Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35834251›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2022

Efficacy and Safety of Ciprofloxacin Plus Fluocinolone Acetonide Among Patients With Acute Otitis Externa: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Laurence Chu, Ana M Acosta, Hessam Aazami, Patrick Dennis, Oscar De Valle, Dale Ehmer, James A Hedrick, John F Ansley

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03196973 (A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of DF289 Plus DF277 Otic Solution Compared to DF289 Otic Solution and to DF277 Otic Solution in the Treatment of Acute Otitis Externa), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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.

NCT03196973 phase3completednot on this map

A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of DF289 Plus DF277 Otic Solution Compared to DF289 Otic Solution and to DF277 Otic Solution in the Treatment of Acute Otitis Externa (AOE)

TypeinterventionalSponsorSalvatRan2017 to 2018Enrolled493ConditionsAcute Otitis ExternaArmsDF289 plus DF277, DF289, DF277
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Anti-Microorganisms · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Laurence ChuBenchmark Research, Austin, Texas.
Ana M AcostaAdvance Medical Research Center, Miami, Florida.
Hessam AazamiHope Clinical Research, Canoga Park, California.
Patrick DennisDelRicht Clinical Research, New Orleans, Louisiana.
Oscar De ValleWest Houston Clinical Research Service, Houston, Texas.
Dale EhmerEar, Nose and Throat Associates of Texas, McKinney.
James A HedrickKentucky Pediatric/Adult Research, Bardstown.
John F AnsleyCarolina ENT Clinic (Centri Inc), Orangeburg, South Carolina.
Advanced Medical Research Institute · USBenchmark Research (United States) · USENT and Allergy Associates of Florida · USHouston Institute for Clinical Research · USOhio Pediatric Research Association · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Ciprofloxacin, 0.3%, plus fluocinolone acetonide, 0.025%, otic solution seems to be efficacious and safe in treating acute otitis externa (AOE) compared with ciprofloxacin, 0.3%, or fluocinolone acetonide, 0.025%, otic solution alone. Objective: To evaluate the superiority of ciprofloxacin, 0.3%, plus fluocinolone acetonide, 0.025%, otic solution compared with ciprofloxacin, 0.3%, or fluocinolone acetonide, 0.025%, otic solution alone in treating AOE. Design, Setting, and Participants: A phase 3 randomized, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial was conducted between August 1, 2017, and September 14, 2018, at 36 centers in the US. The study population comprised 493 patients aged 6 months or older with AOE of less than 21 days' duration with otorrhea, moderate or severe otalgia, and edema, as well as a Brighton grading of II or III (tympanic membrane obscure but without systemic illness). Statistical analysis was performed from November 14, 2018, to February 14, 2019. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to receive ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone, ciprofloxacin, or fluocinolone twice daily for 7 days and were evaluated on day 1 (visit 1; baseline), days 3 to 4 (visit 2; conducted via telephone), days 8 to 10 (visit 3; end of treatment), and days 15 to 17 (visit 4; test of cure). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was therapeutic cure (clinical and microbiological) at the end of the treatment period. The principal secondary end point was the time to end of ear pain. Efficacy analyses were conducted in the microbiological intent-to-treat population, clinical intent-to-treat population, and microbiological intent-to-treat population with Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus. Results: A total of 493 patients (254 female patients [51.5%]; mean [SD] age, 38.2 [23.1] years) were randomized (197 to receive ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone, 196 to receive ciprofloxacin, and 100 to receive fluocinolone). Therapeutic cure in the modified intent-to-treat population with ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone (63 of 103 [61.2%]) was statistically comparable to that of ciprofloxacin (49 of 91 [53.8%]; difference in response rate, 7.3%; 95% CI, -6.6% to 21.2%; P = .30) and fluocinolone (20 of 45 [44.4%]; difference in response rate, 16.7%; 95% CI, -0.6% to 34.0%; P = .06) at visit 3 and significantly superior to ciprofloxacin at visit 4 (90 of 103 [87.4%] vs 69 of 91 [75.8%]; difference in response rate, 11.6%; 95% CI, 0.7%-22.4%; P = .04). A statistically faster resolution of otalgia was achieved among patients treated with ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone (median, 5.0 days [range, 4.2-6.3 days]) vs ciprofloxacin (median, 5.9 days [range, 4.3-7.3 days]; 95% CI, 4.3-7.3 days; P = .002) or fluocinolone (median, 7.7 days [range, 6.7-9.0 days]; 95% CI, 6.7-9.0 days; P < .001). Ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone demonstrated statistical superiority in sustained microbiological response vs ciprofloxacin (94 of 103 [91.3%] vs 74 of 91 [81.3%]; difference in response rate, 9.9%; 95% CI, 0.3%-19.6%; P = .04) and fluocinolone (34 of 45 [75.6%]; difference in response rate, 15.7%; 95% CI, 2.0%-29.4%; P = .01) and in the microbiological outcome vs fluocinolone by visit 3 (99 of 103 [96.1%] vs 37 of 45 [82.2%]; difference in response rate, 13.9%; 95% CI, 2.1%-25.7%; P = .01) and ciprofloxacin by visit 4 (97 of 103 [94.2%] vs 77 of 91 [84.6%]; difference in response rate, 9.6%; 95% CI, 0.9%-18.2%; P = .02). Fifteen adverse events related to study medications were registered, all of which were mild or moderate. Conclusions and Relevance: Ciprofloxacin, 0.3%, plus fluocinolone acetonide, 0.025%, otic solution was efficacious and safe in treating AOE but did not demonstrate superiority vs ciprofloxacin, 0.3%, or fluocinolone acetonide, 0.025%, otic solutions alone in the main study end point of therapeutic cure. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03196973.

Indexed as

Otitis ExternaAcute DiseaseAdministration, TopicalAdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsCiprofloxacinEaracheFemaleFluocinolone AcetonideHumansAnti-Bacterial AgentsCiprofloxacinFluocinolone Acetonide

Identifiers

PMID35834251
PMCPMC10881221
OpenAlexW4285386586

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.