This site is intended only for healthcare professionals residing in Malaysia

Search

Menu

Close

Log Out Our medicinesTherapy AreaExplore contentExplore contentEventsDownloadable materialsVideosLet’s connectLet's ConnectContact usPfizer Medical Information

Menu

Close

HomeAbout DosingEfficacySafety and tolerabilityImportant safety information InteractionsFertility, Pregnancy and lactationUndesirable effectsGuidelinesResourcesProduct InformationEventsMaterialsVideos
EfficacyPiperacillin/tazobactam versus imipenem/cilastatin, both in combination with an aminoglycoside for the treatment of HAPPiperacillin/tazobactam is demonstrated to be comparable with imipenem/cilastatin for the treatment of HAP1*Clinical response (p=0.256)1 Bacteriologic eradication rate (p=0.445)1

Adapted from Joshi M, et al. Respir Med. 2006.

*A randomised, double-blind, multicentre study that compared the efficacy and safety of piperacillin/tazobactam and imipenem/cilastatin, both in combination with an aminoglycoside for the treatment of HAP. Patients with HAP received infusions of 4 g/500 mg piperacillin/tazobactam or 500 mg/500 mg imipenem/cilastatin every 6 hours. 

Primary endpoints: clinical cure and microbiological response rates; pathogen eradication rates; length of hospital stay; hospital readmissions; and adverse events (AEs).

Piperacillin/tazobactam versus imipenem/cilastatin as monotherapy for the treatment of acute pyelonephritis or complicated urinary tract infections (UTIs)Piperacillin/tazobactam is demonstrated to be comparable with imipenem/cilastatin for the treatment of acute pyelonephritis and complicated UTIs2*Clinical success rate

Similar success rates seen for both Piperacillin/tazobactam & imipenem/cilastatin at early follow-up2
Clinical & bacteriological efficacy of Piperacillin/tazobactam. Piperacillin/Tazobactam is as effective as imipenem/cilastatin2

Adapted from Naber KG, et al. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2002.

*A randomised, double-blind, multicentre trial that compared 2 g/0.5 g piperacillin/tazobactam and 0.5 g/0.5 g imipenem/cilastatin every 8 hours, as monotherapy in patients with acute pyelonephritis or complicated urinary tract infections. In total, 237 patients were randomised to receive either piperacillin/tazobactam (n=161) or imipenem/cilastatin (n=166).

Primary endpoints: the bacteriological success rate and the clinical success rate at early follow-up.

Piperacillin/tazobactam versus ertapenem for treatment of complicated skin and skin-structure infections (CSSSIs) in adultsPiperacillin/tazobactam is demonstrated to be comparable with ertapenem for the treatment of cSSSls3*Cure rate

Adapted from Graham DR, et al. Clin Inf. 2002.

p=not significant

*A prospective, randomised, double-blind trial comparing 3.375 g piperacillin/tazobactam every 6 hours, with 1 g ertapenem per day as parenteral treatment for 540 adults with cSSSls. The difference in response rates between the groups was -2.0% (95% CI, -10.2% to 6.2%). This indicated that the response rates for the 2 groups were equivalent.

Primary endpoints: the proportion of patients with an investigator assessment of “cure” at the test-of-cure assessment.

Piperacillin/tazobactam versus meropenem for the empirical treatment of HAP in JapanPiperacillin/tazobactam is demonstrated to be comparable with meropenem for the initial empirical treatment of HAP4*Piperacillin/tazobactam bacteriological eradication in comparison to meropenem*

Adapted from Yamamoto Y, et al. J Infect Chemother. 2013.

p=0.5909 (non-significant)

*A multicentre, randomised, exploratory study to compare the efficacy and safety of initial empiric therapy with 4.5 g piperacillin/tazobactam every 8 hours (n=18) or 0.5 g meropenem every 8 hours (n=16), in patients with HAP in Japan. Duration of the treatment period was 3 to 14 days in principle, but could be extended to a maximum of 21 days.

Primary endpoints: clinical cure rate at the test-of-cure visit. Clinical cure was evaluated as a cure that indicated continued improvement or complete resolution of symptoms and did not require additional antimicrobial agents 7 days after the end of treatment.

Piperacillin/tazobactam versus cefepime for the empirical treatment of paediatric cancer patients with neutropenia and feverPiperacillin/tazobactam and cefepime monotherapy were shown to be both effective and well-tolerated for empirical treatment of paediatric cancer patients with neutropenia and fever5*Overall success

Success without modification

Adapted from Uygun V, et al. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2009.

*A prospective, randomised, and open-label clinical trial that examines the efficiency and safety of piperacillin/tazobactam monotherapy in comparison to cefepime, for the empirical treatment of paediatric cancer patients with neutropenia and fever. The study evaluated 131 consecutive febrile episodes in neutropenic paediatric cancer patients (n=70). Patients received randomised treatment with either 80 mg/kg piperacillin/10 mg/kg tazobactam every 6 hours, or 50 mg/kg cefepime every 8 hours. Clinical response was determined at completion of therapy.

Treatment outcome criteria: ‘success without modification’ referred to episodes where the patient recovered from fever with disappearance of signs of infection without modifications to initial empirical treatment; ‘overall success’ referred to episodes where the patients recovered from fever with disappearance of signs of infection without failure; ‘failure’ referred to death resulting from a documented or presumed infection during the neutropenic episode.

Piperacillin/tazobactam versus ceftriaxone monotherapy for the empirical treatment of patients with haematological malignancies who have febrile neutropeniaPiperacillin/tazobactam monotherapy is demonstrated to be more effective than ceftriaxone plus gentamicin in febrile neutropenic patients with haematological malignancies6*Clinical response: defervescence from initial therapy (within 72 hr)6 Clinical response after 21 days6

Adapted from Gorschlüter M, et al. Support Care Cancer. 2003.

*A randomised, open-label study conducted in the Leukemia Unit of the Medical Center of the University of Bonn between July 1996 and May 1999. The study evaluated 212 consecutive febrile episodes in neutropenic patients with haematological malignancies (n=130). Patients were randomised to receive either 4.5 g piperacillin/tazobactam every 8 hours or 2 g ceftriaxone plus gentamicin 5 mg/kg per day, as empiric therapy 

Primary endpoint: response after 72 h of antibiotic therapy.

Defervescence = persistent (7 days or more) temperature below 38ºC without antipyretic medication in the absence of clinical signs of continuing infection.
Gentamicin 5mg/kg once daily.

References:Joshi M, et al. Comparison of piperacillin/tazobactam and imipenem/cilastatin, both in combination with tobramycin, administered every 6 h for treatment of nosocomial pneumonia. Respir Med. 2006;100(9):1554–65;Naber KG, et al. Piperacillin 2 g/tazobactam 0.5 g is as effective as imipenem 0.5 g/cilastatin 0.5 g for the treatment of acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis and complicated urinary tract infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2002;19(2):95–103;Graham DR, et al. Ertapenem once daily versus piperacillin/tazobactam 4 times per day for treatment of complicated skin and skin-structure infections in adults: results of a prospective, randomized, double-blind multicenter study. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;34(11):1460–68;Yamamoto Y, et al. Prospective randomized comparison study of piperacillin/tazobactam and meropenem for healthcare associated pneumonia in Japan. J Infect Chemother. 2013;19(2):291–98;Uygun V, et al. Piperacillin/tazobactam versus cefepime for the empirical treatment of pediatric cancer patients with neutropenia and fever: a randomized and open-label study. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2009;53(4):610–614;Gorschluter M, et al. Piperacillin-tazobactam is more effective than ceftriaxone plus gentamicin in febrile neutropenic patients with hematological malignancies: a randomized comparison. Support Care Cancer. 2003;11(6):362–370.
Safety and tolerability Learn more Loading Product Information View Product Information Loading
PfizerPro AccountPfizerPro Account

To access further materials, resources and receive communication about medicines and vaccines promoted by Pfizer.

Sign inRegisterAccountSign Out

This site is intended only for healthcare professionals residing in Malaysia. If you are a member of public wishing to access information on a specific medicine, please consult with your doctor.

 

This website is brought to you by
Pfizer (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd 197801003134
(40131-T)
Level 10 & 11, Wisma Averis (Tower 2),
Bangsar South, No. 8, Jalan Kerinchi, 
59200 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Tel: 603-2281 6000 
Fax: 603-2281 6388 
 

Copyright © 2024 Pfizer Limited. All rights reserved.

 

PP-TAZ-MYS-0132-24JUL2024
You are now leaving the PfizerPro Malaysia website
You are now being directed to a third-party website. It is clarified that Pfizer will not be collecting, storing, or accessing any personal information shared by you on the third-party website and Pfizer's Privacy Policy will not apply. Pfizer does not review or control or endorse the content of the third-party website and shall have no liability / assumes no responsibility for any issues arising out of you accessing the third-party website, accuracy of the information, practices, and standards of the third-party website. You will be bound by the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use of the third-party website and be solely responsible for your interactions with that website.
 
     PP-UNP-MYS-0077 - 10FEB2023