呼吸器感染症に対するCefoperazone (T-1551) とCefazolin (CEZ) の二重盲検法による薬効比較試験成績 (第2報)

抄録

Comparative test by double blind method were conducted by administering 2 g of CPZ and 4 g of CEZ as a control per day for comparing the actions of both the medicines in order to ascertain the efficacy and safety of CPZ against respiratory tract infection.
Clinical examination indicated the effectiveness of CPZ in 75.2% of the cases, while CEZ proved effective in 56.5% of the cases, and showed that CPZ was significantly advantageous over CEZ.
CPZ showed a signifficant advantage over CEZ against the individual diseases. In the cases involving bacterial pneumonia, CPZ was effective in 86.2% of the cases, while CEZ was effective in 64.4% and in the cases involving chronic respiratory tract infection, CPZ showed an efficacy of 63.6%, while CEZ was effective in 40.0% of the cases.
As regards the bacteriological effects of the medicines, CPZ showed a significantly high efficacy in Gram-negative bacteria. CPZ was effective in 70.6% of the cases, while CEZ was effective in 54.5%, even though Pseudomonas, Enterobacter and H. influenzae having no or very little sensitivity to CEZ were excluded from consideration.
No significant difference was observed between the two medicines in the manifestation of any side effect or abnormality in laboratory findings. All of such side effects and abnormalities that were observed were merely of the type usually observed with medicines composed of β-lactam.
The utility of CPZ was significantly superior to that of CEZ.
In view of the foregoing results, CPZ would be sufficient for effective treatment of respiratory tract infection.