ArticleIndian journal of dermatology2009
Efficacy and tolerability of cefditoren pivoxil in uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections in Indian patients.
Article in Indian journal of dermatology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 4 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for bacterial folliculitis and boils (furuncles and carbuncles).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Antibiotic therapy for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in non surgical wounds.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Interventions for impetigo.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Interventions for cellulitis and erysipelas.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- Insufficient Representation of Patients With Obesity in Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Antimicrobials for Treatment of Skin and Skin Structure Infections: A Scoping Review.Open forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Treatment outcome measures for randomized controlled trials of antibiotic treatment for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in the emergency department setting.International journal of emergency medicine · 2015Article
- Newer antibacterials in therapy and clinical trials.North American journal of medical sciences · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUncomplicated skin and skin structure infections (uSSSI) are commonly encountered community-acquired infections and are typically confined to the superficial layers of the skin. Hence, they seldom lead to the destruction of skin structures.
aimsTo evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of cefditoren pivoxil in uSSSI in Indian patients.
methodsOne hundred and seventy-eight patients diagnosed with uncomplicated SSSI were enrolled in this randomized, comparative, multicentric study. Patients received either cefditoren pivoxil or cefdinir for ten days. Efficacy was assessed both clinically and microbiologically. Safety evaluation consisted of reporting of type, frequency, severity, and causal relationship of adverse events.
resultsOne hundred and fifty-one patients completed the study. Clinical and bacteriological efficacy of cefditoren pivoxil was comparable to that of cefdinir in the treatment of uSSSI. One hundred and five patients were eligible for per protocol (PP) analysis of bacteriological outcome and clinical efficacy. Clinical cure or improvement was achieved in 98.00% patients treated with cefditoren pivoxil and 98.18% patients treated with cefdinir. In the modified Intent to Treat (mITT) patient population, clinical cure or improvement was recorded in 97.33% patients treated with cefditoren pivoxil and 96.20% patients treated with cefdinir. Microbiological eradication (or presumed eradication) was recorded in 88.00% patients treated with cefditoren pivoxil and 94.55% patients treated with cefdinir. The above differences in the outcome rates between the two drugs were not statistically significant. Six adverse events (AEs) (two in cefditoren group and four in cefdinir group) were reported in this study.
conclusionCefditoren pivoxil 200 mg b.i.d. was effective and well tolerated in the treatment of uSSSI.
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.