Evidence Hub

Supplementary data: Lefamulin versus omadacycline for community acquired bacterial pneumonia: a systematic review and anchored indirect treatment comparison using moxifloxacin as the common comparator

Meiyu Wu, Sheng Han, Hongchao Li

Figshare, 2026

2,063 participants

Abstract

These are peer-reviewed supplementary materials for the article 'Lefamulin versus omadacycline for community acquired bacterial pneumonia: a systematic review and anchored indirect treatment comparison using moxifloxacin as the common comparator' published in the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness ResearchTable S1: Literature search strategyTable S2: PICOS criteriaTable S3: Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria and Outcome Definitions Across TrialsAim: Community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, particularly among elderly and susceptible populations. Escalating antimicrobial resistance among prevalent CABP pathogens in China, combined with safety limitations of existing regimens, underscores the urgent need for novel therapeutic strategies. Lefamulin (LEF) and omadacycline (OMA), recently approved in mainland China, offer promising alternatives, but direct comparative evidence is lacking. This study aims to indirectly compare the clinical efficacy and safety outcomes of LEF versus OMA in the treatment of CABP and to explore subgroup differences in high-risk populations. Materials & methods: A systematic literature review was conducted across PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception through March 2024, limited to English-language studies, to identify phase III randomized controlled trials evaluating LEF or OMA in adults with CABP. The Bucher method was used for the indirect comparison,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 2,063 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