Literature DB >> 11451697

Once-daily oral gatifloxacin versus oral levofloxacin in treatment of uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections: double-blind, multicenter, randomized study.

G A Tarshis1, B M Miskin, T M Jones, J Champlin, K J Wingert, J D Breen, M J Brown.   

Abstract

This was a double-blind, multicenter study in which 410 adults (> or =18 years of age) with uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) were randomized to receive either 400 mg of gatifloxacin orally once daily or 500 mg of levofloxacin orally once daily for 7 to 10 days. The study protocol called for four assessments-before and during treatment, at the end of treatment, and posttreatment. Efficacy evaluations included clinical response and bacterial eradication rates. Of 407 treated patients, 202 (108 women, 94 men) received gatifloxacin and 205 (111 women, 94 men) received levofloxacin. For clinically evaluable patients, the cure rates were 91% for gatifloxacin and 84% for levofloxacin (95% confidence interval [CI] for the difference, -2.0 to 15.2%). Clinical cure rates for microbiologically evaluable patients were 93% for gatifloxacin and 88% for levofloxacin (95% CI for the difference, -6.5 to 16.8%). The bacterial eradication rate was 92% for each group, with gatifloxacin eradicating 93% of the methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus isolates and levofloxacin eradicating 91% of them. Both drugs were well tolerated. Most of the adverse events were mild to moderate, and nausea was the most common adverse event in each treatment arm. Once-daily oral gatifloxacin (400 mg) is clinically efficacious and well tolerated compared with once-daily levofloxacin (500 mg) for the treatment of patients with uncomplicated SSTIs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11451697      PMCID: PMC90654          DOI: 10.1128/AAC.45.8.2358-2362.2001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother        ISSN: 0066-4804            Impact factor:   5.191


  26 in total

1.  Impairment of phagocytic cell respiratory burst by UVA in the presence of fluoroquinolones: an oxygen-dependent phototoxic damage to cell surface microvilli.

Authors:  A R Saniabadi; K Wada; K Umemura; S Sakuma; M Nakashima
Journal:  J Photochem Photobiol B       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 6.252

Review 2.  Tolerability of fluoroquinolone antibiotics. Past, present and future.

Authors:  P Ball; G Tillotson
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 3.  Possible role for the new fluoroquinolones (levofloxacin, grepafloxacin, trovafloxacin, clinafloxacin, sparfloxacin, and DU-6859a) in the treatment of anaerobic infections: review of current information on efficacy and safety.

Authors:  E J Goldstein
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 9.079

4.  Single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of AM-1155, a new 6-fluoro-8-methoxy quinolone, in humans.

Authors:  M Nakashima; T Uematsu; K Kosuge; H Kusajima; T Ooie; Y Masuda; R Ishida; H Uchida
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 5.  Comparative studies of cefprozil in the management of skin and soft-tissue infections.

Authors:  T Nolen
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 3.267

6.  Multicenter, randomized study comparing levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin for uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections.

Authors:  R L Nichols; J W Smith; L O Gentry; J Gezon; T Campbell; P Sokol; R R Williams
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 0.954

7.  DNA topoisomerase targets of the fluoroquinolones: a strategy for avoiding bacterial resistance.

Authors:  X Zhao; C Xu; J Domagala; K Drlica
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1997-12-09       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 8.  Comparison of cefprozil, cefpodoxime proxetil, loracarbef, cefixime, and ceftibuten.

Authors:  B S Schatz; K T Karavokiros; M A Taeubel; G S Itokazu
Journal:  Ann Pharmacother       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 3.154

9.  Ofloxacin treatment of difficult infections of the skin and skin structure.

Authors:  L O Gentry; G Rodriguez-Gomez
Journal:  Cutis       Date:  1993-01

10.  Ofloxacin versus cephalexin for treating skin and soft tissue infections.

Authors:  B A Lipsky; D R Yarbrough; F B Walker; R D Powers; M R Morman
Journal:  Int J Dermatol       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 2.736

View more
  12 in total

1.  Are Respiratory Quinolones Useful for the Treatment of Skin and Soft Tissue Infections?

Authors:  James S. Tan
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.725

Review 2.  Gatifloxacin: a review of its use in the management of bacterial infections.

Authors:  Caroline M Perry; Douglas Ormrod; Miriam Hurst; Susan V Onrust
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 3.  The impact of antibiotics on clinical response over time in uncomplicated cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Krishan Yadav; Natalia Krzyzaniak; Charlotte Alexander; Anna Mae Scott; Justin Clark; Paul Glasziou; Gerben Keijzers
Journal:  Infection       Date:  2022-05-20       Impact factor: 7.455

Review 4.  Gatifloxacin: a review of its use in the treatment of bacterial infections in the US.

Authors:  Susan J Keam; Katherine F Croom; Gillian M Keating
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 5.  A practical guide to the treatment of complicated skin and soft tissue infections.

Authors:  Horatio B Fung; Joanne Y Chang; Stephen Kuczynski
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 6.  Newer treatment options for skin and soft tissue infections.

Authors:  Murugan Raghavan; Peter K Linden
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 7.  Levofloxacin: a review of its use in the treatment of bacterial infections in the United States.

Authors:  Katherine F Croom; Karen L Goa
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 8.  Levofloxacin: an updated review of its use in the treatment of bacterial infections.

Authors:  Miriam Hurst; Harriet M Lamb; Lesley J Scott; David P Figgitt
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 9.546

9.  Is coverage of S. aureus necessary in cellulitis/erysipelas? A literature review.

Authors:  Stamatis Karakonstantis
Journal:  Infection       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 3.553

Review 10.  Interventions for cellulitis and erysipelas.

Authors:  Sally A Kilburn; Peter Featherstone; Bernie Higgins; Richard Brindle
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-06-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.