SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2023
Microbiome-preserving antibiotics for the treatment of Clostridioides difficile infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Techniques in coloproctology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNewer antibiotics that specifically target Clostridioides difficile while preserving the host microbiome have emerged to treat C. difficile infection (CDI): cadazolid, fidaxomicin, ridinilazole, and surotomycin. The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy for each antibiotic.
methodsOnly randomized clinical trials of patients being treated for Clostridioides disease infection were included. Studies were sought in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization clinical trials register portal (up to December 9, 2022). Sustained clinical cure was the outcome of treatment comparison, defined as the resolution of diarrhea without recurrence. Vancomycin was the standard treatment comparator. Meta-analysis was performed for each antibiotic. The overall certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE)-classified as either high, moderate, low, or very low.
resultsFourteen eligible studies were included in the meta-analysis with 4837 patients from 773 sites. Cadazolid did not increase sustained clinical cure relative to vancomycin (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.96-1.13; moderate-certainty evidence). Fidaxomicin demonstrated a significant increase (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.07-1.21; low-certainty evidence). In one phase 2 study, ridinilazole demonstrated a significant increase in sustained clinical cure (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.01-2.91; very low-quality evidence). Surotomycin did not show significant improvement (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.96-1.14; moderate-certainty evidence).
conclusionsFidaxomicin (in seven studies) demonstrated significant improvement in achieving sustained clinical cure. A limitation of this study may that more studies are needed to compare fidaxomicin with other 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.