Evidence Hub

Update on the Cardiac Safety of Moxifloxacin

Wilhelm Haverkamp, Frank Kruesmann, Anna Fritsch, David Friedrich Van Veenhuyzen, Pierre Arvis

Current Drug Safety, 2012

28,144 participants · 45 citations

Abstract

Cardiac safety was compared in patients receiving moxifloxacin and other antimicrobials in a large patient population from Phase II-IV randomized active-controlled clinical trials. Moxifloxacin 400 mg once-daily monotherapy was administered orally (PO) or sequentially (intravenous/oral, IV/PO). Across 64 trials, 21,298 patients received PO therapy (10,613 moxifloxacin, 10,685 comparators) while 6846 received sequential IV/PO therapy (3431 moxifloxacin, 3415 comparators). Treatment-emergent cardiac adverse event (AE) rates were similar for moxifloxacin and comparators in PO (6.6% vs 5.8%) and IV/PO (11.0% vs 12.0%) trials. Treatment-emergent cardiac adverse drug reactions were rare in PO (moxifloxacin 3.2% vs comparators 2.4%) and IV/PO (moxifloxacin 1.4% vs comparators 1.5%) patients. There were five (<0.02%) treatment-emergent drug-related deaths due to cardiac events out of 28,144 patients; one PO patient died treated with comparators, one patient died treated with IV/PO moxifloxacin, and three patients died after treatment with IV/PO comparators. Only one case of treatment-related non-fatal torsade de pointes occurred in the comparator arm. Incidence rates of cardiac AEs remained low in populations at elevated risk of cardiac events predisposed to QTc prolongation (i.e. community-acquired pneumonia patients admitted to the intensive care unit and/or mechanical ventilation, patients with documented prolongation of baseline QTc interval, women, and patients ≥ 65 years old).…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 28,144 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