Skip to main content

A randomized controlled trial evaluating a novel individualized treatment strategy for carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria infections

Journal
International journal of antimicrobial agents (Q1)
Published
17 September 2026
Study design
Randomized controlled trial
Evidence level
Level 1, High (CEBM 1b)
Authors
Jocelyn Qi-Min Teo, Zhi Wei Ong, Ying Ying Ong, Kai Chee Hung, Winnie Lee, Shimin Jasmine Chung, et al.
PMID
42753831
DOI
10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2026.108011

Why clinicians should know about it

  • Picked for Microbiology (medical) (paper of the day, 18 September 2026): iACT‑guided therapy trial for carbapenem‑resistant infections

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the impact of in vitro antibiotic combination testing (iACT)-guided therapy compared to standard therapy on carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative infections. METHODS: In this two-centre, open-label randomized trial, patients were randomized 1:1 to iACT-guided or standard therapy. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Exploratory analyses compared patients who received iACT-matched therapy with those who did not, irrespective of randomized assignment. FINDINGS: 102 patients were randomized and 98 included in the ITT analysis (49 per arm). The study was discontinued early due to substantial crossover: 31 (63%) patients assigned to the control arm switched to iACT-guided therapy at physician request due to anticipated intolerance to standard therapy. The 30-day mortality was 33% in both groups (difference 0%; 95% CI -18 to 18). Drug-related adverse events were 37% (iACT arm) versus 27% (control arm). Exploratory analysis showed that receipt of iACT-matched therapy (n=91) was associated with a larger absolute risk difference for 30-day all-cause mortality (difference -42%; 95% CI, -64 to -5) compared to the non-matched arm (n=7) but should be interpreted with caution due to the imbalanced groups and other confounding risks. CONCLUSIONS: Accrual in this trial was poor due to physicians' preference to adopt iACT-guided therapy. Randomized comparisons showed no mortality benefit, which was affected by significant treatment crossover. While exploratory analysis suggests potential utility of iACT-guided therapy for CRGNB infections, the findings is at most hypothesis-generating and needs to be validated with further investigations.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.

View on PubMedFull text at the publisherOpen in the app

For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.