ArticleEClinicalMedicine2023
Oral minocycline plus rifampicin versus oral linezolid for complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by methicillin-resistant
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Linezolid administration to lactating Wistar rats affects the health of their offspring.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2025Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Antibiotics in the Treatment of Methicillin-ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Adverse drug events associated with linezolid administration: a real-world pharmacovigilance study from 2004 to 2023 using the FAERS database.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The need for oral, cost-effective treatment for complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSIs) due to methicillin-resistant Methods: In the AIDA multicenter, open label, randomized, controlled clinical trial, hospitalized adults with cSSSI and documented MRSA were randomly assigned at a 2:1 ratio to either oral 600 mg rifampicin qd plus 100 mg minocycline bid or oral 600 mg linezolid bid for 10 days. The primary endpoint was the clinical cure rate in the clinically evaluable (CE) population at the test-of-cure visit (14 days). Non-inferiority was confirmed if the lower confidence limit (CI) did not fall below the accepted error margin of 15%. The study is registered with EudraCT number 2014-001276-56. Findings: 123 patients recruited between November 2014 and January 2017 were randomly assigned to treatment (81 patients to minocycline plus rifampicin and 42 patients to linezolid). Cure rates were 78.% (46/59, 90% CI 67.3-86.5) and 68.6% (24/35, 90% CI 53.4-81.3), respectively ( Interpretation: Oral minocycline plus rifampicin was non-inferior to oral linezolid treatment providing alternative oral treatment for cSSSI. Funding: The EU Seventh Research Framework Programme.
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.