ArticleThe Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale2016
Fidaxomicin versus Vancomycin in the Treatment of Clostridium difficile Infection: Canadian Outcomes.
Article in The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cadazolid vs Vancomycin for the Treatment of Clostridioides difficile Infection: Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.Current clinical pharmacology · 2020Pooled it
- Antibiotic treatment for Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Health-related quality of life in patients with recurrentTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Clostridioides difficile infections in the intensive care unit: a monocentric cohort study.Infection · 2020Article
- Observational
- Mouse models for bacterial enteropathogen infections: insights into the role of colonization resistance.Gut microbesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background. This analysis examined the efficacy of fidaxomicin versus vancomycin in 406 Canadian patients with Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), based on data from 2 randomized, clinical trials. Methods. Patients received fidaxomicin or vancomycin 1. Patients were assessed for clinical response recurrence of infection and sustained clinical response for 28 days after treatment completion. Patients at increased risk of recurrence were subjected to subgroup analyses. Results. Clinical response rates for fidaxomicin (90.0%) were noninferior to those with vancomycin (92.2%; 95% confidence interval for difference: -7.7, 3.5). However, fidaxomicin-treated patients had lower recurrence (14.4% versus 28.0%, p = 0.001) and higher sustained clinical response (77.1% versus 66.3%, p = 0.016). Compared with vancomycin, fidaxomicin was associated with lower recurrence rates in all subgroups, reaching statistical significance in patients with age ≥ 65 years (16.0% versus 30.9%, p = 0.026), concomitant antibiotic use (16.2% versus 38.7%, p = 0.036), and non-BI strains (11.8% versus 28.3%, p = 0.004). Higher sustained clinical response rates were observed for fidaxomicin compared with vancomycin in all subgroups; this was statistically significant in the non-BI subgroup (82.8% versus 69.1%, p = 0.021). Conclusions. In Canadian patients, fidaxomicin was superior to vancomycin in sustaining clinical response and reducing CDI recurrence.
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.