Evidence Hub

Efficacy of delafloxacin versus moxifloxacin against atypical bacterial respiratory pathogens in adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP): data from the delafloxacin phase 3 CABP trial

S. McCurdy, Ashley Nenninger, A. Sheets, Kara Keedy, L. Lawrence, M. Quintas, S. Cammarata

International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2020

520 participants · 12 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To report atypical pathogens from clinical trial data comparing delafloxacin to moxifloxacin in the treatment of adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP).

METHODS: Multiple diagnostic methods were employed to diagnose atypical infections including culture, serology, and urinary antigen.

RESULTS: The microbiological intent-to-treat (MITT) population included 520 patients; 30% had an atypical bacterial pathogen identified (156/520). Overall, 13.1% (68/520) had a monomicrobial atypical infection and 2.3% (12/520) had polymicrobial all-atypical infections. Among patients with polymicrobial infections, Streptococcus pneumoniae was the most frequently occurring co-infecting organism and Chlamydia pneumoniae was the most frequently occurring co-infecting atypical organism. For Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Legionella pneumophila, serology yielded the highest number of diagnoses. Delafloxacin and moxifloxacin had similar in vitro activity against M. pneumoniae and delafloxacin had greater activity against L. pneumophila. Two macrolide-resistant M. pneumoniae isolates were recovered. No fluoroquinolone-resistant M. pneumoniae were isolated. The rates of microbiological success (documented or presumed eradication) at test-of-cure were similar between the delafloxacin and moxifloxacin groups. There was no evidence of a correlation between minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and outcome; a high proportion of favorable outcomes was observed across all…

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: 520 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