ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023
Efficacy and safety of novel carbapenem-β-lactamase inhibitor combinations: imipenem-cilastatin/relebactam results from randomized controlled trials.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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.
- In Vitro Activity of Imipenem/Relebactam Alone and in Combination Against Cystic Fibrosis Isolates ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial resistance inScience in One Health · 2025Review
- Imipenem/Cilastatin/Relebactam for Complicated Infections: A Real-World Evidence.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gram-negative bacteria is a global public health problem. Treatment options include novel beta-lactamase inhibitors. Objectives: The objective of this study was to collect information on the efficacy and safety of novel β-lactamase inhibitor combinations such as imipenem-cilastatin/relebactam (IMI/REL). Methods: In order to comprehensively evaluate the clinical, microbiological, and adverse events outcomes, a meta-analysis was conducted on clinical trials comparing novel β-lactamase inhibitor combinations with existing comparator therapies. Results: Four studies comprising 948 patients were included in the analysis. IMI/REL therapy demonstrated similar clinical responses to comparators across various treatment visits, including discontinuation of intravenously administered therapy visits [DCIV, RR = 1.00 (0.88, 1.12)], early follow-up visits [EFU, RR = 1.00 (0.89, 1.14)], late follow-up visits [LFU, RR = 1.00 (0.88, 1.13)]. Moreover, no significant difference in the microbiologic response of MITT patients was observed between IMI/REL and comparators across DCIV [RR = 0.99 (0.89, 1.11)], EFU [RR = 1.01 (0.95, 1.07)], and LFU visits [RR = 1.00 (90.94, 1.07)]. In terms of safety, therapy with IMI/REL and comparators exhibited similar risks of at least one adverse event (AE), drug-related AEs, and discontinuation due to AEs. The incidence of serious AEs (SAEs) was significantly lower in the IMI/REL group compared to the comparison groups. The predominant AEs were gastrointestinal disorders, with no significant difference observed between the IMI/REL group and comparators. Conclusion: The clinical and microbiologic response to IMI/REL in the treatment of bacterial infection was comparable to that of the comparator. Furthermore, the incidence of AEs and the tolerability of IMI/REL were similar among the comparators. Based on these findings, IMI/REL can be considered as a viable alternative treatment option.
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.