Skip to main content
Log in

Retrospective Analysis of the Safety Profile of Oral Moxifloxacin in Elderly Patients Enrolled in Clinical Trials

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Drug Safety Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background and objective: As aging is associated with physiological changes, including renal and hepatic insufficiency, and a higher risk of drug interactions, special attention needs to be directed towards the safety of medications in the elderly. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the safety of oral moxifloxacin in elderly patients who were enrolled in clinical trials and to compare these results to those of other commonly used antibacterials.

Methods: Safety data from 27 prospective, randomised, comparative phase II/III trials of oral moxifloxacin included in the Bayer clinical trial database were pooled and analysed by age group (<65 years of age, 65–74 years of age, ≥75 years of age) and by treatment group (moxifloxacin vs comparator). The primary endpoints included rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (all adverse events regardless of causality), drug-related adverse events, drug-related serious adverse events, deaths and premature discontinuations because of a treatment-emergent adverse event. A treatment by age group interaction test was used to determine if the comparison between moxifloxacin and the comparator group in the incidence rates of any treatment-emergent or drug-related adverse events were affected by increasing age.

Results: Of the 12 231 patients who had valid safety data, 6270 had been treated with oral moxifloxacin and 5961 with a comparator antibacterial. The most frequently used comparators were cefuroxime and clarithromycin. Most patients (n = 9671) were <65 years of age (4939 moxifloxacin, 4732 comparator); 1636 patients were 65–74 years of age (842 moxifloxacin, 794 comparator); and 924 patients were ≥75 years of age (489 moxifloxacin, 435 comparator). The treatment by age group interaction test revealed that the comparison of drug-related adverse event rates between the moxifloxacin and comparator group were not affected by increasing age (p = 0.43). Rates of premature termination between the moxifloxacin and comparator treatment groups also did not increase with age (p = 0.552). No arrhythmias related to corrected QT (QTc) interval prolongation were reported following oral moxifloxacin or comparator treatment in this large group of young and elderly patients. Overall, the number of deaths was similar between the treatment groups (17 moxifloxacin, 19 comparator).

Conclusions: Drug-related adverse event rates associated with oral moxifloxacin or the comparator therapy used in these studies did not significantly increase with advancing age. This pooled analysis suggests that oral moxifloxacin can be safely used in elderly patients with characteristics consistent with those enrolled into the clinical trials.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Table I
Table II
Table III
Table IV
Table V

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yoshikawa TT, Norman DC. Treatment of infections in elderly patients. Med Clin North Am 1995; 79: 651–61

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Andriole VT. The quinolones: prospects. In: Andriole VT, editor. The quinolones. San Diego: Academic Press, 2000: 477–495

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Quintiliani R, Owens Jr RC, Grant EM. Clinical role of fluoroquinolones in patients with respiratory tract infections. Infect Dis Clin Pract 1999; 8Suppl. 1: S28–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Blondeau JM. A review of the comparative in vitro activities of 12 antimicrobial agents, with a focus on five new respiratory quinolones. J Antimicrob Chemother 1999; 43Suppl. B: 1–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim M-K, Nightingale CH. The quinolones: pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the fluoroquinolones. In: Andriole VT, editor. The quinolones. San Diego: Academic Press, 2000: 169–202

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Cockcroft DW, Gault MH. Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine. Nephron 1976; 16: 31–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Stass H, Kubitza D, von Bergmann K, Halabi A, Kuhlmann J, Sudhop T. No dose adjustment is needed for patients with hepatic impairment receiving oral moxifloxacin [abstract]. ECCMID 1999: P0771

    Google Scholar 

  8. Data on file, Bayer Pharmaceuticals, 1996–2001

  9. Stass H, Kubitza D. Profile of moxifloxacin drug interactions. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32Suppl. 1: S47–50

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gavin JR, Kubin R, Choudhri S, et al. Moxifloxacin and glucose homeostasis: evidence from pooled clinical and postmarketing studies. Drug Saf 2004; 27: 671–86

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Mantel N, Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 1959; 2: 719–48

    Google Scholar 

  12. Agesti A. Analysis of ordinal categorical data. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wirtz M, Kleeff J, Swoboda S, et al. Moxifloxacin penetration into human gastrointestinal tissues. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 53: 875–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Breilh D, Jougon J, Djabarouti S, et al. Diffusion of oral and intravenous 400mg once-daily moxifloxacin into lung tissue at pharmacokinetic steady-state. J Chemother 2003; 15: 558–62

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Dinis PB, Monteiro MC, Martins ML, et al. Sinus tissue concentration of moxifloxacin after a single oral dose. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2004; 113: 142–6

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tillotson GS, Rybak J. New milestones achieved in fluoroquinolone safety. Pharmacotherapy 2001; 21: 358–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Church D, Haverstock D, Andriole VT. Moxifloxacin: a review of its safety profile based on worldwide clinical trials. Today’s Therapeutic Trends 2000; 18: 205

    Google Scholar 

  18. Culley CM, Lacy MK, Klutman N, et al. Moxifloxacin: clinical efficacy and safety. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2001; 58: 379–88

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Iannini PB, Kubin R, Reiter C, et al. Reassuring safety profile of moxifloxacin. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32: 1112–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Iannini PB, Mandell LA. An updated safety profile of moxifloxacin. J Chemother 2002; 14Suppl. 2: 29–34

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Carbon C. Comparison of side effects of levofloxacin versus other fluoroquinolones. Chemotherapy 2001; 47Suppl. 3: 9–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Gantz NM. Quinolones: their uses in geriatric infections. Geriatrics 1988; 43: 41–44, 47

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Heyd A, Haverstock D. Retrospective analysis of the safety profile of oral and intravenous ciprofloxacin in a geriatric population. Clin Ther 2000; 22: 1239–50

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Fostini R, Girelli M, Dalle Vedove P, et al. Safety profile of ofloxacin in elderly patients. Drugs Exp Clin Res 1988; 14: 393–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. File Jr TM, Tan JS. The use of oral fluoroquinolones in nursing home patients. Drugs Aging 1992; 2: 310–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. McCue JD. Rationale for the use of oral fluoroquinolones as empiric treatment of nursing home infections. Arch Fam Med 1994; 3: 157–64

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Bertino Jr J, Fish D. The safety profile of the fluoroquinolones. Clin Ther 2000; 22: 798–817

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Nicolle LE. Quinolones in the aged. Drugs 1999; 58Suppl. 2: 49–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The data presented in this manuscript was presented at the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, San Diego, California, US (September 2002). This work was supported by a research grant from Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corporation, West Haven, Connecticut, US. We thank Brian G. Shearer, PhD and Teresa Tartaglione, PharmD for editorial contributions.

Daniel C. Haverstock and Shurjeel H. Choudhri are employed by Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Vincent T. Andriole has no conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Andriole, V.T., Haverstock, D.C. & Choudhri, S.H. Retrospective Analysis of the Safety Profile of Oral Moxifloxacin in Elderly Patients Enrolled in Clinical Trials. Drug-Safety 28, 443–452 (2005). https://doi.org/10.2165/00002018-200528050-00007

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00002018-200528050-00007

Keywords

Navigation