Cited by 163Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityFungal Infections and StudiesFungal Plant Pathogen Control

Rezafungin versus caspofungin in a phase 2, randomized, double-blind study for the treatment of candidemia and invasive candidiasis: the STRIVE Trial

Open access
Thompson, George R, Soriano, Alex, Skoutelis, Athanasios, Vazquez, Jose A, Honore, Patrick M, Horcajada, Juan P, Spapen, Herbert, Bassetti, Matteo +5 more·2021·Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract

Background: Rezafungin (RZF) is a novel echinocandin exhibiting distinctive pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics. STRIVE was a phase 2, double-blind, randomized trial designed to compare the safety and efficacy of RZF once weekly (QWk) to caspofungin (CAS) once daily for treatment of candidemia and/or invasive candidiasis (IC). Methods: Adults with systemic signs and mycological confirmation of candidemia and/or IC were randomized to RZF 400 mg QWk (400 mg), RZF 400 mg on week 1 then 200 mg QWk (400/200 mg), or CAS 70 mg as a loading dose followed by 50 mg daily for ≤4 weeks. Efficacy assessments included overall cure (resolution of signs of candidemia/IC + mycological eradication) at day 14 (primary endpoint), investigator-assessed clinical response at day 14, and 30-day all-cause mortality (ACM) (secondary endpoints), and time to negative blood culture. Safety was evaluated by adverse events and ACM through follow-up. Results: Of 207 patients enrolled, 183 were in the microbiological intent-to-treat population (~21% IC). Overall cure rates were 60.5% (46/76) for RZF 400 mg, 76.1% (35/46) for RZF 400/200 mg, and 67.2% (41/61) for CAS; investigator-assessed clinical cure rates were 69.7% (53/76), 80.4% (37/46), and 70.5% (43/61), respectively. In total, 30-day ACM was 15.8% for RZF 400 mg, 4.4% for RZF 400/200 mg, and 13.1% for CAS. Candidemia was cleared in 19.5 and 22.8 hours in RZF and CAS patients, respectively. No concerning safety trends were observed; ACM through follow-up was 15.2% (21/138) for RZF and 18.8% (13/69) for CAS. Conclusions: RZF was safe and efficacious in the treatment of candidemia and/or IC. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02734862

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/cid/ciaa1380

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thompson, G. R., Soriano, A., Skoutelis, A., Vazquez, J. A., Honore, P. M., Horcajada, J. P., Spapen, H., Bassetti, M., Ostrosky-Zeichner, L., Das, A. F., Viani, R. M., Sandison, T., & Pappas, P. G.
Affiliations
  • University of California Davis Medical Center (US)
  • Department of Infectious Diseases, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, IDIBAPS, University of Barcelona, Spain
  • Evangelismos Hospital (GR)
  • Department of Medicine/Division of Infectious Disease, Medical College of Georgia/Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, USA
  • Department of Intensive Care, Brugmann University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium
  • Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)
  • Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (BE)
  • Ospedale Policlinico San Martino (IT)
  • Division of Infectious Diseases, McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas, USA
  • AD Stat Consulting, Guerneville, California, USA
  • Cidara Therapeutics (United States) (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
Corresponding author
Thompson, George R
Venue
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Published
2020-09-21
Volume
73
Issue
11
Pages
e3647-e3655
ISSN
  • 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-6591
OpenAlex
W3087075670
Cited by
163
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 2
FWCI
2.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Infectious Diseases (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Repositori digital de la UPF (Universitat Pompeu Fabra) (submittedVersion)
  • VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Cidara Therapeutics, Inc
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Fungal Infections and Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
Keywords
rezafungin, caspofungin, candidemia, invasive candidiasis, echinocandins, antifungal treatment efficacy, all-cause mortality, STRIVE trial, dose comparison, adverse events, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, weekly dosing
MeSH terms
Caspofungin, Adult, Antifungal Agents, Double-Blind Method, Humans, Treatment Outcome, Echinocandins, Candidiasis, Invasive, Candidemia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review