• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

一项比较两种剂量的达拉非沙星与替加环素治疗成人复杂性皮肤和皮肤结构感染的随机 2 期研究。

A randomized phase 2 study comparing two doses of delafloxacin with tigecycline in adults with complicated skin and skin-structure infections.

机构信息

eStudySite, 6367 Alvarado Court, Suite 300, San Diego, CA 92120, USA.

Artemis Research Group, 770 Washington Street, Suite 300, San Diego, CA 92103, USA.

出版信息

Int J Infect Dis. 2015 Jan;30:67-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2014.10.009. Epub 2014 Oct 30.

DOI:10.1016/j.ijid.2014.10.009
PMID:25448332
Abstract

BACKGROUND

A randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial was done to compare two doses of delafloxacin with tigecycline in patients with various complicated skin and skin-structure infections (wound infections following surgery, trauma, burns, or animal/insect bites, abscesses, and cellulitis).

METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive delafloxacin 300mg intravenous (IV) every 12h, delafloxacin 450mg IV every 12h, or tigecycline 100mg IV×1, followed by 50mg IV every 12h; randomization was stratified by infection type. Duration of therapy was 5-14 days. The primary efficacy analysis, performed on the clinically evaluable (CE) population at the test-of-cure (TOC) visit (14-21 days after the final dose of study drug), compared clinical response rates in the delafloxacin and tigecycline arms. Clinical response rates in the two delafloxacin arms were also compared.

RESULTS

Among CE patients, clinical cure rates at TOC visit were similar in the delafloxacin and tigecycline arms (94.3%, 92.5%, and 91.2%, respectively in delafloxacin 300-mg, delafloxacin 450-mg, and tigecycline arms). Overall, the most frequent adverse events were nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea; the 300-mg delafloxacin arm was the best-tolerated regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

Delafloxacin was similarly effective as tigecycline for a variety of complicated skin and skin-structure infections and was well tolerated. (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT 0719810).

摘要

背景

一项随机、双盲、多中心试验比较了两种剂量的德拉沙星与替加环素治疗各种复杂皮肤和皮肤结构感染(手术后、创伤、烧伤或动物/昆虫咬伤、脓肿和蜂窝织炎引起的伤口感染)的疗效。

方法

患者按 1:1:1 随机分为三组,分别接受 300mg 静脉注射(IV)每 12h 一次的德拉沙星、450mg IV 每 12h 一次的德拉沙星或 100mg IV×1 后 50mg IV 每 12h 的替加环素;随机分组按感染类型分层。治疗持续时间为 5-14 天。主要疗效分析在治疗结束(最后一次研究药物后 14-21 天)的临床可评估(CE)人群中进行,比较了德拉沙星和替加环素组的临床缓解率。还比较了两个德拉沙星组之间的临床缓解率。

结果

在 CE 患者中,TOE 访视时的临床治愈率在德拉沙星和替加环素组相似(300mg 德拉沙星组、450mg 德拉沙星组和替加环素组分别为 94.3%、92.5%和 91.2%)。总体而言,最常见的不良事件是恶心、呕吐和腹泻;300mg 德拉沙星组的耐受性最好。

结论

德拉沙星与替加环素治疗各种复杂皮肤和皮肤结构感染的疗效相似,且耐受性良好。(Clinicaltrials.gov NCT 0719810)。

相似文献

1
A randomized phase 2 study comparing two doses of delafloxacin with tigecycline in adults with complicated skin and skin-structure infections.一项比较两种剂量的达拉非沙星与替加环素治疗成人复杂性皮肤和皮肤结构感染的随机 2 期研究。
Int J Infect Dis. 2015 Jan;30:67-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2014.10.009. Epub 2014 Oct 30.
2
A randomized, double-blind, Phase 2 study to evaluate subjective and objective outcomes in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections treated with delafloxacin, linezolid or vancomycin.一项随机、双盲的2期研究,旨在评估接受德拉氟沙星、利奈唑胺或万古霉素治疗的急性细菌性皮肤和皮肤结构感染患者的主观和客观结果。
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016 Mar;71(3):821-9. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkv411. Epub 2015 Dec 17.
3
Results of a multicenter, randomized, open-label efficacy and safety study of two doses of tigecycline for complicated skin and skin-structure infections in hospitalized patients.一项针对住院患者复杂皮肤及皮肤结构感染的两剂量替加环素多中心、随机、开放标签疗效和安全性研究的结果。
Clin Ther. 2004 May;26(5):704-14. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(04)90070-7.
4
Efficacy and safety of tigecycline monotherapy compared with vancomycin plus aztreonam in patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections: Results from a phase 3, randomized, double-blind trial.替加环素单药治疗与万古霉素联合氨曲南治疗复杂性皮肤及皮肤结构感染患者的疗效和安全性比较:一项3期随机双盲试验的结果
Int J Infect Dis. 2005 Sep;9(5):251-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2005.05.003.
5
Cefdinir vs. cephalexin for mild to moderate uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections in adolescents and adults.头孢地尼与头孢氨苄用于青少年及成人轻至中度非复杂性皮肤及皮肤结构感染的比较。
Curr Med Res Opin. 2006 Dec;22(12):2419-28. doi: 10.1185/030079906X148355.
6
A Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Followed by Oral Delafloxacin With Vancomycin Plus Aztreonam for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections: A Phase 3, Multinational, Double-Blind, Randomized Study.静脉注射后序贯口服多氟喹诺酮与万古霉素联合氨曲南治疗急性细菌性皮肤及皮肤结构感染的疗效和安全性比较:一项 3 期、多国、双盲、随机研究。
Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Aug 16;67(5):657-666. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy165.
7
A randomized trial of tigecycline versus ampicillin-sulbactam or amoxicillin-clavulanate for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections.替加环素与氨苄西林-舒巴坦或阿莫西林-克拉维酸治疗复杂性皮肤和皮肤结构感染的随机试验。
BMC Infect Dis. 2012 Nov 12;12:297. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-12-297.
8
Overview of tigecycline efficacy and safety in the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections - a European perspective.替加环素治疗复杂性皮肤及皮肤结构感染的疗效与安全性概述——欧洲视角
J Chemother. 2008 Oct;20 Suppl 1:20-7. doi: 10.1179/joc.2008.20.Supplement-1.20.
9
A multicenter trial of the efficacy and safety of tigecycline versus imipenem/cilastatin in patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections [Study ID Numbers: 3074A1-301-WW; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00081744].一项多中心试验:比较替加环素与亚胺培南/西司他丁治疗复杂性腹腔内感染患者的疗效和安全性[研究编号:3074A1-301-WW;美国国立医学图书馆临床试验标识符:NCT00081744]
BMC Infect Dis. 2005 Oct 19;5:88. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-5-88.
10
Efficacy and safety of delafloxacin compared with vancomycin plus aztreonam for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: a Phase 3, double-blind, randomized study.比较 delafloxacin 与万古霉素加氨曲南治疗急性细菌性皮肤和皮肤结构感染的疗效和安全性:一项 3 期、双盲、随机研究。
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017 Dec 1;72(12):3471-3480. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkx329.

引用本文的文献

1
Tigecycline and Hypoglycemia, When and How?替加环素与低血糖,何时以及如何(引发低血糖)?
J Pharm Technol. 2024 Feb;40(1):37-44. doi: 10.1177/87551225231211737. Epub 2023 Nov 18.
2
Eravacycline, the first four years: health outcomes and tolerability data for 19 hospitals in 5 U.S. regions from 2018 to 2022.依拉环素:四年经验——2018 年至 2022 年来自美国五个地区 19 家医院的健康结局和耐受性数据。
Microbiol Spectr. 2024 Jan 11;12(1):e0235123. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.02351-23. Epub 2023 Nov 29.
3
Physicochemical Characteristics of Antimicrobials and Practical Recommendations for Intravenous Administration: A Systematic Review.
抗菌药物的物理化学特性及静脉给药实用建议:一项系统评价
Antibiotics (Basel). 2023 Aug 19;12(8):1338. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics12081338.
4
Updated Review on Clinically-Relevant Properties of Delafloxacin.关于德拉氟沙星临床相关特性的最新综述
Antibiotics (Basel). 2023 Jul 28;12(8):1241. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics12081241.
5
Insufficient Representation of Patients With Obesity in Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Antimicrobials for Treatment of Skin and Skin Structure Infections: A Scoping Review.评估抗菌药物治疗皮肤和皮肤结构感染有效性及安全性的随机对照试验中肥胖患者代表性不足:一项范围综述
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2023 Mar 20;10(3):ofad144. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofad144. eCollection 2023 Mar.
6
Overview of Side-Effects of Antibacterial Fluoroquinolones: New Drugs versus Old Drugs, a Step Forward in the Safety Profile?氟喹诺酮类抗菌药物的副作用概述:新药与旧药对比,安全性方面是否有所进步?
Pharmaceutics. 2023 Mar 1;15(3):804. doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics15030804.
7
The efficacy and adverse events of delafloxacin in the treatment of acute bacterial infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.达氟沙星治疗急性细菌感染的疗效及不良事件:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析
Front Pharmacol. 2022 Sep 28;13:975578. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.975578. eCollection 2022.
8
Efficacy and safety of delafloxacin, ceftaroline, ceftobiprole, and tigecycline for the empiric treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.达氟沙星、头孢洛林、头孢托罗和替加环素用于急性细菌性皮肤及皮肤结构感染经验性治疗的疗效和安全性:一项随机对照试验的网状Meta分析
Saudi Pharm J. 2022 Mar;30(3):195-204. doi: 10.1016/j.jsps.2021.12.007. Epub 2022 Jan 1.
9
Urgent need for novel antibiotics in Republic of Korea to combat multidrug-resistant bacteria.韩国急需新型抗生素来对抗耐多药细菌。
Korean J Intern Med. 2022 Mar;37(2):271-280. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2021.527. Epub 2022 Feb 28.
10
Delafloxacin, Finafloxacin, and Zabofloxacin: Novel Fluoroquinolones in the Antibiotic Pipeline.德拉氟沙星、非那沙星和扎博沙星:抗生素研发中的新型氟喹诺酮类药物。
Antibiotics (Basel). 2021 Dec 8;10(12):1506. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics10121506.