Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11347723›Full record

ReviewDrug safety2001

A risk-benefit assessment of levofloxacin in respiratory, skin and skin structure, and urinary tract infections.

S J Martin, R Jung, C G Garvin

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

S J MartinThe University of Toledo, College of Pharmacy, Ohio 43606, USA. smartin2@utnet.utoledo.edu
R Jung
C G Garvin
University of Colorado Health · USUniversity of Missouri–Kansas City · USUniversity of Toledo · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As a class, the quinolone antibacterials can no longer be assumed to be both effective and relatively free of significant adverse effects. Recent safety issues with newer generation fluoroquinolones, and concerns regarding drug-use associated bacterial resistance have made all drugs in this class subject to intense scrutiny and further study. Levofloxacin is a second generation fluoroquinolone with a post marketing history of well tolerated and successful use in a variety of clinical situations. Quinolones as a class cause a variety of adverse effects, including phototoxicity, seizures and other CNS disturbances, tendonitis and arthropathies, gastrointestinal effects, nephrotoxicity, prolonged QTc interval and torsade de pointes, hypo- or hyperglycaemia, and hypersensitivity reactions. Levofloxacin has been involved in only a few case reports of adverse events, which include QTc prolongation, seizures, glucose disturbances, and tendonitis. Levofloxacin has been shown to be effective at dosages of 250mg to 500mg once-daily in clinical trials in the management of acute maxillary sinusitis, acute bacterial exacerbations of chronic bronchitis, community-acquired pneumonia, skin and skin structure infections, and urinary tract infections. There are data suggesting that levofloxacin may promote fluoroquinolone resistance among the Streptococcus pneumoniae, and that clinical failures may result from this therapy. Other data suggest that fluoroquinolones with lower potency against Pseudomonas aeruginosa than ciprofloxacin, such as levofloxacin, may drive class-wide resistance to this pathogen. Levofloxacin is an effective drug in many clinical situations, but its cost is significantly higher than amoxicillin, erythromycin, or first and second generation cefalosporins. Because of the propensity to select for fluoroquinolone resistance in the pneumococcus and potentially other pathogens, levofloxacin should be an alternative agent rather than a drug-of-choice in routine community-acquired respiratory tract, urinary tract, and skin or skin structure infections. In areas with increasing pneumococcal beta-lactam resistance, levofloxacin may be a reasonable empiric therapy in community-acquired respiratory tract infections. Similarly, in patients with risk factors for infectious complications or poor outcome, levofloxacin may be an excellent empiric choice in severe community-acquired respiratory tract infections, urinary tract infections, complicated skin or skin structure infections, and nosocomial respiratory and urinary tract infections. Better clinical data are needed to identify the true place in therapy of the newer fluoroquinolones in common community-acquired and nosocomial infections. Until then, these agents, including levofloxacin, might best be reserved for complicated infections, infection recurrence, and infections caused by beta-lactam or macrolide-resistant pathogens.

Indexed as

LevofloxacinAnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsDrug Resistance, MicrobialHumansOfloxacinRespiratory Tract InfectionsRisk AssessmentSkin Diseases, BacterialUrinary Tract InfectionsAnti-Infective AgentsLevofloxacinOfloxacin

Identifiers

PMID11347723
OpenAlexW1966472340

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.