ArticleInfectious diseases and therapy2025
Clinical Outcomes of Eravacycline in Patients Treated for Stenotrophomonas maltophilia Infections.
Article in Infectious diseases and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Epidemiology, treatment and outcomes of antimicrobial-resistant infections in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.Current opinion in infectious diseases · 2026Review
- Beyond β-Lactams: Defining the Role of Eravacycline in Multidrug-Resistant and Metallo-β-Lactamase-Producing Infections.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The Efficacy and Safety of Eravacycline in the Management of Infections: A Single-Center Experience.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Eravacycline: From broad-spectrum coverage to novel clinical applications.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2026Review
- Antimicrobial resistance mechanisms, treatment challenges, and emerging strategies inFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
- Activation of endogenous retroviruses in tumor cells and their immunomodulatory mechanisms: from molecular basis to clinical translation.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Epidemiological and Clinical Characteristics ofTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
- Screening and comparison ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionStenotrophomonas maltophilia is notable for its rising incidence and multidrug resistance, which complicates treatment. As a result of insufficient clinical studies, the 2024 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Guidance on Treating Antimicrobial Resistant Gram-negative Infection advises against using eravacycline (ERV) for S. maltophilia infections. We present real-world data on patients treated with ERV for these infections.
methodsThis multicenter, retrospective, observational study included adult patients who received ERV for treating S. maltophilia infections for ≥ 72 h between October 2018 and August 2022. The primary outcome was the clinical cure evaluated at the end of ERV therapy. Key secondary outcomes included a 30-day survival rate, absence of infection recurrence counting from the end of ERV therapy, and occurrence of possible ERV-related adverse effects (AE) noted in the patient's records.
resultsOverall, 41 patients were included with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 63 years (46.0-74.5). Most patients were male (63.4%) and white (51.2%). The primary source of infection was pulmonary (56.1%), and most patients received ERV for regimen consolidation (65.9%). Combination therapy was used in about 10% of the cases for S. maltophilia treatment. The median (IQR) duration of ERV treatment was 7 days (4.0-11.5). The clinical cure rate was 73.2%, and the 30-day survival rate was 68.3%. Four patients (9.8%) experienced possible AE from ERV.
conclusionS. maltophilia infections are challenging to treat because of limited options. An analysis of 41 patients indicates ERV may be an acceptable treatment option, but more clinical studies are needed to evaluate its efficacy and safety.
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.