Trial reportAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2009
Multicenter, randomized study of the efficacy and safety of intravenous iclaprim in complicated skin and skin structure infections.
Trial report in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Antibiotic therapy for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in non surgical wounds.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of vancomycin for the treatment of patients with gram-positive infections: focus on the study design.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2012Pooled it
- Multicenter, randomized study of the efficacy and safety of intravenous iclaprim in complicated skin and skin structure infections.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2009Trial
- Exploring Novel Indazole and Pyrazole Nucleoside Analogues: Enzymatic Synthesis, Characterization, and Biological Evaluation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Treatment of MRSA Infection: Where are We?Current medicinal chemistry · 2024Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Iclaprim for the Treatment of Skin Structures and Soft Tissue Infections: A Methodological Framework.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Emerging Treatment Options for Infections by Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Positive Microorganisms.Microorganisms · 2020Review
- An Updated Review of Iclaprim: A Potent and Rapidly Bactericidal Antibiotic for the Treatment of Skin and Skin Structure Infections and Nosocomial Pneumonia Caused by Gram-Positive Including Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria.Open forum infectious diseases · 2018Review
- Staphylococcus aureus infections: epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and management.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2015Review
- Diabetic foot infections: microbiological aspects, current and future antibiotic therapy focusing on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.International wound journal · 2011Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Iclaprim is a novel antibacterial agent that is currently in development for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSI). Iclaprim specifically and selectively inhibits bacterial dihydrofolate reductase, a critical enzyme in the bacterial folate pathway, and exhibits an extended spectrum of activity against various resistant pathogens, including methicillin (meticillin)-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). The objective of this randomized, double-blind phase II study was to compare the efficacy and safety of iclaprim to those of vancomycin in patients with cSSSI. Patients were randomized to receive 0.8 mg iclaprim/kg of body weight, 1.6 mg/kg iclaprim, or 1 g vancomycin twice a day for 10 days. Clinical cure rates for the 0.8- and 1.6-mg/kg-iclaprim treatment groups were comparable to that for the vancomycin treatment group (26/28 patients [92.9%], 28/31 patients [90.3%], and 26/28 patients [92.9%], respectively). Iclaprim also showed high microbiological eradication rates. Iclaprim exhibited an eradication rate of 80% and 72% versus 59% observed with vancomycin for S. aureus, the pathogen most frequently isolated at baseline. Five MRSA cases were observed, four in the 0.8-mg/kg-iclaprim arm and one in the vancomycin arm, and all were both clinically and microbiologically cured. Iclaprim exhibited a safety profile similar to that of vancomycin, an established drug for the treatment of cSSSI. Results from this study indicate that iclaprim is a promising new therapy for the treatment of cSSSI, in particular those caused by S. aureus, including MRSA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.