Evidence Hub

Omadacycline for treatment of acute bacterial infections: a meta-analysis of phase II/III trials

Lin F, He R, Yu B, Deng B, Ling B, Yuan M

BMC infectious diseases, 2023

2,841 participants · 9 citations

Abstract

Abstract Objective This study aims to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of omadacycline for the treatment of acute bacterial infections. Methods A search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials was conducted up to July 1, 2022. We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs), in which omadacycline and other antibiotics were evaluated for treating acute bacterial infections in adults. The primary outcomes were clinical response and microbiological response, whereas the secondary outcome was the risk of adverse events (AEs). Results A total of seven RCTs involving 2841 patients with acute bacterial infection were included. Overall, our study illustrated that the clinical cure ratio of omadacycline was similar to the comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infections (OR = 1.18, 95%CI = 0.96, 1.46, I2 = 29%). Omadacycline had a microbiological eradication rate similar to comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infections (OR = 1.02, 95%CI = 0.81, 1.29, I2 = 42%). No statistical differences were observed between omadacycline and the comparators in terms of infection caused by Staphylococcus aureus (OR = 1.14, 95%CI = 0.80, 1.63, I2 = 0%), methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA, OR = 1.28, 95%CI = 0.73, 2.24, I2 = 0%), methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA, OR = 1.12, 95%CI = 0.69, 1.81, I2 = 0%), and Enterococcus faecalis (OR = 2.47, 95%CI = 0.36, 16.97, I2 = 7%). A significant difference was found between omadacycline and the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, 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: 2,841 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