Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17120738›Full record

Trial reportJournal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology. Medical sciences = Hua zhong ke ji da xue xue bao. Yi xue Ying De wen ban = Huazhong keji daxue xuebao. Yixue Yingdewen ban2006

Efficacy and safety of intravenous moxifloxacin versus cefoperazone with azithromycin in the treatment of community acquired pneumonia.

Shuyun Xu, Shengdao Xiong, Yongjian Xu, Jin Liu, Huiguo Liu, Jianping Zhao, Weining Xiong

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology. Medical sciences = Hua zhong ke ji da xue xue bao. Yi xue Ying De wen ban = Huazhong keji daxue xuebao. Yixue Yingdewen ban, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Respiratory fluoroquinolones for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2008
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shuyun XuDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Shengdao Xiong
Yongjian Xu
Jin Liu
Huiguo Liu
Jianping Zhao
Weining Xiong
Huazhong University of Science and Technology · CNTongji Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of intravenous moxifloxacin with those of a commonly used empirical antibiotic regimen, cefoperazone and azithromycin in the treatment of community acquired pneumonia (CAP) in adult patients requiring initial parenteral therapy, 40 patients with CAP were divided into two groups, a moxifloxacin group (n = 20) and a control group (n = 20), which were treated for 7 to 14 days. The patients in the moxifloxacin group were intravenously given 400 mg of moxifloxacin (Avelox) once a day. Patients in the control group were administered 2.0 g of cefoperazone twice a day and azithromycin 0.5 g once a day. Clinical, bacteriological, and laboratory examinations were performed before the treatment, and at the end of the treatment. Our results showed that there was no significant difference in the clinical efficacy rate between two treatment groups at end of therapy (90% for moxifloxacin, 95% for cefoperazone plus azithromycin) (P > 0.05). The bacteriologic eradication rate at the end of treatment was 90% in the moxifloxacin group and 80% in the cefoperazone-plus-azithromycin group, whereas there was no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). In addition, both drugs were well-tolerated in this trial, with the number of drug-related adverse events being comparable. It is concluded that moxifloxacin is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for CAP and was equivalent to the commonly used empirical treatment of cefoperazone plus azithromycin. Moxifloxacin is likely to offer clinicians an alternative for reliable empirical CAP treatment in the face of increasing antibiotic resistance.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnti-Infective AgentsAza CompoundsAzithromycinCefoperazoneCommunity-Acquired InfectionsFemaleFluoroquinolonesHumansInfusions, IntravenousMaleMiddle AgedMoxifloxacinPneumonia, BacterialQuinolinesAnti-Infective AgentsAza CompoundsAzithromycinCefoperazoneFluoroquinolonesMoxifloxacinQuinolines

Identifiers

PMID17120738
OpenAlexW2005332286

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.