31
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Once-weekly dalbavancin versus daily conventional therapy for skin infection.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Dalbavancin, a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic agent that is active against gram-positive pathogens, has a long plasma half-life, allowing for once-weekly dosing. DISCOVER 1 and DISCOVER 2 were identically designed noninferiority trials of dalbavancin for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infection.

          Related collections

          Most cited references13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Vancomycin therapeutic guidelines: a summary of consensus recommendations from the infectious diseases Society of America, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists.

          Practice guidelines for therapeutic monitoring of vancomycin treatment for Staphylococcus aureus infection in adult patients were reviewed by an expert panel of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. A literature review of existing evidence regarding vancomycin dosing and monitoring of serum concentrations, in addition to patient outcomes combined with expert opinion regarding the drug's pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and safety record, resulted in new recommendations for targeting and adjustment of vancomycin therapy.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Comparative analysis of two rates

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Tedizolid phosphate vs linezolid for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: the ESTABLISH-1 randomized trial.

              Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs), including cellulitis or erysipelas, major cutaneous abscesses, and wound infections, can be life-threatening and may require surgery and hospitalization. Increasingly, ABSSSIs are associated with drug-resistant pathogens, and many antimicrobial agents have adverse effects restricting their use. Tedizolid phosphate is a novel oxazolidinone in development for the treatment of ABSSSIs. To establish the noninferiority of tedizolid phosphate vs linezolid in treating ABSSSIs and compare the safety of the 2 agents. The Efficacy and Safety of 6-day Oral Tedizolid in Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections vs 10-day Oral Linezolid Therapy (ESTABLISH-1) was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial that was conducted from August 2010 through September 2011 at 81 study centers in North America, Latin America, and Europe. The intent-to-treat analysis set consisted of data from 667 adults aged 18 years or older with ABSSSIs treated with tedizolid phosphate (n = 332) or linezolid (n = 335). A 200 mg once daily dose of oral tedizolid phosphate for 6 days or 600 mg of oral linezolid every 12 hours for 10 days. The primary efficacy outcome was early clinical response at the 48- to 72-hour assessment (no increase in lesion surface area from baseline and oral temperature of ≤37.6°C, confirmed by a second temperature measurement within 24 hours). A 10% noninferiority margin was predefined. In the intent-to-treat analysis set, the early clinical treatment response rates were 79.5% (95% CI, 74.8% to 83.7%) of 332 patients in the tedizolid phosphate group and 79.4% (95% CI, 74.7% to 83.6%) of 335 patients in the linezolid group (a treatment difference of 0.1% [95% CI, -6.1% to 6.2%]). The sustained clinical treatment response rates at the end of treatment (day 11) were 69.3% (95% CI, 64.0% to 74.2%) in the tedizolid phosphate group and 71.9% (95% CI, 66.8% to 76.7%) in the linezolid group (a treatment difference of -2.6% [95% CI, -9.6% to 4.2%]). Results of investigator-assessed clinical treatment success rates at a posttherapy evaluation visit (1-2 weeks after the end-of-treatment visit) were 85.5% (95% CI, 81.3% to 89.1%) in the tedizolid phosphate group and 86.0% (95% CI, 81.8% to 89.5%) in the linezolid group (a treatment difference of -0.5% [95% CI, -5.8% to 4.9%), and were similar for 178 patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated from the primary lesion. Tedizolid phosphate was a statistically noninferior treatment to linezolid in early clinical response at 48 to 72 hours after initiating therapy for an ABSSSI. Tedizolid phosphate may be a reasonable alternative to linezolid for treating ABSSSI. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01170221.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                N. Engl. J. Med.
                The New England journal of medicine
                1533-4406
                0028-4793
                Jun 5 2014
                : 370
                : 23
                Affiliations
                [1 ] From the Division of Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine, Tufts Medical Center and Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston (H.W.B.); the Department of Microbiology, Leeds Teaching Hospital and University of Leeds, Old Medical School, Leeds, United Kingdom (M.W.); Talbot Advisors, Anna Maria, FL (G.H.T.); Durata Therapeutics, Branford, CT (S.P., M.W.D.); and InClin, San Mateo, CA (A.F.D.).
                Article
                10.1056/NEJMoa1310480
                24897082
                5ecef9d5-069c-4f1c-9560-00bf5d196be1
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article