ArticleJAMA network open2025
Comparative Effectiveness of Long-Acting Lipoglycopeptides vs Standard-of-Care Antibiotics in Serious Bacterial Infections.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Organizational perspectives on barriers and facilitators to an integrated care model for opioid use disorder and serious injection-related infections.Journal of substance use and addiction treatment · 2026Article
- Review
- Clinical outcomes of dalbavancin versus standard therapy for non-severe skin and soft-tissue infections as well as bone and joint infections: a retrospective observational study.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Article
- ASP-COMPLEX: redefining antimicrobial stewardship to improve outcomes in high-risk patients with severe infections.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2026Review
- Review
- Oritavancin safety: a real-world pharmacovigilance study of the FAERS database.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Dalbavancin for Treatment of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: The DOTS Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA · 2025Article
- ORItavancin as a therapeutic regimen for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices infections with multidrug-resistant Gram-positive cocci (ORI-4-CIEDi) pilot study: rationale and design.Cardiology journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Serious bacterial infections such as bacteremia, endocarditis, osteomyelitis, and septic arthritis typically require prolonged intravenous antibiotics. Long-acting lipoglycopeptides (laLGPs), such as dalbavancin and oritavancin, offer extended treatment intervals for gram-positive infections that may benefit populations with barriers to traditional treatment, including persons who use drugs (PWUD individuals). Objective: To assess the effectiveness of laLGPs in managing serious bacterial infections in both PWUD and non-PWUD populations compared with standard-of-care (SOC) antibiotics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness study using a target trial emulation framework included data extracted from the US Cerner Real World Data platform. Individuals hospitalized and discharged for serious bacterial infections between October 1, 2015, and October 1, 2022, were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from July 7, 2023, to February 28, 2025. Intervention: Receipt of an laLGP (dalbavancin or oritavancin) vs SOC antibiotics. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome measure was a composite of readmission, emergency department visit, and inpatient death or discharge to hospice within 90 days post discharge from the index admission. Analyses were stratified by PWUD and non-PWUD status. Clone censor weighting was used to emulate a per-protocol analysis. Hazard ratios (HR) of time to the composite event and 95% CIs were calculated using bootstrapping. Results: Among 42 067 included individuals, median age was 61 (IQR, 47-73) years, 24 704 were male (58.7%), and 5047 (12.0%) were classified as PWUD. laLGPs were prescribed in 825 individuals (2.0%). There was no statistically significant difference in the composite outcome between the laLGP and SOC groups in both the PWUD (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.88-1.13) and non-PWUD (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.86-1.00) participants. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of laLGPs vs SOC, findings suggested that laLGPs were effective as step-down treatment of serious gram-positive bacterial infections, offering comparable outcomes to those of SOC antibiotics in PWUD and non-PWUD individuals. Clinicians may consider laLGPs as alternative step-down options to SOC antibiotics for the treatment of serious gram-positive bacterial infections.
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.