Literature DB >> 18684703

Efficacy and safety of tigecycline compared with vancomycin or linezolid for treatment of serious infections with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus or vancomycin-resistant enterococci: a Phase 3, multicentre, double-blind, randomized study.

I Florescu1, M Beuran, R Dimov, A Razbadauskas, M Bochan, G Fichev, G Dukart, T Babinchak, C A Cooper, E J Ellis-Grosse, N Dartois, H Gandjini.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are causing serious nosocomial infections. Tigecycline was evaluated in hospitalized patients with MRSA or VRE infection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomized (3:1), double-blind, multicentre, Phase 3 study compared the safety and efficacy of tigecycline with vancomycin or linezolid in hospitalized patients with MRSA or VRE infection, respectively. Patients were treated for 7-28 days and the test-of-cure (TOC) assessment was made 12-37 days after the last dose. The primary efficacy endpoint was the clinical response (cure, failure and indeterminate) in the co-primary, microbiologically evaluable (ME) and microbiologically modified intent-to-treat (m-mITT) populations at the TOC assessment.
RESULTS: For MRSA infection, clinical cure rates in the ME population (n = 117) were 81.4% (70 of 86 patients) with tigecycline and 83.9% (26 of 31 patients) with vancomycin. In the m-mITT population (n = 133), clinical cure occurred in 75 of 100 tigecycline-treated patients (75.0%) and in 27 of 33 vancomycin-treated patients (81.8%). In patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by MRSA, cure rates were similar with tigecycline or vancomycin (86.4% versus 86.9% in ME population; and 78.6% versus 87.0% in m-mITT population). In patients with MRSA infection, nausea or vomiting occurred more frequently with tigecycline than with vancomycin (41.0% versus 17.9%); most cases were mild, with only three patients discontinuing treatment. In patients with VRE (total enrollment, 15), 3 of 3 and 3 of 8 patients in the ME and m-mITT populations, respectively, were cured by tigecycline, compared with 2 of 3 patients in the ME and m-mITT populations treated with linezolid.
CONCLUSIONS: Tigecycline is safe and effective in hospitalized patients with serious infection caused by MRSA. There were too few cases of VRE to draw any conclusions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18684703     DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkn250

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother        ISSN: 0305-7453            Impact factor:   5.790


  35 in total

1.  Tissue penetration and pharmacokinetics of tigecycline in diabetic patients with chronic wound infections described by using in vivo microdialysis.

Authors:  Catharine C Bulik; Dora E Wiskirchen; Ashley Shepard; Christina A Sutherland; Joseph L Kuti; David P Nicolau
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2010-10-04       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 2.  Colonization, pathogenicity, host susceptibility, and therapeutics for Staphylococcus aureus: what is the clinical relevance?

Authors:  Steven Y C Tong; Luke F Chen; Vance G Fowler
Journal:  Semin Immunopathol       Date:  2011-12-11       Impact factor: 9.623

3.  Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of vancomycin for the treatment of patients with gram-positive infections: focus on the study design.

Authors:  Konstantinos Z Vardakas; Michael N Mavros; Nikolaos Roussos; Matthew E Falagas
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 7.616

Review 4.  Risk of hepatic events in patients treated with vancomycin in clinical studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yan Chen; Xiao Yan Yang; Michael Zeckel; Chris Killian; Kenneth Hornbuckle; Arie Regev; Simon Voss
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2011-01-01       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 5.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of tigecycline for treatment of infectious disease.

Authors:  Yun Cai; Rui Wang; Beibei Liang; Nan Bai; Youning Liu
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2010-12-20       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 6.  MRSA: treating people with infection.

Authors:  Nikolas Rae; Anna Jarchow-MacDonald; Dilip Nathwani; Charis Ann Marwick
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2016-02-16

Review 7.  MRSA: treating people with infection.

Authors:  Dilip Nathwani; Peter Garnet Davey; Charis Ann Marwick
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2010-10-28

8.  Clarification to the systematic review and meta-analysis involving tigecycline.

Authors:  Paul McGovern; Timothy Babinchak; Alvaro Quintana
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 9.  The Enterococcus: a Model of Adaptability to Its Environment.

Authors:  Mónica García-Solache; Louis B Rice
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2019-01-30       Impact factor: 26.132

Review 10.  Newer antibacterial drugs for a new century.

Authors:  Gina Devasahayam; William M Scheld; Paul S Hoffman
Journal:  Expert Opin Investig Drugs       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 6.206

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.