Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31560372›Full record

ArticleJAMA2019

Oral Lefamulin vs Moxifloxacin for Early Clinical Response Among Adults With Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia: The LEAP 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Elizabeth Alexander, Lisa Goldberg, Anita F Das, Gregory J Moran, Christian Sandrock, Leanne B Gasink, Patricia Spera, Carolyn Sweeney, Susanne Paukner, Wolfgang W Wicha and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02813694 (A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Oral Lefamulin), which is not on this map. Cited by 54 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
18.1field-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.

NCT02813694 phase3completednot on this map

A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Oral Lefamulin (BC 3781) Versus Oral Moxifloxacin in Adults With Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia

TypeinterventionalSponsorNabriva Therapeutics AGRan2016 to 2018Enrolled738ConditionsCommunity Acquired PneumoniaArmslefamulin, Moxifloxacin
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 105 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Clinical microbiology reviews · 2025
    Review
  12. Static vs. cidal: it's not complex; it's simply incorrect.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2025
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Guidelines for Antibiotics Prescription in Critically Ill Patients.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Staph wars: the antibiotic pipeline strikes back.Microbiology (Reading, England) · 2023
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Elizabeth AlexanderNabriva Therapeutics US Inc, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Lisa GoldbergNabriva Therapeutics US Inc, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Anita F DasDas Consulting, Guerneville, California.
Gregory J MoranOlive View-UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Christian SandrockUniversity of California, Davis, School of Medicine, Sacramento.
Leanne B GasinkNabriva Therapeutics US Inc, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Patricia SperaNabriva Therapeutics US Inc, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Carolyn SweeneyNabriva Therapeutics US Inc, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Susanne PauknerNabriva Therapeutics GmbH, Vienna, Austria.
Wolfgang W WichaNabriva Therapeutics GmbH, Vienna, Austria.
Steven P GeloneNabriva Therapeutics US Inc, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Jennifer SchranzNabriva Therapeutics US Inc, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Nabriva Therapeutics (Austria) · ATOlive View-UCLA Medical Center · USUniversity of California, Davis · USWest County Health Centers · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceNew antibacterials are needed to treat community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) because of growing antibacterial resistance and safety concerns with standard care.

objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of a 5-day oral lefamulin regimen in patients with CABP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsA phase 3, noninferiority randomized clinical trial conducted at 99 sites in 19 countries that included adults aged 18 years or older with a Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk class of II, III, or IV; radiographically documented pneumonia; acute illness; 3 or more CABP symptoms; and 2 or more vital sign abnormalities. The first patient visit was on August 30, 2016, and patients were followed up for 30 days; the final follow-up visit was on January 2, 2018.

interventionsPatients were randomized 1:1 to receive oral lefamulin (600 mg every 12 hours for 5 days; n = 370) or moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 hours for 7 days; n = 368). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) primary end point was early clinical response at 96 hours (within a 24-hour window) after the first dose of either study drug in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (all randomized patients). Responders were defined as alive, showing improvement in 2 or more of the 4 CABP symptoms, having no worsening of any CABP symptoms, and not receiving any nonstudy antibacterial drug for current CABP episode. The European Medicines Agency coprimary end points (FDA secondary end points) were investigator assessment of clinical response at test of cure (5-10 days after last dose) in the modified ITT population and in the clinically evaluable population. The noninferiority margin was 10% for early clinical response and investigator assessment of clinical response.

resultsAmong 738 randomized patients (mean age, 57.5 years; 351 women [47.6%]; 360 had a PORT risk class of III or IV [48.8%]), 707 (95.8%) completed the trial. Early clinical response rates were 90.8% with lefamulin and 90.8% with moxifloxacin (difference, 0.1% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -4.4% to ∞]). Rates of investigator assessment of clinical response success were 87.5% with lefamulin and 89.1% with moxifloxacin in the modified ITT population (difference, -1.6% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -6.3% to ∞]) and 89.7% and 93.6%, respectively, in the clinically evaluable population (difference, -3.9% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -8.2% to ∞]) at test of cure. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were gastrointestinal (diarrhea: 45/368 [12.2%] in lefamulin group and 4/368 [1.1%] in moxifloxacin group; nausea: 19/368 [5.2%] in lefamulin group and 7/368 [1.9%] in moxifloxacin group). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with CABP, 5-day oral lefamulin was noninferior to 7-day oral moxifloxacin with respect to early clinical response at 96 hours after first dose. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02813694; European Clinical Trials Identifier: 2015-004782-92.

Identifiers

PMID31560372
PMCPMC6865224
OpenAlexW2977132187

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.