incidences of side effects and of abnormal laboratory findings. From our results we conclude that CEMT-PI is highly effective and useful in the treatment of bacterial respiratory tract infections and is equivalent to CFIX.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)844-863
    Number of pages20
    JournalChemotherapy
    Volume39
    Issue number9
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1991

    Keywords

    • cefetamet pivoxil
    • cefixime

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

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

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Double blind comparative study on cefetamet pivoxil vs cefixime in chronic respiratory tract infections'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this