Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40768716›Full record

Trial reportThe New England journal of medicine2025

Ciprofloxacin versus Aminoglycoside-Ciprofloxacin for Bubonic Plague.

Rindra Vatosoa Randremanana, Mihaja Raberahona, Josephine Bourner, Minoarisoa Rajerison, Tansy Edwards, Ravaka Randriamparany, Tsinjo Fehizoro Razafindratsinana, Lisy Hanitra Razananaivo, Gabriella Zadonirina, Théodora Mayouya-Gamana and 9 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIEquivalence TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in The New England journal of medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04110340 (An Open-label, Randomised, Non-inferiority Trial of the Efficacy and Safety of Ciprofloxacin Versus an Aminoglycoside Followed by Ciprofloxacin in the Treatment of Bubonic Plague), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04110340 phase3completednot on this map

An Open-label, Randomised, Non-inferiority Trial of the Efficacy and Safety of Ciprofloxacin Versus an Aminoglycoside Followed by Ciprofloxacin in the Treatment of Bubonic Plague

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of OxfordRan2020 to 2025Enrolled222ConditionsPlague, Bubonic, Plague, PneumonicArmsCiprofloxacin, Streptomycin, Gentamicin
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Environmental and Host Blood Interactions ShapePathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Rindra Vatosoa RandremananaInstitut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo.
Mihaja RaberahonaCentre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Joseph Raseta Befelatanana, Antananarivo, Madagascar.
Josephine BournerInternational Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium, Pandemic Sciences Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4687-8380
Minoarisoa RajerisonInstitut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo.
Tansy EdwardsInternational Statistics and Epidemiology Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London.
Ravaka RandriamparanyInstitut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo.
Tsinjo Fehizoro RazafindratsinanaInstitut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo.
Lisy Hanitra RazananaivoInstitut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo.
Gabriella ZadonirinaInstitut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo.
Théodora Mayouya-GamanaInstitut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo.
Alex Paddy Abdel SalamInternational Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium, Pandemic Sciences Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Reziky Tiandraza MangahasimbolaInstitut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo.
Voahangy AndrianaivoarimananaInstitut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo.
Elise PesonelCentre d'Infectiologie Charles Mérieux, Université d'Antananarivo, Antananarivo, Madagascar.
Rivonirina Andry RakotoariveloÉquipe de Recherche Clinique en Maladies Infectieuses, Antananarivo, Madagascar.
Mamy Jean de Dieu RandriaCentre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Joseph Raseta Befelatanana, Antananarivo, Madagascar.
Peter HorbyInternational Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium, Pandemic Sciences Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Piero OlliaroInternational Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium, Pandemic Sciences Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
IMASOY Study Group

Funding

Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office 216273/Z/19/ZWellcome 216273/Z/19/ZWellcome Trust 216273
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPlague is a high-consequence infectious disease with epidemic potential. Current treatment guidelines are based on weak evidence.

methodsWe enrolled persons (excluding pregnant persons) in Madagascar who had clinically suspected bubonic plague during 2020-2024. Using an open-label noninferiority design, we compared two treatments included in the national plague guidelines: oral ciprofloxacin for 10 days (ciprofloxacin monotherapy) or injectable aminoglycoside for 3 days followed by oral ciprofloxacin for 7 days (aminoglycoside-ciprofloxacin). The primary end point was treatment failure on day 11, with treatment failure defined as death, fever, secondary pneumonic plague, or alternative or prolonged plague treatment. To show noninferiority of ciprofloxacin monotherapy among patients with laboratory-confirmed or probable infections, the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval around the risk difference had to be less than 15 percentage points.

resultsA total of 933 patients underwent screening; 450 patients with suspected bubonic plague were enrolled and underwent randomization. A total of 220 patients (110 per group) had confirmed infection, and 2 (1 per group) had probable infection. Of the patients who underwent randomization, 53.2% were male, and the median age was 14 years (range, 2 to 72). Ciprofloxacin monotherapy was noninferior to aminoglycoside-ciprofloxacin therapy: among the patients with confirmed or probable infection, treatment failure occurred in 9.0% (10 of 111 patients) in the ciprofloxacin monotherapy group and 8.1% (9 of 111 patients) in the aminoglycoside-ciprofloxacin group (difference, 0.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -6.0 to 7.8). Noninferiority was consistent in other prespecified analysis populations. A total of 5 patients in the ciprofloxacin monotherapy group and 4 patients in the aminoglycoside-ciprofloxacin group died, and secondary pneumonic plague developed in 3 patients in each group. The incidence of adverse events among patients with confirmed or probable infections was similar in the two groups - 18.0% in the ciprofloxacin monotherapy group and 18.9% in the aminoglycoside-ciprofloxacin group had adverse events, and 7.2% and 5.4%, respectively, had serious adverse events.

conclusionsOral ciprofloxacin monotherapy for 10 days was noninferior to an aminoglycoside-ciprofloxacin sequential combination for the treatment of patients with bubonic plague. (Funded by the U.K. Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office and Wellcome; IMASOY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04110340.).

Indexed as

AminoglycosidesAnti-Bacterial AgentsCiprofloxacinPlagueAdministration, OralAdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolDrug CombinationsDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleGentamicinsHumansInfusions, IntravenousAminoglycosidesAnti-Bacterial AgentsCiprofloxacinDrug CombinationsGentamicinsStreptomycin

Identifiers

PMID40768716
PMCPMC7618094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.