Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30891240›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in infectious disease

Efficacy and safety of ceftaroline: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Maria T Rosanova, Pedro S Aguilar, Norma Sberna, Roberto Lede

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in infectious disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. ASP-COMPLEX: redefining antimicrobial stewardship to improve outcomes in high-risk patients with severe infections.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Spotlight on New Antibiotics for the Treatment of Pneumonia.Clinical medicine insights. Circulatory, respiratory and pulmonary medicine · 2020
    Review
  7. Review
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

4 authors.

Maria T RosanovaHospital J. P. Garrahan, CABA, Buenos Aires, Barragan601 CABA - Argentina -ZIP Code 1408.
Pedro S AguilarServicio de Evaluación del Servicio Canario de la Salud (SESCS), Red de investigación de servicios de salud en enfermedades crónicas (REDISSEC), Tenerife, Spain.
Norma SbernaHospital J. P. Garrahan, CABA, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Roberto LedeHospital Universitario, Universidad Abierta Interamericana, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResistance to antibiotics is steadily increasing. Ceftaroline has a broad spectrum of activity against clinically relevant gram-positive strains including methicillin-resistant

objectivesThis systematic review was conducted to evaluate whether ceftaroline is effective and safe, leading to a lower rate of treatment failures than comparators. MATERIAL AND

methodsStudies were included if they were comparing the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline with other antibiotics. DATA SOURCES: Using the search terms 'ceftaroline' or 'ceftaroline fosamil', a search strategy was developed. The efficacy endpoint was the rate of treatment failure, while the safety endpoint was the incidence of adverse events. Heterogeneity bias was estimated using the

resultsOnly 10 studies were included. SYNTHESIS OF

resultsThe risk of treatment failure was significantly lower for ceftaroline than for comparators, and cumulative meta-analysis showed that the effect size was relevant and precise. Pooled risk ratio was 0.79 (95% confidence interval = 0.65-0.95). The rates of adverse events were similar among the studies, and there were no statistically significant differences between groups. For this endpoint, there was a significant heterogeneity among studies ( DISCUSSION: The risk of treatment failure was significantly lower for ceftaroline than comparators, while the rate of adverse events was similar. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review on the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline including children and adults. A limitation is that no randomized controlled trials were found in non-complicated skin- and soft-tissue infection and non-community-acquired pneumonia infections; only few cases with methicillin-resistant

interpretationCeftaroline may be an option of treatment in complicated skin- and soft-tissue infection and community-acquired pneumonia.

Indexed as

Ceftarolineefficacysafetysoft tissue infectionsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30891240
PMCPMC6416768

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.