Skip to content

Safety and Efficacy Study of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam to Treat Ventilated Nosocomial Pneumonia (MK-7625A-008)

A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter, Phase 3 Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Intravenous Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Compared With Meropenem in Adult Patients With Ventilated Nosocomial Pneumonia

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02070757
Acronym
ASPECT-NP
Enrollment
726
Registered
2014-02-25
Start date
2014-09-02
Completion date
2018-06-06
Last updated
2020-05-05

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Healthcare-Associated Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia, Lung Diseases

Brief summary

This is a phase 3, multicenter, prospective, randomized study of intravenous (IV) ceftolozane/tazobactam versus IV meropenem in the treatment of adult participants with either ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (VABP) or ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia (HABP). The primary objective is to demonstrate the non-inferiority of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem in adult participants with ventilated nosocomial pneumonia (VNP) based on the difference in Day 28 all-cause mortality rates in the Intent-to-treat (ITT) population using a non-inferiority margin of 10%.

Interventions

Ceftolozane/tazobactam is an antibacterial consisting of a co-formulation of ceftolozane, a novel antipseudomonal cephalosporin and tazobactam, a well-established beta (β)-lactamase inhibitor (BLI) being developed for the treatment of serious bacterial infections.

DRUGMeropenem

Meropenem is a broad spectrum injectable antibiotic widely used to treat serious infections such as ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia and hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia.

Sponsors

Cubist Pharmaceuticals LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc. (Rahway, New Jersey USA)
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Key Inclusion Criteria: * Adult participants diagnosed with either VABP or ventilated HABP requiring IV antibiotic therapy; * Intubated and on mechanical ventilation at the time of randomization; * New or progressive infiltrate on chest radiography consistent with pneumonia; * Presence of clinical criteria consistent with a diagnosis of ventilated nosocomial pneumonia. Key

Exclusion criteria

* History of moderate or severe hypersensitivity reactions to beta-lactam antibiotics; * Prior non-study antibiotics for \> 24 hours; * Gram stain of lower respiratory tract specimen showing only gram positive bacteria; * Active immunosuppression; * End-stage renal disease or requirement for dialysis; * Expected survival \< 72 hours; * Severe confounding respiratory condition (i.e., chest trauma with paradoxical respiration); * Known or suspected community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. * Anticipated concomitant use of any of the following medications during the course of study therapy: valproic acid or divalproex sodium. Anticipated concomitant use of serotonin re-uptake inhibitors, tricyclic antidepressants, or serotonin 5-HT1 receptor agonists (triptans), meperidine, or buspirone during the course of linezolid treatment. * Receipt of a monoamine oxidase inhibitor within 14 days prior to the first dose of study drug or anticipated concomitant use during the course of linezolid therapy.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage of Participants With All Cause Mortality in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population - Day 28Day 28To demonstrate the non-inferiority of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem in stratified adult participants with ventilated nosocomial pneumonia (VNP) (participants with either ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia \[VABP\] or ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia \[HABP\]) based on the difference in all-cause mortality rates in the intent to treat (ITT) population using a non-inferiority margin of 10%. The estimated adjusted percentage was a weighted average across all strata, constructed using Mehrotra-Railkar continuity-corrected minimum risk (MRc) stratum weights.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage of Participants With All Cause Mortality in the Microbiological Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Population - Day 28Day 28To compare the all cause mortality rates of participants in the ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem arms in microbiological intent-to-treat (mITT) population.
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population7 to 14 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 30)To compare the clinical response rates of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem in adult participants with VNP (participants with either ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia \[VABP\] or ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia \[HABP\]) at the TOC visit in the CE population. Clinical response at the TOC visit was defined as cure (complete resolution with no new signs of VNP), failure (progression, relapse or recurrence of VNP) or indeterminate (no evaluable study data). A favorable clinical response is a clinical cure. A missing clinical response will be considered indeterminate unless the clinical outcome at the EOT visit was failure. The data-as-observed (DAO) approach was used where participants with missing clinical responses, including indeterminate outcomes, are excluded from the analysis population.
Percentage of Participants With Per-Participant Microbiological Response of Cure or Presumed Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population7 to 14 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 30)To compare the per-participant microbiological response rates of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem at the TOC visit in the microbiologically evaluable (ME) population. The per-participant microbiological response will be determined based on the individual microbiological outcomes for each baseline pathogen. A microbiological response at the TOC visit was defined as cure (baseline pathogens eradicated), failure (baseline pathogen is persistent) or indeterminate (no evaluable respiratory material). A favorable microbiological response is a microbiological cure or presumed cure. The data-as-observed (DAO) approach was used where participants with missing clinical responses, including indeterminate outcomes, are excluded from the analysis population.
Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)7 to 14 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 30)To compare the percentage of participants with a microbiological outcome of eradication or presumed eradication, by pathogen. The microbiological outcome was classified as eradication, presumed eradication, persistence, 'presumed persistence, indeterminate or recurrence. Eradication was defined as a ≥1- log reduction in bacterial burden of the original baseline LRT pathogen AND a per pathogen count of ≤10\^4 colony-forming unit (CFU)/mL for endotracheal aspirate (ETA) or sputum specimens, ≤10\^3 CFU/mL for a bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) specimen, or ≤10\^2 CFU/mL for a protected brush specimen (PBS) from a follow-up LRT culture. Presumed eradication was defined as an absence of material to culture (e.g. inability to obtain a culture in an extubated patient) in a patient deemed a clinical cure.
Percentage of Participants With All-Cause Mortality in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population - Day 14Day 14To compare the all cause mortality rates of participants (ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem arms). Participants whose Day 14 mortality outcomes are missing or unknown are analysed as deceased.
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population7 to 14 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 30)To demonstrate the non-inferiority of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem in adult participants with ventilated nosocomial pneumonia (VNP) at the TOC visit (7 to 14 days after the end-of-therapy \[EOT\] visit) using a non-inferiority margin of 12.5%. Clinical response at the TOC visit was defined as cure (complete resolution with no new signs of VNP), failure (progression, relapse or recurrence of VNP) or indeterminate (no evaluable study data). A favorable clinical response is a clinical cure. A missing clinical response will be considered indeterminate unless the clinical outcome at the EOT visit was failure. The estimated adjusted percentage was a weighted average across all strata, constructed using Mehrotra-Railkar continuity-corrected minimum risk (MRc) stratum weights.
Percentage of Participants With Per-Participant Microbiological Response of Cure or Presumed Cure at the End-of-Therapy (EOT) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) PopulationWithin 24 hours after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 15)To compare the microbiological response rates of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem at the EOT visit. The per-participant microbiological response will be determined based on the individual microbiological outcomes for each baseline pathogen. A microbiological response at the EOT visit was defined as cure (baseline pathogens eradicated), failure (baseline pathogen is persistent) or indeterminate (no evaluable respiratory material). A favorable microbiological response is a microbiological cure or presumed cure. The data-as-observed (DAO) approach was used where participants with missing clinical responses, including indeterminate outcomes, are excluded from the analysis population.
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Late Follow-up (LFU) Visit in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population28 to 35 days after the last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 50)To compare the clinical response rates at the Late Follow-up (LFU) visit for ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem in the CE population. Clinical response at the LFU visit will be classified as sustained cure, relapse, or indeterminate only in participants deemed a clinical cure at the TOC visit. A favorable clinical response is sustained clinical cure.
Percentage of Participants Who Report 1 or More Adverse Event (AE)Up to 35 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 50)An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product that does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not related to the medicinal product.
Percentage of Participants With Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE)Up to 35 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 50)A serious adverse event (SAE) is an AE that results in death, is life threatening, requires or prolongs an existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, is a congenital anomaly or birth defect, or is another important medical event deemed such by medical or scientific judgment.
Percentage of Participants Discontinuing Study Drug Due to an Adverse Event (AE)Up to 14 days after the first dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 15)An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product that does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not related to the medicinal product.
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the End-of-Therapy (EOT) Visit in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) PopulationWithin 24 hours after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 15)To compare the clinical response rates at the EOT visit for ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem. Clinical response at the EOT visit was defined as cure (complete resolution with no new signs of VNP), failure (progression, relapse or recurrence of VNP) or indeterminate (no evaluable study data). A favorable clinical response is a clinical cure. A missing clinical response will be considered indeterminate.

Participant flow

Recruitment details

A total of 263 sites were opened for enrollment with the majority of participants recruited from sites in eastern Europe.

Pre-assignment details

Randomization was stratified by diagnosis (ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia \[VABP\] or ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia \[HABP\]) and by age (\<65 or ≥65 years). All participants randomized were included in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Ceftolozane/Tazobactam
Participants receive 3000 mg ceftolozane/tazobactam (comprising 2000 mg ceftolozane and 1000 mg tazobactam) administered as an IV infusion every 8 hours (q8h).
362
Meropenem
Participants receive 1000 mg meropenem administered as an IV infusion q8h.
364
Total726

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyAdverse Event10799
Overall StudyDischarged from Study Hospital22
Overall StudyInvestigator Decision02
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up74
Overall StudyProtocol Violation04
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject13

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicMeropenemTotalCeftolozane/Tazobactam
Age, Continuous59.5 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 17.2
60.0 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 16.9
60.5 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 16.7
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
American Indian Or Alaska Native
1 Participants1 Participants0 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
23 Participants50 Participants27 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
4 Participants14 Participants10 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Missing
2 Participants2 Participants0 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Native Hawaiian Or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Not Reported
27 Participants46 Participants19 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other
7 Participants11 Participants4 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
300 Participants601 Participants301 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
109 Participants209 Participants100 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
255 Participants517 Participants262 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
105 / 361101 / 359
other
Total, other adverse events
113 / 361111 / 359
serious
Total, serious adverse events
152 / 361129 / 359

Outcome results

Primary

Percentage of Participants With All Cause Mortality in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population - Day 28

To demonstrate the non-inferiority of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem in stratified adult participants with ventilated nosocomial pneumonia (VNP) (participants with either ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia \[VABP\] or ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia \[HABP\]) based on the difference in all-cause mortality rates in the intent to treat (ITT) population using a non-inferiority margin of 10%. The estimated adjusted percentage was a weighted average across all strata, constructed using Mehrotra-Railkar continuity-corrected minimum risk (MRc) stratum weights.

Time frame: Day 28

Population: The ITT population consisted of all randomized participants with documented informed consent, regardless of whether or not they received study drug.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With All Cause Mortality in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population - Day 2824.0 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With All Cause Mortality in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population - Day 2825.3 Percentage of Participants
95% CI: [-5.13, 7.39]
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Discontinuing Study Drug Due to an Adverse Event (AE)

An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product that does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not related to the medicinal product.

Time frame: Up to 14 days after the first dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 15)

Population: All safety analyses were based on a subset of the ITT population (the Safety Population), which included randomized participants who received any amount (i.e., full or partial dose) of study drug. All participants received their randomly assigned treatments, and no participants with important deviations were excluded from the safety population.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants Discontinuing Study Drug Due to an Adverse Event (AE)10.2 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants Discontinuing Study Drug Due to an Adverse Event (AE)11.7 Percentage of Participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who Report 1 or More Adverse Event (AE)

An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product that does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a medicinal product, whether or not related to the medicinal product.

Time frame: Up to 35 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 50)

Population: All safety analyses were based on a subset of the ITT population (the Safety Population), which included randomized participants who received any amount (i.e., full or partial dose) of study drug. All participants received their randomly assigned treatments, and no participants with important deviations were excluded from the safety population.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants Who Report 1 or More Adverse Event (AE)85.9 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants Who Report 1 or More Adverse Event (AE)83.3 Percentage of Participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With All-Cause Mortality in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population - Day 14

To compare the all cause mortality rates of participants (ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem arms). Participants whose Day 14 mortality outcomes are missing or unknown are analysed as deceased.

Time frame: Day 14

Population: The ITT population consisted of all randomized participants with documented informed consent, regardless of whether or not they received study drug.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With All-Cause Mortality in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population - Day 1414.1 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With All-Cause Mortality in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population - Day 1412.9 Percentage of Participants
Comparison: Difference in Percentage of Participants95% CI: [-6.41, 3.57]
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With All Cause Mortality in the Microbiological Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Population - Day 28

To compare the all cause mortality rates of participants in the ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem arms in microbiological intent-to-treat (mITT) population.

Time frame: Day 28

Population: The mITT population was a subset of the ITT population that included any participant who received any amount of study drug and had at least 1 bacterial respiratory pathogen isolated from the baseline LRT culture that was susceptible to at least 1 of the study drugs.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With All Cause Mortality in the Microbiological Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Population - Day 2820.1 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With All Cause Mortality in the Microbiological Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Population - Day 2825.5 Percentage of Participants
Comparison: Difference in Percentage of Participants95% CI: [-2.83, 11.75]
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE)

A serious adverse event (SAE) is an AE that results in death, is life threatening, requires or prolongs an existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, is a congenital anomaly or birth defect, or is another important medical event deemed such by medical or scientific judgment.

Time frame: Up to 35 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 50)

Population: All safety analyses were based on a subset of the ITT population (the Safety Population), which included randomized participants who received any amount (i.e., full or partial dose) of study drug. All participants received their randomly assigned treatments, and no participants with important deviations were excluded from the safety population.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE)42.1 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Any Serious Adverse Event (SAE)35.9 Percentage of Participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the End-of-Therapy (EOT) Visit in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population

To compare the clinical response rates at the EOT visit for ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem. Clinical response at the EOT visit was defined as cure (complete resolution with no new signs of VNP), failure (progression, relapse or recurrence of VNP) or indeterminate (no evaluable study data). A favorable clinical response is a clinical cure. A missing clinical response will be considered indeterminate.

Time frame: Within 24 hours after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 15)

Population: The ITT population consisted of all randomized participants with documented informed consent, regardless of whether or not they received study drug.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the End-of-Therapy (EOT) Visit in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population66.0 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the End-of-Therapy (EOT) Visit in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population66.8 Percentage of Participants
Comparison: Difference in Percentage of Participants95% CI: [-7.67, 6.04]
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Late Follow-up (LFU) Visit in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population

To compare the clinical response rates at the Late Follow-up (LFU) visit for ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem in the CE population. Clinical response at the LFU visit will be classified as sustained cure, relapse, or indeterminate only in participants deemed a clinical cure at the TOC visit. A favorable clinical response is sustained clinical cure.

Time frame: 28 to 35 days after the last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 50)

Population: The CE population was a subset of the ITT population that included any participant who received study drug, adhered to the study protocol through the TOC visit, and had an evaluable clinical outcome (either Cure or Failure) at the TOC visit (or were classified as a clinical failure prior to the TOC visit).

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Late Follow-up (LFU) Visit in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population52.8 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Late Follow-up (LFU) Visit in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population51.6 Percentage of Participants
Comparison: Difference in Percentage of Participants95% CI: [-3.38, 10.44]
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population

To compare the clinical response rates of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem in adult participants with VNP (participants with either ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia \[VABP\] or ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia \[HABP\]) at the TOC visit in the CE population. Clinical response at the TOC visit was defined as cure (complete resolution with no new signs of VNP), failure (progression, relapse or recurrence of VNP) or indeterminate (no evaluable study data). A favorable clinical response is a clinical cure. A missing clinical response will be considered indeterminate unless the clinical outcome at the EOT visit was failure. The data-as-observed (DAO) approach was used where participants with missing clinical responses, including indeterminate outcomes, are excluded from the analysis population.

Time frame: 7 to 14 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 30)

Population: The CE population was a subset of the ITT population that included any participant who received study drug, adhered to the study protocol through the TOC visit, and had an evaluable clinical outcome (either Cure or Failure) at the TOC visit (or were classified as a clinical failure prior to the TOC visit).

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population63.8 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Clinically Evaluable (CE) Population64.7 Percentage of Participants
Comparison: Difference in Percentage of Participants95% CI: [-10.21, 7.67]
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population

To demonstrate the non-inferiority of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem in adult participants with ventilated nosocomial pneumonia (VNP) at the TOC visit (7 to 14 days after the end-of-therapy \[EOT\] visit) using a non-inferiority margin of 12.5%. Clinical response at the TOC visit was defined as cure (complete resolution with no new signs of VNP), failure (progression, relapse or recurrence of VNP) or indeterminate (no evaluable study data). A favorable clinical response is a clinical cure. A missing clinical response will be considered indeterminate unless the clinical outcome at the EOT visit was failure. The estimated adjusted percentage was a weighted average across all strata, constructed using Mehrotra-Railkar continuity-corrected minimum risk (MRc) stratum weights.

Time frame: 7 to 14 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 30)

Population: The ITT population consisted of all randomized participants with documented informed consent, regardless of whether or not they received study drug.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population54.4 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Clinical Response of Clinical Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population53.3 Percentage of Participants
95% CI: [-6.17, 8.29]
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)

To compare the percentage of participants with a microbiological outcome of eradication or presumed eradication, by pathogen. The microbiological outcome was classified as eradication, presumed eradication, persistence, 'presumed persistence, indeterminate or recurrence. Eradication was defined as a ≥1- log reduction in bacterial burden of the original baseline LRT pathogen AND a per pathogen count of ≤10\^4 colony-forming unit (CFU)/mL for endotracheal aspirate (ETA) or sputum specimens, ≤10\^3 CFU/mL for a bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) specimen, or ≤10\^2 CFU/mL for a protected brush specimen (PBS) from a follow-up LRT culture. Presumed eradication was defined as an absence of material to culture (e.g. inability to obtain a culture in an extubated patient) in a patient deemed a clinical cure.

Time frame: 7 to 14 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 30)

Population: The ME population included any participants in the mITT who adhered to the protocol, had an evaluable clinical outcome at TOC and at least 1 pathogen isolated from the baseline LRT culture at the appropriate CFU/mL threshold. The number analyzed per pathogen represents the number of participants in the ME population with that specific pathogen.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Escherichia coli78.3 Percentage of Participants
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Haemophilus influenzae91.7 Percentage of Participants
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Enterobacteriaceae68.7 Percentage of Participants
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Enterobacter cloacae57.1 Percentage of Participants
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Klebsiella pneumoniae71.4 Percentage of Participants
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Klebsiella oxytoca87.5 Percentage of Participants
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Pseudomonas aeruginosa79.3 Percentage of Participants
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Serratia marcescens40.0 Percentage of Participants
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Proteus mirabilis63.6 Percentage of Participants
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Acinetobacter baumannii33.3 Percentage of Participants
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Gram-Negative69.9 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Acinetobacter baumannii80.0 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Gram-Negative62.4 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Pseudomonas aeruginosa55.3 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Enterobacteriaceae65.6 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Escherichia coli73.9 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Klebsiella pneumoniae66.7 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Proteus mirabilis70.0 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Haemophilus influenzae50.0 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Enterobacter cloacae75.0 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Klebsiella oxytoca57.1 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Microbiological Response of Eradication or Presumed Eradication, by Pathogen, at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population (>=10 Isolates at Baseline)Serratia marcescens50.0 Percentage of Participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Per-Participant Microbiological Response of Cure or Presumed Cure at the End-of-Therapy (EOT) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population

To compare the microbiological response rates of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem at the EOT visit. The per-participant microbiological response will be determined based on the individual microbiological outcomes for each baseline pathogen. A microbiological response at the EOT visit was defined as cure (baseline pathogens eradicated), failure (baseline pathogen is persistent) or indeterminate (no evaluable respiratory material). A favorable microbiological response is a microbiological cure or presumed cure. The data-as-observed (DAO) approach was used where participants with missing clinical responses, including indeterminate outcomes, are excluded from the analysis population.

Time frame: Within 24 hours after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 15)

Population: The ME population was a subset of the mITT population that included any participants who adhered to the study protocol through the TOC visit, had an evaluable clinical outcome (Cure or Failure) at the TOC visit and had at least 1 bacterial respiratory pathogen (at the appropriate CFU/mL threshold) isolated from the baseline LRT culture.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Per-Participant Microbiological Response of Cure or Presumed Cure at the End-of-Therapy (EOT) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population80.9 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Per-Participant Microbiological Response of Cure or Presumed Cure at the End-of-Therapy (EOT) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population78.8 Percentage of Participants
Comparison: Difference in Percentage of Participants95% CI: [-8.91, 12.02]
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Per-Participant Microbiological Response of Cure or Presumed Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population

To compare the per-participant microbiological response rates of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem at the TOC visit in the microbiologically evaluable (ME) population. The per-participant microbiological response will be determined based on the individual microbiological outcomes for each baseline pathogen. A microbiological response at the TOC visit was defined as cure (baseline pathogens eradicated), failure (baseline pathogen is persistent) or indeterminate (no evaluable respiratory material). A favorable microbiological response is a microbiological cure or presumed cure. The data-as-observed (DAO) approach was used where participants with missing clinical responses, including indeterminate outcomes, are excluded from the analysis population.

Time frame: 7 to 14 days after last dose of study drug (Up to ~Day 30)

Population: The ME population was a subset of the mITT population that included any participants who adhered to the study protocol through the TOC visit, had an evaluable clinical outcome (Cure or Failure) at the TOC visit and had at least 1 bacterial respiratory pathogen (at the appropriate CFU/mL threshold) isolated from the baseline LRT culture.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Ceftolozane/TazobactamPercentage of Participants With Per-Participant Microbiological Response of Cure or Presumed Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population70.4 Percentage of Participants
MeropenemPercentage of Participants With Per-Participant Microbiological Response of Cure or Presumed Cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC) Visit in the Microbiologically Evaluable (ME) Population62.7 Percentage of Participants
Comparison: Difference in Percentage of Participants95% CI: [-5.11, 18.93]

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 1, 2026