Suppr超能文献

使用通用型与品牌型利奈唑胺治疗的患者血小板减少症发生率的比较分析:一项利用医院电子病历的队列研究。

Comparative analysis of thrombocytopenia incidence in patients treated with generic vs. brand-name linezolid: a cohort study utilizing hospital electronic medical records.

作者信息

Wang Zhizhou, Wang Ke, Hua Yiming, Hu Xin, Zhang Xiaotong, Li Xiaoxi, Xing Xiaoxuan, Feng Yingnan, Wu Chao, Zhang Zhichao, Dong Xianzhe, Zhang Lan

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, Xuanwu Hospital of Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

College of Pharmacy, Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China.

出版信息

Front Pharmacol. 2025 Jun 18;16:1528633. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2025.1528633. eCollection 2025.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the hematological safety of generic linezolid, providing data to support its rational and safe use in clinical practice.

METHODS

Data were collected from electronic medical records at a tertiary hospital in China between January 2019 and June 2023. We conducted a real-world, retrospective matched cohort study involving hospitalized patients treated with either generic or brand-name linezolid for bacterial infections. Propensity score matching was employed to control for potential risk factors associated with thrombocytopenia. The primary outcome was the incidence of thrombocytopenia adverse events. Secondary outcomes included rates of severe thrombocytopenia, the incidence of anemia meeting transfusion thresholds, and changes in platelet counts (PLTs) and hemoglobin (Hb) levels during follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 218 patients received generic linezolid, while 222 patients received the brand-name version. After adjustment, each group had 137 patients. There were no significant differences in thrombocytopenia (28.44% vs. 21.17%), severe thrombocytopenia (6.42% vs. 4.95%), or anemia rates (2.75% vs. 3.15%) (P > 0.05). Similarly, reductions in PLT and HB levels during follow-up did not differ significantly (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate no significant differences in the incidence of thrombocytopenia and severe anemia between generic and brand-name linezolid, highlighting the need for further validation in other generic formulations and diverse patient populations.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在评估仿制利奈唑胺的血液学安全性,为其在临床实践中的合理安全使用提供数据支持。

方法

收集了中国一家三级医院2019年1月至2023年6月电子病历中的数据。我们进行了一项真实世界的回顾性匹配队列研究,纳入了因细菌感染接受仿制或原研利奈唑胺治疗的住院患者。采用倾向评分匹配法控制与血小板减少相关的潜在风险因素。主要结局是血小板减少不良事件的发生率。次要结局包括严重血小板减少的发生率、达到输血阈值的贫血发生率以及随访期间血小板计数(PLT)和血红蛋白(Hb)水平的变化。

结果

共有218例患者接受仿制利奈唑胺治疗,222例患者接受原研利奈唑胺治疗。调整后,每组各有137例患者。血小板减少(28.44%对21.17%)、严重血小板减少(6.42%对4.95%)或贫血发生率(2.75%对3.15%)方面无显著差异(P>0.05)。同样,随访期间PLT和HB水平的降低也无显著差异(P>0.05)。

结论

我们的结果表明,仿制利奈唑胺和原研利奈唑胺在血小板减少和严重贫血发生率方面无显著差异,这凸显了在其他仿制制剂和不同患者群体中进一步验证的必要性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c94c/12213584/22b247265a8b/fphar-16-1528633-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验