SynthesisAdvances in therapy2020
Effectiveness and Safety of High Dose Tigecycline for the Treatment of Severe Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Advances in therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
70 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 116 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis byPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Real-World Therapy with Eravacycline for Complex Infections Caused by Carbapenem-Resistant Pathogens with a Focus on Patients with Severe Burns.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2026Article
- Advanced herbal self-assembled nanoplatforms: targeted, stimuli-responsive, and precision therapeutics for human diseases.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- Changes in Susceptibility Profiles ofJournal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- DOTA-grafted Cationic Polymers Behaving as Powerful Macromolecular Resistance-reversal Agents (MRRAs) Combating Against New Delhi Metallo-β-lactamase (NDM)-producing Bacteria.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Co-occurrence of blaBMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Antimicrobial Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Considerations in Special Populations: A Call to Action.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Review
- <p>Molecular medicine reports · 2026Review
- Construction and temporal external validation of interpretable machine-learning models for predicting tigecycline-associated hypofibrinogenemia.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model to predict loading dose polymyxin B exposure in critically ill patients with sepsis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Characteristics and outcomes of patients treated with tigecycline for MDR gram-negative infections: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Clinical Outcomes of Omadacycline in Critically Ill Patients Treated for Carbapenem-Resistant Organism Infections: A Retrospective Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Exploratory pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic range of tigecycline for balancing treatment effect and safety in hospital-acquired pneumonia: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Clinical efficacy and safety of eravacycline for the treatment of enterococcal infections: a subpopulation analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Repurposing antibiotics: A dual-action approach against bacteria-induced cancer.Cancer pathogenesis and therapy · 2025Review
- Significant Prevalence of Dual KPC/NDM Carbapenemase-ProducingAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
- A nomogram for predicting the risk of tigecycline-associated drug-induced liver injury in a Chinese population.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Sulbactam for carbapenem-resistantJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2025Review
- Cefepime versus carbapenem for treating complicated urinary tract infection caused by cefoxitin-nonsusceptible ESCPM organisms: a multicenter, real-world study.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStudies assessing the effect of high dose tigecycline on severe infections are limited and remain controversial.
objectivesTo assess systematically the effectiveness and safety of high dose tigecycline in the treatment of severe infections.
methodsPubmed, Web of Science, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials were searched up to February 20, 2019 for studies that compared the effectiveness and safety of high dose tigecycline with standard dose tigecycline or other non-tigecycline-containing regimens in the treatment of severe infections. Rates for all-cause mortality, clinical cure, microbiological eradication and adverse events were analysed.
resultsTen studies with 593 patients were included. The results indicated that using high dose tigecycline resulted in better outcomes compared with controls with lower all-cause mortality (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30-0.66, p < 0.0001), higher clinical cure (OR 3.43, 95% CI 2.09-5.63, p < 0.00001), higher microbiological eradication (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.44-3.50, p = 0.0003), and without increasing adverse events rates. Subgroup analysis showed that high dose tigecycline reduced all-cause mortality in nosocomial acquired pneumonia (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.22-0.70, p = 0.002), bloodstream infections (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.06-0.58, p = 0.004) and mixed infections (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07-0.59, p = 0.003), with no statistical differences in complicated intra-abdominal infections (OR 2.04, 95% CI 0.80-5.23, p = 0.14). In carbapenem-resistant pathogens, the microbiological eradication rate in those given high dose tigecycline did not differ from controls (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.44-2.60, p = 0.87), although mortality was reduced (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.09-0.45, p = 0.0001). The main limitation of the review is that most of the included studies are observational studies with small sample sizes and high risks of bias.
conclusionsHigh dose tigecycline treatment is effective and safe for severe infections owing to its lower all-cause mortality, higher clinical cure, microbiological eradication and comparable adverse events. However, as a result of the high risks of bias of the included studies, well-designed randomised clinical trials are warranted to establish the effectiveness and safety of high dose tigecycline compared with standard dose tigecycline and other commonly used antibiotics.
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.