SynthesisFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2022
Efficacy and safety of novel carbapenem-β-lactamase inhibitor combinations: Results from phase II and III trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Novel β-Lactam/β-Lactamase Inhibitors Versus Best Available Therapy on the Mortality-Related Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The Biological Effects of Boron in Animals and Humans.Biological trace element research · 2026Review
- Antibiotic-Adjuvants Abolish Resistance Conferred by theACS infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of novel carbapenem-β-lactamase inhibitor combinations: imipenem-cilastatin/relebactam results from randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The addition of novel β-lactamase inhibitors to carbapenems restores the activity against multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. The aim of this study was to summarize the evidence on the efficacy and safety of novel carbapenem-β-lactamase inhibitor combinations. Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of clinical trials comparing novel carbapenem-β-lactamase inhibitor combinations with comparators to assess the clinical and microbiological responses, mortality, and adverse events (AEs). Results: A total of 1,984 patients were included. The pooled risk ratios (RRs) of clinical cure, microbiological eradication, all-cause mortality, and 28-day mortality were 1.11 (95% CI: 0.98-1.26), 0.98 (95% CI: 0.82-1.16), 0.90 (95% CI: 0.49-0.94), and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.49-0.94) between the novel carbapenem-β-lactamase inhibitor combinations and control groups. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the phase II trial of imipenem-cilastatin/relebactam (ICR) against complicated urinary tract infections could be the most important factor of heterogeneity for the microbiological response. The therapeutic effect of novel carbapenem-β-lactamase inhibitor combinations was better in meropenem-vaborbactam (MEV), phase III trials, and number of patients less than 200. The RRs of AEs from any cause and serious adverse events (SAEs) for patients receiving novel carbapenem-β-lactamase inhibitor combinations were 0.98 (95% CI: 0.93-1.04) and 1.01 (95% CI: 0.75-1.36), respectively. Conclusions: ICR and MEV were superior to comparators for clinical cure and survival rate in the treatment of complicated infections, and both were as tolerable as the comparators.
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.