Evidence Hub

Exploratory pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic range of tigecycline for balancing treatment effect and safety in hospital-acquired pneumonia: a retrospective cohort study

Ya-Ting Lu, Ru-Hua Wei, Ming-Wei Meng, Wen Cao, Zheng Huang, Bo-Ren Li, Xiao-Bu Lan, Kai Mo et al.

Frontiers in Pharmacology, 2026

100 participants

Abstract

Tigecycline (TGC) is a core antibiotic for treating hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria, but the absence of individualized dosing guidance that balances treatment effect and safety frequently results in suboptimal efficacy or coagulation-related adverse events in clinical practice.

A single-center retrospective study was conducted, enrolling 100 patients with MDR-HAP who were assigned to a standard-dose group or a high-dose group based on clinical decisions. The efficacy and safety of different TGC dosing regimens were compared between the two groups.

The trough concentration (C

min

), intermediate concentration (C

1/2

), and peak concentration (C

max

), the estimated ratio of the area under the concentration-time curve to the 24h of dosing/minimum inhibitory concentration (eAUIC), pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target attainment rate, clinical response rate and overall favorable outcome rate in the high-dose group were significantly higher than those in the standard group (

p

< 0.05). The incidence of thrombocytopenia was significantly higher in the high-dose group (36.67% vs. 17.14%,

p

= 0.034), whereas the incidence of hypofibrinogenemia was numerically higher but did not reach statistical significance (40.0% vs. 30.0%,

p

= 0.330). No significant between-group differences were observed in microbiological eradication rate, median survival time, 30-day all-cause mortality, coagulation parameters, gastrointestinal…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 100 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free