Clinical effectiveness of branded versus generic piperacillin-tazobactam for treating severe community-acquired pneumonia
Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved..
PURPOSE: To compare the clinical effectiveness of branded versus generic piperacillin-tazobactam for treating severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified patients with severe CAP who received piperacillin-tazobactam based on a nine-center registry database. Furthermore, we classified the patients in three hospitals, which used only branded piperacillin-tazobactam as the study group, and the patients in six other hospitals, which used both branded and generic products as the control group.
RESULTS: A total of 472 patients (n = 263 in the study group and n = 209 in the control group) with severe CAP were included. The study group using branded piperacillin-tazobactam had higher odds of clinical cure (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 3.77, 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.93-7.37) and lower odds of treatment failure (adjusted OR = 0.28, 95 % CI, 0.13-0.58) than the control group receiving either branded or generic piperacillin-tazobactam. In addition, the study group was associated with higher odds of clinical effectiveness (adjusted OR = 2.95, 95 % CI, 1.46-6.11), less odds of clinical ineffectiveness (adjusted OR = 0.39, 95 % CI, 0.18-0.81), and lower risk of in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR = 0.39, 95 % CI, 0.21-0.73).
CONCLUSION: Based on the findings of the present study using indirect comparison, the clinical effectiveness of generic piperacillin-tazobactam for treating patients with severe CAP might not be as good as that of brand-name products.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2022 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2022 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:15 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of infection and public health - 15(2022), 9 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 961-965 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Wang, Cheng-Yi [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 07.09.2022 Date Revised 07.09.2022 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.jiph.2022.07.008 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM344504115 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM344504115 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226022925.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jiph.2022.07.008 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1148.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM344504115 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)35930932 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S1876-0341(22)00186-1 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Wang, Cheng-Yi |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Clinical effectiveness of branded versus generic piperacillin-tazobactam for treating severe community-acquired pneumonia |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 07.09.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 07.09.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a PURPOSE: To compare the clinical effectiveness of branded versus generic piperacillin-tazobactam for treating severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) | ||
| 520 | |a PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified patients with severe CAP who received piperacillin-tazobactam based on a nine-center registry database. Furthermore, we classified the patients in three hospitals, which used only branded piperacillin-tazobactam as the study group, and the patients in six other hospitals, which used both branded and generic products as the control group | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: A total of 472 patients (n = 263 in the study group and n = 209 in the control group) with severe CAP were included. The study group using branded piperacillin-tazobactam had higher odds of clinical cure (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 3.77, 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.93-7.37) and lower odds of treatment failure (adjusted OR = 0.28, 95 % CI, 0.13-0.58) than the control group receiving either branded or generic piperacillin-tazobactam. In addition, the study group was associated with higher odds of clinical effectiveness (adjusted OR = 2.95, 95 % CI, 1.46-6.11), less odds of clinical ineffectiveness (adjusted OR = 0.39, 95 % CI, 0.18-0.81), and lower risk of in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR = 0.39, 95 % CI, 0.21-0.73) | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: Based on the findings of the present study using indirect comparison, the clinical effectiveness of generic piperacillin-tazobactam for treating patients with severe CAP might not be as good as that of brand-name products | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Brand-name | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Community-acquired pneumonia | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Effectiveness | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Generic name | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Piperacillin-tazobactam | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Anti-Bacterial Agents |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Drugs, Generic |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Piperacillin, Tazobactam Drug Combination |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 157044-21-8 |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Penicillanic Acid |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 87-53-6 |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Piperacillin |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a X00B0D5O0E |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Chen, Chia-Hung |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Tu, Chih-Yen |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Chen, Wei-Chih |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kuo, Li-Kuo |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Wang, Yao-Tung |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Fu, Pin-Kuei |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ku, Shih-Chi |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Fang, Wen-Feng |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Chen, Chin-Ming |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lai, Chih-Cheng |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of infection and public health |d 2008 |g 15(2022), 9 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 961-965 |w (DE-627)NLM200240730 |x 1876-035X |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:15 |g year:2022 |g number:9 |g day:15 |g month:09 |g pages:961-965 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2022.07.008 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 15 |j 2022 |e 9 |b 15 |c 09 |h 961-965 | ||