Evidence Hub

A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Comparative Study Of The Efficacy And Safety Of Tigecycline Vs Levofloxacin To Treat Subjects Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia

ClinicalTrials.gov · COMPLETED, 2005

430 participants

Abstract

To compare the efficacy and safety of tigecycline with those of levofloxacin in the treatment of subjects with CAP requiring hospitalization. The co-primary efficacy endpoints in the study will be the clinical response in the clinically evaluable population and the clinical response in the clinical modified intent-to-treat population at the TOC visit. The primary efficacy analyses will first determine whether tigecycline is noninferior to levofloxacin. If tigecycline is found to be noninferior, the analyses will determine whether tigecycline is statistically better than levofloxacin.

Conditions: Community Acquired Pneumonia, Bacterial Pneumonia, Cross Infection.

Enrollment: 430 participants.

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: 430 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