Integrated results of 2 phase 3 studies comparing tigecycline and levofloxacin in community-acquired pneumonia

Tanaseanu C, Bergallo C, Teglia O, Jasovich A, Oliva ME, Dukart G, Dartois N, Cooper CA et al.

Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, 2008

403 participants · 114 citations

Abstract

Tigecycline (TGC), a glycylcycline, has expanded activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative, anaerobic, and atypical bacteria. Two phase 3 studies were conducted. Hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) were randomized to intravenous (IV) TGC (100 mg followed by 50 mg bid) or IV levofloxacin (LEV) (500 mg bid). In 1 study, patients could be switched to oral LEV after at least 3 days intravenously. The coprimary efficacy end points were as follows: clinical response in clinically evaluable (CE) and clinical modified intent-to-treat (c-mITT) populations at test-of-cure (TOC). The secondary end points were as follows: microbiologic efficacy and susceptibility to TGC for CAP bacteria. Safety evaluations were included. Eight hundred ninety-one were patients screened: 846 mITT (TGC 424, LEV 422), 574 CE (TGC 282, LEV 292). Most patients had Fine Pneumonia Severity Index II to IV (80.7% TGC, 74.4% LEV, mITT). At TOC (CE), TGC cured 253/282 patients (89.7%) and LEV cured 252/292 patients (86.3%); the absolute difference of TGC-LEV was 3.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.2 to 9.1, noninferior [P < 0.001]). In c-mITT, TGC cured 319/394 patients (81.0%) and LEV cured 321/403 patients (79.7%); the absolute difference of TGC-LEV was 1.3% (95% CI -4.5 to 7.1, noninferior [P < 0.001]). The drug-related adverse events (AEs) of nausea (20.8% TGC versus 6.6% LEV) and vomiting (13.2% TGC versus 3.3% LEV) were significantly higher in TGC; elevated alanine…

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: 403 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

• DOI
• PubMed
• Publisher page

Related studies

• Severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19 associated with proton pump inhibitors: a nationwide cohort study with propensity score matching Gut, 2020
• Thiophenes—Naturally Occurring Plant Metabolites: Biological Activities and In Silico Evaluation of Their Potential as Cathepsin D Inhibitors Plants, 2022
• Inhalable Mannosylated Rifampicin–Curcumin Co-Loaded Nanomicelles with Enhanced In Vitro Antimicrobial Efficacy for an Optimized Pulmonary Tuberculosis Therapy Pharmaceutics, 2022
• Association between cord blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations and respiratory tract infections in the first 6 months of age in a Korean population: a birth cohort study (COCOA) Korean Journal of Pediatrics, 2013
• GC-MS Analysis and Biomedical Therapy of Oil from n-Hexane Fraction of Scutellaria edelbergii Rech. f.: In Vitro, In Vivo, and In Silico Approach Molecules, 2021
• Novel Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Parameters Quantify the Exposure–Effect Relationship of Levofloxacin against Fluoroquinolone-Resistant Escherichia coli Antibiotics, 2021

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