• H Phillips, C J Van Hook, T Butler, and W M Todd.
• Columbiana Clinic of Family Medicine, Ala.
• Chest. 1993 Nov 1; 104 (5): 138713921387-92.

AbstractIn this multicenter, observer-blinded study, 301 patients with signs and symptoms of acute bacterial exacerbation of COPD were randomized (2:1) to receive either cefpodoxime proxetil (200 mg, bid) or cefaclor (250 mg, tid) for 10 days. Clinical and microbiologic evaluations were performed before treatment, during therapy (study days 3 to 5), at the end of therapy (3 to 7 days posttreatment), and at long-term follow-up (4 weeks posttreatment). The most common pretreatment isolates were Haemophilus influenzae, Haemophilus parainfluenzae, and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Significantly (p < 0.001) more bacterial isolates were susceptible in vitro to cefpodoxime (233 of 256, 91 percent) than to cefaclor (215 of 255, 84 percent). There were no statistically significant differences between the two drug regimens in eradication of the initial pathogen (cefpodoxime, 116 of 128, 91 percent; cefaclor, 59 of 64, 92 percent) or end-of-therapy clinical response (cure + proved; cefpodoxime, 99 of 100, 99 percent; cefaclor, 45 of 49, 92 percent) rates for evaluable patients. Both drug treatments were well-tolerated, with a similar incidence of drug-related adverse events (cefpodoxime 11 percent, cefaclor 12 percent). Cefpodoxime (bid) was as safe and effective as cefaclor (tid) in the treatment of acute exacerbation of COPD. The less frequent dosing regimen of cefpodoxime may improve patient compliance compared to those antibiotics that require three or four daily doses.

30 keywords...

hide…