4.7 Article

Recombinant Tissue Factor Pathway Inhibitor in Severe Community-acquired Pneumonia A Randomized Trial

期刊

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201007-1167OC

关键词

coagulation; sepsis; respiratory failure

资金

  1. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale: Severe community-acquired pneumonia (sCAP) is a leading cause of death worldwide. Adjunctive therapies for sCAP are needed to further improve outcome. A systemic inhibitor of coagulation, tifacogin (recombinant human tissue factor pathway inhibitor) seemed to provide mortality benefit in the sCAP subgroup of a previous sepsis trial. Objectives: Evaluate the impact of adjunctive tifacogin on mortality in patients with sCAP. Methods: A multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, three-arm study was conducted from July 2005 to June 2008 at 188 centers in North and South America, Europe, South Africa, Asia, Australia, and New Zealand. Adults with sCAP were randomized to receive a continuous intravenous infusion of tifacogin 0.025 mg/kg/h, tifacogin 0.075 mg/kg/h, or matching placebo over 96 hours. Measurements and Main Results: Severity-adjusted 28-day all-cause mortality. Of 2,138 randomized patients, 946, 238, and 918 received tifacogin 0.025 mg/kg/h, tifacogin 0.075 mg/kg/h, and placebo, respectively. Tifacogin 0.075 mg/kg/h was discontinued after the first interim analysis according to prespecified futility criterion. The 28-day all-cause mortality rates were similar between the 0.025 mg/kg/h (18%) and placebo groups (17.9%) (P = 0.56). Greater reduction in prothrombin fragment 1+2 and thrombin antithrombin complexes levels relative to baseline throughout the first 96 hours was found with tifacogin 0.025 mg/kg/h than with placebo. The incidence of adverse events and serious adverse events were comparable between the tifacogin 0.025 mg/kg/h and placebo groups. Conclusions: Tifacogin showed no mortality benefit in patients with sCAP despite evidence of biologic activity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据