Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22752865›Full record

Trial reportClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2012

Treatment of first recurrence of Clostridium difficile infection: fidaxomicin versus vancomycin.

Oliver A Cornely, Mark A Miller, Thomas J Louie, Derrick W Crook, Sherwood L Gorbach

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 199 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
199citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
13.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

199 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 391 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Extended-pulsed fidaxomicin versus vancomycin for Clostridium difficile infection: EXTEND study subgroup analyses.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2019
    Trial
  13. [Challenges of Clostridium difficile infection].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2013
    Trial
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  20. Article

139 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Oliver A CornelyDepartment I of Internal Medicine, Clinical Trials Centre Cologne, ZKS Köln, BMBF 01KN1106, Germany. oliver.cornely@ctuc.de
Mark A Miller
Thomas J Louie
Derrick W Crook
Sherwood L Gorbach
Jewish General Hospital · CATufts University · USUniversity of Calgary · CAUniversity of Cologne · DEUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recurrence of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) occurs in approximately 25% of successfully treated patients. Two phase 3 randomized, double-blind trials were conducted at 154 sites in the United States, Canada, and Europe to compare fidaxomicin vs vancomycin in treating CDI. Patients with CDI received fidaxomicin 200 mg twice daily or vancomycin 125 mg 4 times daily for 10 days. The primary end point was clinical cure of CDI at end of treatment, and a secondary end point was recurrence during the 28 days following clinical cure. In all, 1164 subjects were enrolled, of which a subgroup of 128 in the per-protocol population had another recent episode of CDI prior to the CDI diagnosis at study enrollment. In the analysis of this subgroup, initial response to therapy was similar for both drugs (>90% cure). However, recurrence within 28 days occurred in 35.5% of patients treated with vancomycin and 19.7% of patients treated with fidaxomicin (-15.8% difference; 95% confidence interval, -30.4% to -0.3%; P = .045). Early recurrence (within 14 days) was reported in 27% of patients treated with vancomycin and 8% of patients treated with fidaxomicin (P = .003). In patients with a first recurrence of CDI, fidaxomicin was similar to vancomycin in achieving a clinical response at end of therapy but superior in preventing a second recurrence within 28 days.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAminoglycosidesAnti-Bacterial AgentsCanadaClostridioides difficileClostridium InfectionsConfidence IntervalsDouble-Blind MethodEuropeFecesFemaleFidaxomicinHumansAminoglycosidesAnti-Bacterial AgentsFidaxomicinMetronidazoleVancomycin

Identifiers

PMID22752865
PMCPMC3388030
OpenAlexW2144282350

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.