Comparative study of sparfloxacin and ofloxacin in bacterial pneumonia by the double blind method

Rinzo Soejima; Hiroshi Kawane; Niro Okimoto; Masaru Sumi; Akira Saito; Ichiro Nakayama; Tamotsu Takishima; Yasuo Tanno; Kotaro Oizumi; Akira Watanabe; Kazuo Sato; Kikuo Onuma; Kaoru Shimada; Hiroyuki Kobayashi; Takashi Inoue; Jingoro Shimada; Atsushi Saito; Kohya Shiba; Masanobu Kaji; Seiji Hori; Masaki Yoshida; Osamu Sakai; Hiroichi Tanimoto; Hideo Ikemoto; Tsuneo Hamamoto; Koichiro Nakata; Tatsuo Nakatani; Yoshitaka Nakamori; Shoichiro Irimajiri; Mitsuo Obana; Fumio Matsumoto; Takero Imai; Shigeki Odagiri; Kaneo Suzuki; Osamu Sekine; Yasutoshi Suzuki; Hajimu Takeda; Tatsuo Satake; Kenzo Takagi; Kenichi Yamaki; Yasunobu Noda; Hideo Gonda; Kiyoshi Suzuki; Katsutaka Torikai; Masakuni Tomii; Masataka Tajima; Tatsuo Hamamoto; Fumio Miki; Nobuhiro Narita; Masayoshi Sawaki; Keiichi Mikasa; Toshiharu Matsushima; Makoto Kimura; Osamu Kurimura; Hideo Sasaki; Yoshiro Sawae; Koji Takaki; Minoru Yoshida; Masayuki Nakanishi; Kohei Hara; Shigeru Kono; Hironobu Koga; Koichi Watanabe; Kenji Irifune; Sadahiro Asai; Jun Araki; Hideo Mashimoto; Keizo Matsumoto; Kazunori Oishi; Hirofumi Tanaka; Hidefumi Ishikawa; Kiyoshi Shima; Shinobu Takenaka; Taketoshi Matsumoto; Masaru Nasu; Yoichiro Goto; Mitsunobu Akashi; Hiroshi Nagaoka; Mitsuyoshi Nakashima; Mitsuo Kaku; Azuyuki Sugawara

doi:10.11250/chemotherapy1953.39.Supplement4_429

Comparative study of sparfloxacin and ofloxacin in bacterial pneumonia by the double blind method

Rinzo Soejima, Hiroshi Kawane, Niro Okimoto, Masaru Sumi, Akira Saito, Ichiro Nakayama, Tamotsu Takishima, Yasuo Tanno, Kotaro Oizumi, Akira Watanabe, Kazuo Sato, Kikuo Onuma, Kaoru Shimada, Hiroyuki Kobayashi, Takashi Inoue, Jingoro Shimada, Atsushi Saito, Kohya Shiba, Masanobu Kaji, Seiji HoriMasaki Yoshida, Osamu Sakai, Hiroichi Tanimoto, Hideo Ikemoto, Tsuneo Hamamoto, Koichiro Nakata, Tatsuo Nakatani, Yoshitaka Nakamori, Shoichiro Irimajiri, Mitsuo Obana, Fumio Matsumoto, Takero Imai, Shigeki Odagiri, Kaneo Suzuki, Osamu Sekine, Yasutoshi Suzuki, Hajimu Takeda, Tatsuo Satake, Kenzo Takagi, Kenichi Yamaki, Yasunobu Noda, Hideo Gonda, Kiyoshi Suzuki, Katsutaka Torikai, Masakuni Tomii, Masataka Tajima, Tatsuo Hamamoto, Fumio Miki, Nobuhiro Narita, Masayoshi Sawaki, Keiichi Mikasa, Toshiharu Matsushima, Makoto Kimura, Osamu Kurimura, Hideo Sasaki, Yoshiro Sawae, Koji Takaki, Minoru Yoshida, Masayuki Nakanishi, Kohei Hara, Shigeru Kono, Hironobu Koga, Koichi Watanabe, Kenji Irifune, Sadahiro Asai, Jun Araki, Hideo Mashimoto, Keizo Matsumoto, Kazunori Oishi, Hirofumi Tanaka, Hidefumi Ishikawa, Kiyoshi Shima, Shinobu Takenaka, Taketoshi Matsumoto, Masaru Nasu, Yoichiro Goto, Mitsunobu Akashi, Hiroshi Nagaoka, Mitsuyoshi Nakashima, Mitsuo Kaku, Azuyuki Sugawara

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Sparfloxacin (SPFX), a new oral quinolone antibacterial, was evaluated for efficacy, safety and usefulness in patients with bacterial pneumonia by the randomized double blind comparative study using ofloxacin (OFLX) as a control drug. The patients were given either SPFX (300 mg once daily) or OFLX (200 mg three times daily) for 14 days, in principle. The results obtained were as follows: 1) A total of 173 patients (SPFX 86, OFLX 87) were enrolled in the trial. The number of evaluable cases according to the criteria proposed by the committee was 149 for clinical efficacy (SPFX 72, OFLX 77), 164 for side effects (SPFX 82, OFLX 82), 160 for laboratory findings (SPFX 78, OFLX 82), and 150 for usefulness (SPFX 72, OFLX 78). There was no significant difference in the rate of background factors of the patients except in the distribution of severity of the disease between the two groups. 2) The clinical efficacy rate judged by the committee was 93.1% (67/72) in the SPFX group and 90.9% (70/77) in the OFLX group, and judged by the doctor in charge was 93, 1% (67/72) and 92.2% (71/77), respectively, without any significant difference between the two groups. 3) The bacteriological eradication rate was 100% (22/22) in the SPFX group and 96. 6% (28/29) in the OFLX group, without any significant difference between the two groups. 4) The incidence of side effects was 6.1% (5/82) in both groups, and that of abnormal laboratory findings was 19.2% (15/78) in the SPFX group and 19.5% (16/82) in the OFLX group, the difference between the two groups being without any significance. 5) The usefulness rate judged by the committee was 90.3% (65/72) in the SPFX group and 88.5% (69/78) in the OFLX group, and judged by the doctor in charge was 88.9% (64/72) and 87.2% (68/78), respectively, without any significant difference between the two groups. The above results indicate that SPFX (300 mg once daily) is as useful as OFLX (200 mg three times daily) in the treatment of patients with bacterial pneumonia.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	429-453
Number of pages	25
Journal	Chemotherapy
Volume	39
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.11250/chemotherapy1953.39.Supplement4_429
Publication status	Published - 1991
Externally published	Yes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Pharmacology (medical)
Infectious Diseases
Pharmacology
Drug Discovery
Oncology

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.11250/chemotherapy1953.39.Supplement4_429

Cite this

Soejima, R., Kawane, H., Okimoto, N., Sumi, M., Saito, A., Nakayama, I., Takishima, T., Tanno, Y., Oizumi, K., Watanabe, A., Sato, K., Onuma, K., Shimada, K., Kobayashi, H., Inoue, T., Shimada, J., Saito, A., Shiba, K., Kaji, M., ... Sugawara, A. (1991). Comparative study of sparfloxacin and ofloxacin in bacterial pneumonia by the double blind method. Chemotherapy, 39, 429-453. https://doi.org/10.11250/chemotherapy1953.39.Supplement4_429

Soejima, R, Kawane, H, Okimoto, N, Sumi, M, Saito, A, Nakayama, I, Takishima, T, Tanno, Y, Oizumi, K, Watanabe, A, Sato, K, Onuma, K, Shimada, K, Kobayashi, H, Inoue, T, Shimada, J, Saito, A, Shiba, K, Kaji, M, Hori, S, Yoshida, M, Sakai, O, Tanimoto, H, Ikemoto, H, Hamamoto, T, Nakata, K, Nakatani, T, Nakamori, Y, Irimajiri, S, Obana, M, Matsumoto, F, Imai, T, Odagiri, S, Suzuki, K, Sekine, O, Suzuki, Y, Takeda, H, Satake, T, Takagi, K, Yamaki, K, Noda, Y, Gonda, H, Suzuki, K, Torikai, K, Tomii, M, Tajima, M, Hamamoto, T, Miki, F, Narita, N, Sawaki, M, Mikasa, K, Matsushima, T, Kimura, M, Kurimura, O, Sasaki, H, Sawae, Y, Takaki, K, Yoshida, M, Nakanishi, M, Hara, K, Kono, S, Koga, H, Watanabe, K, Irifune, K, Asai, S, Araki, J, Mashimoto, H, Matsumoto, K, Oishi, K, Tanaka, H, Ishikawa, H, Shima, K, Takenaka, S, Matsumoto, T, Nasu, M, Goto, Y, Akashi, M, Nagaoka, H, Nakashima, M, Kaku, M & Sugawara, A 1991, 'Comparative study of sparfloxacin and ofloxacin in bacterial pneumonia by the double blind method', Chemotherapy, vol. 39, pp. 429-453. https://doi.org/10.11250/chemotherapy1953.39.Supplement4_429

@article{b1aee4c0e72747ae9eb7046894cf0f3a,

title = "Comparative study of sparfloxacin and ofloxacin in bacterial pneumonia by the double blind method",

abstract = "Sparfloxacin (SPFX), a new oral quinolone antibacterial, was evaluated for efficacy, safety and usefulness in patients with bacterial pneumonia by the randomized double blind comparative study using ofloxacin (OFLX) as a control drug. The patients were given either SPFX (300 mg once daily) or OFLX (200 mg three times daily) for 14 days, in principle. The results obtained were as follows: 1) A total of 173 patients (SPFX 86, OFLX 87) were enrolled in the trial. The number of evaluable cases according to the criteria proposed by the committee was 149 for clinical efficacy (SPFX 72, OFLX 77), 164 for side effects (SPFX 82, OFLX 82), 160 for laboratory findings (SPFX 78, OFLX 82), and 150 for usefulness (SPFX 72, OFLX 78). There was no significant difference in the rate of background factors of the patients except in the distribution of severity of the disease between the two groups. 2) The clinical efficacy rate judged by the committee was 93.1% (67/72) in the SPFX group and 90.9% (70/77) in the OFLX group, and judged by the doctor in charge was 93, 1% (67/72) and 92.2% (71/77), respectively, without any significant difference between the two groups. 3) The bacteriological eradication rate was 100% (22/22) in the SPFX group and 96. 6% (28/29) in the OFLX group, without any significant difference between the two groups. 4) The incidence of side effects was 6.1% (5/82) in both groups, and that of abnormal laboratory findings was 19.2% (15/78) in the SPFX group and 19.5% (16/82) in the OFLX group, the difference between the two groups being without any significance. 5) The usefulness rate judged by the committee was 90.3% (65/72) in the SPFX group and 88.5% (69/78) in the OFLX group, and judged by the doctor in charge was 88.9% (64/72) and 87.2% (68/78), respectively, without any significant difference between the two groups. The above results indicate that SPFX (300 mg once daily) is as useful as OFLX (200 mg three times daily) in the treatment of patients with bacterial pneumonia.",

author = "Rinzo Soejima and Hiroshi Kawane and Niro Okimoto and Masaru Sumi and Akira Saito and Ichiro Nakayama and Tamotsu Takishima and Yasuo Tanno and Kotaro Oizumi and Akira Watanabe and Kazuo Sato and Kikuo Onuma and Kaoru Shimada and Hiroyuki Kobayashi and Takashi Inoue and Jingoro Shimada and Atsushi Saito and Kohya Shiba and Masanobu Kaji and Seiji Hori and Masaki Yoshida and Osamu Sakai and Hiroichi Tanimoto and Hideo Ikemoto and Tsuneo Hamamoto and Koichiro Nakata and Tatsuo Nakatani and Yoshitaka Nakamori and Shoichiro Irimajiri and Mitsuo Obana and Fumio Matsumoto and Takero Imai and Shigeki Odagiri and Kaneo Suzuki and Osamu Sekine and Yasutoshi Suzuki and Hajimu Takeda and Tatsuo Satake and Kenzo Takagi and Kenichi Yamaki and Yasunobu Noda and Hideo Gonda and Kiyoshi Suzuki and Katsutaka Torikai and Masakuni Tomii and Masataka Tajima and Tatsuo Hamamoto and Fumio Miki and Nobuhiro Narita and Masayoshi Sawaki and Keiichi Mikasa and Toshiharu Matsushima and Makoto Kimura and Osamu Kurimura and Hideo Sasaki and Yoshiro Sawae and Koji Takaki and Minoru Yoshida and Masayuki Nakanishi and Kohei Hara and Shigeru Kono and Hironobu Koga and Koichi Watanabe and Kenji Irifune and Sadahiro Asai and Jun Araki and Hideo Mashimoto and Keizo Matsumoto and Kazunori Oishi and Hirofumi Tanaka and Hidefumi Ishikawa and Kiyoshi Shima and Shinobu Takenaka and Taketoshi Matsumoto and Masaru Nasu and Yoichiro Goto and Mitsunobu Akashi and Hiroshi Nagaoka and Mitsuyoshi Nakashima and Mitsuo Kaku and Azuyuki Sugawara",

year = "1991",

doi = "10.11250/chemotherapy1953.39.Supplement4_429",

language = "English",

volume = "39",

pages = "429--453",

journal = "CHEMOTHERAPY",

issn = "0009-3165",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparative study of sparfloxacin and ofloxacin in bacterial pneumonia by the double blind method

AU - Soejima, Rinzo

AU - Kawane, Hiroshi

AU - Okimoto, Niro

AU - Sumi, Masaru

AU - Saito, Akira

AU - Nakayama, Ichiro

AU - Takishima, Tamotsu

AU - Tanno, Yasuo

AU - Oizumi, Kotaro

AU - Watanabe, Akira

AU - Sato, Kazuo

AU - Onuma, Kikuo

AU - Shimada, Kaoru

AU - Kobayashi, Hiroyuki

AU - Inoue, Takashi

AU - Shimada, Jingoro

AU - Saito, Atsushi

AU - Shiba, Kohya

AU - Kaji, Masanobu

AU - Hori, Seiji

AU - Yoshida, Masaki

AU - Sakai, Osamu

AU - Tanimoto, Hiroichi

AU - Ikemoto, Hideo

AU - Hamamoto, Tsuneo

AU - Nakata, Koichiro

AU - Nakatani, Tatsuo

AU - Nakamori, Yoshitaka

AU - Irimajiri, Shoichiro

AU - Obana, Mitsuo

AU - Matsumoto, Fumio

AU - Imai, Takero

AU - Odagiri, Shigeki

AU - Suzuki, Kaneo

AU - Sekine, Osamu

AU - Suzuki, Yasutoshi

AU - Takeda, Hajimu

AU - Satake, Tatsuo

AU - Takagi, Kenzo

AU - Yamaki, Kenichi

AU - Noda, Yasunobu

AU - Gonda, Hideo

AU - Suzuki, Kiyoshi

AU - Torikai, Katsutaka

AU - Tomii, Masakuni

AU - Tajima, Masataka

AU - Hamamoto, Tatsuo

AU - Miki, Fumio

AU - Narita, Nobuhiro

AU - Sawaki, Masayoshi

AU - Mikasa, Keiichi

AU - Matsushima, Toshiharu

AU - Kimura, Makoto

AU - Kurimura, Osamu

AU - Sasaki, Hideo

AU - Sawae, Yoshiro

AU - Takaki, Koji

AU - Yoshida, Minoru

AU - Nakanishi, Masayuki

AU - Hara, Kohei

AU - Kono, Shigeru

AU - Koga, Hironobu

AU - Watanabe, Koichi

AU - Irifune, Kenji

AU - Asai, Sadahiro

AU - Araki, Jun

AU - Mashimoto, Hideo

AU - Matsumoto, Keizo

AU - Oishi, Kazunori

AU - Tanaka, Hirofumi

AU - Ishikawa, Hidefumi

AU - Shima, Kiyoshi

AU - Takenaka, Shinobu

AU - Matsumoto, Taketoshi

AU - Nasu, Masaru

AU - Goto, Yoichiro

AU - Akashi, Mitsunobu

AU - Nagaoka, Hiroshi

AU - Nakashima, Mitsuyoshi

AU - Kaku, Mitsuo

AU - Sugawara, Azuyuki

PY - 1991

Y1 - 1991

N2 - Sparfloxacin (SPFX), a new oral quinolone antibacterial, was evaluated for efficacy, safety and usefulness in patients with bacterial pneumonia by the randomized double blind comparative study using ofloxacin (OFLX) as a control drug. The patients were given either SPFX (300 mg once daily) or OFLX (200 mg three times daily) for 14 days, in principle. The results obtained were as follows: 1) A total of 173 patients (SPFX 86, OFLX 87) were enrolled in the trial. The number of evaluable cases according to the criteria proposed by the committee was 149 for clinical efficacy (SPFX 72, OFLX 77), 164 for side effects (SPFX 82, OFLX 82), 160 for laboratory findings (SPFX 78, OFLX 82), and 150 for usefulness (SPFX 72, OFLX 78). There was no significant difference in the rate of background factors of the patients except in the distribution of severity of the disease between the two groups. 2) The clinical efficacy rate judged by the committee was 93.1% (67/72) in the SPFX group and 90.9% (70/77) in the OFLX group, and judged by the doctor in charge was 93, 1% (67/72) and 92.2% (71/77), respectively, without any significant difference between the two groups. 3) The bacteriological eradication rate was 100% (22/22) in the SPFX group and 96. 6% (28/29) in the OFLX group, without any significant difference between the two groups. 4) The incidence of side effects was 6.1% (5/82) in both groups, and that of abnormal laboratory findings was 19.2% (15/78) in the SPFX group and 19.5% (16/82) in the OFLX group, the difference between the two groups being without any significance. 5) The usefulness rate judged by the committee was 90.3% (65/72) in the SPFX group and 88.5% (69/78) in the OFLX group, and judged by the doctor in charge was 88.9% (64/72) and 87.2% (68/78), respectively, without any significant difference between the two groups. The above results indicate that SPFX (300 mg once daily) is as useful as OFLX (200 mg three times daily) in the treatment of patients with bacterial pneumonia.

AB - Sparfloxacin (SPFX), a new oral quinolone antibacterial, was evaluated for efficacy, safety and usefulness in patients with bacterial pneumonia by the randomized double blind comparative study using ofloxacin (OFLX) as a control drug. The patients were given either SPFX (300 mg once daily) or OFLX (200 mg three times daily) for 14 days, in principle. The results obtained were as follows: 1) A total of 173 patients (SPFX 86, OFLX 87) were enrolled in the trial. The number of evaluable cases according to the criteria proposed by the committee was 149 for clinical efficacy (SPFX 72, OFLX 77), 164 for side effects (SPFX 82, OFLX 82), 160 for laboratory findings (SPFX 78, OFLX 82), and 150 for usefulness (SPFX 72, OFLX 78). There was no significant difference in the rate of background factors of the patients except in the distribution of severity of the disease between the two groups. 2) The clinical efficacy rate judged by the committee was 93.1% (67/72) in the SPFX group and 90.9% (70/77) in the OFLX group, and judged by the doctor in charge was 93, 1% (67/72) and 92.2% (71/77), respectively, without any significant difference between the two groups. 3) The bacteriological eradication rate was 100% (22/22) in the SPFX group and 96. 6% (28/29) in the OFLX group, without any significant difference between the two groups. 4) The incidence of side effects was 6.1% (5/82) in both groups, and that of abnormal laboratory findings was 19.2% (15/78) in the SPFX group and 19.5% (16/82) in the OFLX group, the difference between the two groups being without any significance. 5) The usefulness rate judged by the committee was 90.3% (65/72) in the SPFX group and 88.5% (69/78) in the OFLX group, and judged by the doctor in charge was 88.9% (64/72) and 87.2% (68/78), respectively, without any significant difference between the two groups. The above results indicate that SPFX (300 mg once daily) is as useful as OFLX (200 mg three times daily) in the treatment of patients with bacterial pneumonia.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025856567&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025856567&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.11250/chemotherapy1953.39.Supplement4_429

DO - 10.11250/chemotherapy1953.39.Supplement4_429

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0025856567

SN - 0009-3165

VL - 39

SP - 429

EP - 453

JO - CHEMOTHERAPY

JF - CHEMOTHERAPY

ER -

Comparative study of sparfloxacin and ofloxacin in bacterial pneumonia by the double blind method

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this