AzTrials
AzTrials

Gram-negative BacteremiaBALANCE+NCT05893147

BALANCE+ Vanguard Phase

A study testing De-escalation VS No De-escalation, Oral beta-lactams VS non beta-lactams and Central vascular catheter retention VS Central vascular catheter replacement in people with Gram-negative Bacteremia, run by Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre at 10 sites in Canada.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The goal of the BALANCE+ clinical trial is to transform random care to randomized care for patients with Gram negative bloodstream infections to inform best treatment approaches and optimize outcomes. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Any age
Conditions the study is for
Gram-negative Bacteremia
What is being tested?
De-escalation VS No De-escalation, Oral beta-lactams VS non beta-lactams and Central vascular catheter retention VS Central vascular catheter replacement
Type of treatment
Pill or oral medicine
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
174 participants
Where
10 sitesCanada
Study dates
26 Aug 2023to 10 Aug 2024
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages Any age
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • 1. included in BALANCE+ platform
  • included in BALANCE+ platform
  • initially treated with intravenous antibiotics, but clinical team transitioning patient to oral/enteral antibiotic within 7 days of starting treatment
  • included in BALANCE+ platform
  • has an indwelling central vascular catheter that was already in place within the 48-hour period before the onset of bloodstream infection (i.e. is not a new catheter placed within 48 hours of the onset of infection)
  • included in BALANCE+ platform
Show all 13Show fewer
  • positive blood culture with GN bacterium, of the following species
  • Serratia spp.
  • Morganella spp.
  • Providencia spp.
  • Proteus spp. other than P.mirabilis
  • organism is sensitive to ceftriaxone
  • 1. included in BALANCE+ platform

Who cannot join

  • receiving an empiric antibiotic regimen at the time of blood culture finalization to which the GN pathogen(s) are not sensitive
  • carbapenem-resistance (so that patients will not need to remain on reserve-use agents)
  • no de-escalation option due to any or all of
  • resistance ii. allergies iii. medical contraindications iv. drug-interaction risk v. other relevant reason
  • patients with a suspected or proven polymicrobial source of infection
  • BETA-LACTAM VS. NON-BETA-LACTAM ORAL/ENTERAL TREATMENT DOMAIN
Show all 29Show fewer
  • enrolled in an arm of another BALANCE+ platform domain which limits the use of oral/enteral therapy
  • no-de-escalation arm
  • no non-beta-lactam options due to any or all of
  • resistance ii. allergies iii. medical contraindications iv. drug-interaction risk v. other relevant reason
  • no beta-lactam options due to any or all of
  • resistance ii. allergies iii. medical contraindications iv. drug-drug interaction risk v. other relevant reason
  • CENTRAL VASCULAR CATHETER REPLACEMENT DOMAIN
  • patient has no ongoing need for a central vascular catheter
  • patient has definite indication for central vascular catheter removal
  • ongoing septic shock with definite/probable line source
  • concomitant S. aureus bacteremia
  • concomitant candidemia
  • local suppurative signs (severe redness, warmth, pain, swelling or fluctuance/collection) necessitating catheter removal, or other clinical evidence of infected line (e.g. imaging/echocardiographic findings)
  • definite alternative source of GN BSI
  • LOW-RISK AmpC DOMAIN
  • severe allergy to beta-lactams (eg, type 4 hypersensitivity reaction or DRESS)
  • baseline phenotypic resistance to ceftriaxone
  • FOLLOW UP BLOOD CULTURE DOMAIN
  • patient already discharged home prior to day 4
  • definite indication for repeat blood culture testing
  • concomitant Staph. aureus bacteremia
  • concomitant Candidemia
  • clinical suspicion for infective endocarditis (e.g., presence of prosthetic valve, implantable cardiac device)

Trial locations and contacts

10 sites in 1 country.

10 sites in 1 country

Canada10 sites
  • Foothills Hospital

    Calgary, Alberta

  • Peter Lougheed Centre

    Calgary, Alberta

  • The Ottawa Hospital

    Ottawa, Ontario

  • Niagara Health System

    St. Catharines, Ontario

  • Eastern Regional Health Authority

    St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador

  • Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre

    Toronto, Ontario, M4N3M5

  • Michael Garron Hospital

    Toronto, Ontario

  • Mount Sinai Hospital

    Toronto, Ontario

  • North York General Hospital

    Toronto, Ontario

  • University Health Network

    Toronto, Ontario

Other trials in Canada

About this study

Official title: BALANCE+: A Platform Trial for Gram Negative Bloodstream Infections

The goal of the BALANCE+ clinical trial is to transform random care to randomized care for patients with Gram negative bloodstream infections to inform best treatment approaches and optimize outcomes.

BALANCE+, a perpetual platform trial, will efficiently answer multiple questions that are important for hospitalized patients with Gram negative bloodstream infections.

Read the detailed description

Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are common and lethal, ranking among the top 7 causes of death, with 600,000 cases and 90,000 deaths per year in North America, and 1.2 Million cases and 150,000 deaths per year in Europe. Despite being a leading cause of death worldwide, bloodstream infections remain understudied. Treatment approaches are complicated by rising rates of antimicrobial resistance and declining new drug development.

BALANCE+ provides a platform upon which to answer multiple pressing cross-cutting questions for patients with Gram negative bloodstream infections, including the concept of de-escalating antibiotic spectrum, optimal transition to oral antibiotics, and the role for routine follow up blood culture testing. The trial will also include a syndrome-specific question of whether to remove or retain a central vascular catheter, and a pathogen-specific question of whether cephalosporins are sufficient for patients with low-risk AmpC organisms. As each question is answered, optimal therapies will be adopted into usual care, and new questions will be introduced into the platform of the trial. The evidence generated by BALANCE+ will improve cure for this vulnerable patient population.

Being tested
De-escalation VS No De-escalation, Oral beta-lactams VS non beta-lactams, Central vascular catheter retention VS Central vascular catheter replacement, Cephalosporin VS Carbapenem for low risk AmpC organisms, Routine follow-up blood culture VS No routine follow-up blood culture

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • De-escalation VS No De-escalationOther

    No de-escalation group: continue to receive the same antibiotic that was started initially (as long as it is confirmed to be effective based on the blood culture sensitivity result)

    De-escalation group: switched to narrower spectrum antibiotic.

  • Oral beta-lactams VS non beta-lactamsOther

    Beta-lactam antibiotic: This can be ciprofloxacin, moxifloxacin, levofloxacin or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole.

    Non beta-lactam antibiotic: This can be, but not limited to, amoxicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanate, cephalexin, cefadroxil, or cefixime.

  • Central vascular catheter retention VS Central vascular catheter replacementOther

    Central vascular catheter replacement: the catheter will be changed by the treating team as soon as possible and within a maximum of 72 hours from blood culture finalization

    Central vascular catheter retention: the catheter will not be changed and will be retained until it is no longer needed.

  • Cephalosporin VS Carbapenem for low risk AmpC organismsOther

    Cephalosporin (ceftriaxone) at standard doses

    Carbapenem (like Meropenem, Ertapenem etc) at standard doses

  • Routine follow-up blood culture VS No routine follow-up blood cultureOther

    Routine follow-up blood culture: routine repeat blood collection 4 days from the index blood collection with positive bacteria.

    No follow-up blood culture: no routine repeat blood collection 4 days from the index blood collection with positive bacteria

Study groups in NCT05893147
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
De-escalation VS No De-escalationActive comparatorNot described
Receives: Other: De-escalation VS No De-escalation
Oral beta-lactams VS Oral Non-beta-lactamsActive comparatorNot described
Receives: Other: Oral beta-lactams VS non beta-lactams
Central vascular catheter retention VS Central vascular catheter replacementActive comparatorNot described
Receives: Other: Central vascular catheter retention VS Central vascular catheter replacement
Cephalosporin VS Carbapenem for low risk AmpC organismsActive comparatorNot described
Receives: Other: Cephalosporin VS Carbapenem for low risk AmpC organisms
Routine follow-up blood culture VS No routine follow-up blood cultureActive comparatorNot described
Receives: Other: Routine follow-up blood culture VS No routine follow-up blood culture

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Recruitment rate (co-primary outcomes of BALANCE+ vanguard phase)

    Recruitment rate will be measured as the number of patients randomized to each study domain, overall, and by individual participating site. Investigators will target a minimum overall recruitment rate of 1 patient/site/month in the de-escalation domain, beta-lactam versus non-beta-lactam stepdown domain, and FUBC domain; and 0.25 patients/site/month in the line replacement domain.

    Measured: 1 year

  2. Protocol adherence (co-primary outcomes of BALANCE+ vanguard phase)

    Protocol adherence will be calculated differently depending on the domain, but in each case will require adherence to the specific intervention arm and complete follow-up for the primary outcome. Investigators will target ≥90% adherence in each arm of each domain.

    Measured: 1 year

  3. De-escalation versus no de-escalation domain

    • Patient-centered, ordinal Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) outcome: (dead at 90 days) < (alive at 90 days with reinfection and readmission) < (alive at 90 days with reinfection or readmission) < (alive at 90 days with neither reinfection nor readmission)
    • Tie-breaker within ordinal levels: new antimicrobial resistance (AMR) colonization or infection from routine cultures

    Measured: 90 days

  4. Oral beta-lactam versus non beta-lactam domain

    • Ordinal DOOR outcome: (dead at 90 days) < (alive at 90 days with reinfection and readmission) < (alive at 90 days with reinfection or readmission) < (alive at 90 days with neither reinfection nor readmission)
    • Tie-breaker within ordinal levels: new AMR colonization or infection from routine cultures

    Measured: 90 days

  5. Central vascular catheter retention versus replacement domain

    • Ordinal DOOR outcome: (dead at 90 days) < (alive at 90 days with reinfection and readmission) < (alive at 90 days with reinfection or readmission) < (alive at 90 days with neither reinfection nor readmission)
    • No tie-breaker

    Measured: 90 days

  6. Low-risk AmpC domain

    • Ordinal DOOR outcome: (dead at 90 days) < (alive at 90 days with reinfection and readmission) < (alive at 90 days with reinfection or readmission) < (alive at 90 days with neither reinfection nor readmission)
    • Tie-breaker within ordinal levels: new AMR colonization or infection from routine cultures

    Measured: 90 days

  7. Follow-up blood culture domain

    • Ordinal DOOR outcome: (dead at 90 days) < (alive at 90 days with reinfection and readmission) < (alive at 90 days with reinfection or readmission) < (alive at 90 days with neither reinfection nor readmission)
    • No tie-breaker

    Measured: 90 days

Secondary outcomes (7)
  1. 90-day mortality

    Measured: 90 days

  2. 90-day reinfection

    Measured: 90 days

  3. 90-day all cause readmission

    Measured: 90 days

  4. 90-day AMR colonization/infection

    Measured: 90 days

  5. 90-day Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI)

    Measured: 90 days

  6. 30-day mortality

    Measured: 30 days

  7. 60-day mortality

    Measured: 60 days

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted7 Jun 2023
  2. Study start26 Aug 2023
  3. Primary completion23 Jul 2024
  4. Study completion10 Aug 2024

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Model description
72 in the overall platform AND at least 12 in each domain.
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
174 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT05893147
Sponsor's protocol ID
4369
Acronym
BALANCE+
Status last verified
Sep 2024
First submitted
18 May 2023
Last updated
1 Oct 2024
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Daneman N, Johnstone J, Lee TC, MacFadden DR, McDonald EG, Morpeth SC, Ong SWX, Paterson DL, Pinto RL, Rishu A, Rogers BA, Yahav D, Coburn B, Daley P, Das P, Fiest K, Findlater A, Fralick M, George M, Kandel C, Malavade A, Powis J, Somayaji R, Fowler R; BALANCE+ Investigators, and the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada Clinical Research Network and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. Assessing the feasibility of a platform trial for Gram negative bloodstream infections: results from the vanguard phase of BALANCE. BMJ Open. 2025 Dec 5;15(12):e101588. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2025-101588.

    PubMed 41360461

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing De-escalation VS No De-escalation, Oral beta-lactams VS non beta-lactams and Central vascular catheter retention VS Central vascular catheter replacement in people with Gram-negative Bacteremia, run by Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre at 10 sites in Canada.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 13 inclusion and 29 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 1 Oct 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 10 sites in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Recruitment rate (co-primary outcomes of BALANCE+ vanguard phase) (time frame: 1 year). The study lists 7 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05893147, which also lists 1 linked publication.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 1 Oct 2024.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in