cefprozil
Sources réglementaires consultées
Indications approuvées
- Infections sensibles légères à modérées des voies respiratoires supérieures et inférieures et de la peau.
Contre-indications
Absolues
- Hypersensibilité au cefprozil ou aux céphalosporines.
Mises en garde cliniques
- Mise en garde majeure · Il peut provoquer une hypersensibilité sévère ou une anaphylaxie. Rechercher tout antécédent de réaction immédiate aux bêta-lactamines avant l’emploi et arrêter en cas de réaction allergique. — FDA, set_id 14527f4a-ce99-449d-a5a5-9edd7fb28dee
- Mise en garde majeure · Il peut provoquer une diarrhée associée à Clostridioides difficile pendant ou après le traitement ; évaluer toute diarrhée importante et éviter les antipéristaltiques si une colite est suspectée. — FDA, set_id 14527f4a-ce99-449d-a5a5-9edd7fb28dee
Interactions médicamenteuses
- ModéréeProbénécide
Mécanisme: Il réduit la sécrétion tubulaire rénale et peut augmenter et prolonger l’exposition à l’antibiotique.
Recommandation: Éviter l’association sauf indication délibérée et surveiller la toxicité.
FDA, set_id 14527f4a-ce99-449d-a5a5-9edd7fb28dee
- SévèreAminosides et autres médicaments néphrotoxiques
Mécanisme: L’association peut augmenter la néphrotoxicité.
Recommandation: Éviter l’association si possible et surveiller la fonction rénale.
FDA, set_id 14527f4a-ce99-449d-a5a5-9edd7fb28dee
Effets indésirables
Communs (≥1%)
Nausées, diarrhée et éruption cutanée
Rares mais graves
Anaphylaxie, colite à C. difficile et cytopénies sévères
Grossesse et allaitement
Utiliser pendant la grossesse uniquement en cas d’indication claire. De faibles quantités passent dans le lait ; surveiller diarrhée, candidose ou sensibilisation chez le nourrisson et réévaluer la poursuite selon le produit.
Bibliographie récente (PubMed)
This study aimed to assess the bioequivalence of 2 cefprozil dispersible tablet formulations (250 mg) in healthy Chinese volunteers under fasting and fed conditions and to determine the pharmacokinetics of cefprozil. A randomized, single-dose, open-label, 2-formulation, 2-period study was conducted. The elimination period for this study was 7 days. Forty-eight healthy volunteers received 250-mg cefprozil dispersible tablets in each study period under both test and reference conditions. The test and the reference cefprozil were bioequivalent in healthy Chinese volunteers, and there was no significant food effect in individuals receiving either formulation. No serious adverse event was recorded, and no volunteers withdrew from the study.
Penicillin remains the first-line therapy for group A streptococcal (GAS) pharyngitis. However, broad-spectrum antibiotics continue to be widely prescribed in clinical practice. This study aimed to evaluate the relative efficacy and safety profiles of antibiotics for GAS pharyngitis. Literature published through March 2026 was searched. Efficacy outcomes included early and late bacterial eradication, clinical response, and bacteriological recurrence, whereas safety was assessed according to adverse events. Per-protocol data were extracted, and a Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We identified 64 RCTs (23,287 participants). For early bacterial eradication, cefdinir (OR: 3.09; 95% CI: 1.60-6.01) and cefpodoxime proxetil (OR: 2.58; 95% CI: 1.07-6.17) demonstrated greater efficacy compared with penicillin V, whereas azithromycin showed inferior eradication rates than penicillin V (OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.32-0.90). For late bacterial eradication, cefprozil demonstrated greater efficacy compared with penicillin V (OR: 3.12; 95% CI: 1.03-11.25), whereas azithromycin exhibited suboptimal performance (OR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.25-0.62). For early clinical response, cefdinir (OR: 2.01; 95% CI: 1.28-3.25) and cefuroxime axetil (OR: 2.14; 95% CI: 1.19-3.60) demonstrated significantly greater efficacy compared with penicillin V. For late clinical response, spiramycin showed superior efficacy to penicillin V (OR: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.02-0.94), although evidence was limited to a single small trial. Azithromycin was associated with reduced efficacy, higher late recurrence rates, and increased adverse events. Standard penicillins should remain the preferred first-line therapy for GAS pharyngitis to support antimicrobial stewardship. Cefdinir represents an effective alternative. Conversely, azithromycin should be avoided due to inferior efficacy and increased adverse risks. http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, ident