ReviewInfection and drug resistance2025
Efficacy of Lefamulin for Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia (CABP) Patients: Pooled Analysis of the Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP) 1, LEAP 2 and LEAP China Trials.
Review in Infection and drug resistance, 2025. 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.
- Cost-effectiveness of omadacycline versus moxifloxacin as the initial treatment for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia in China.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Resistance to Lefamulin: An Evaluation of Data from In Vitro Antimicrobial Susceptibility Studies.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Lefamulin or moxifloxacin for community-acquired pneumonia: balancing innovation, safety, and evidence.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Lefamulin represents a newly developed pleuromutilin antibiotic utilized for treating Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia (CABP). Two pivotal Phase 3 studies, the Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP) 1 and LEAP 2 trials, along with the bridging LEAP China trial, each confirmed that Lefamulin has proven efficacy and is non-inferior to active control treatments. This study conducted a post-hoc pooled analysis of these trials to assess Lefamulin's overall efficacy and its effects on specific patient groups, particularly the elderly and those at high risk of drug resistance. Methods: Trials compared lefamulin to moxifloxacin in adults with CABP. The primary outcome was early clinical response (ECR). Secondary outcomes included investigator assessment of clinical response (IACR), and these responses in subgroups, such as severe patients, elderly patients, and those with prior antibiotic treatment. The pooled analysis was conducted post hoc, using noninferiority margin of 10% and 95% confidence intervals. Results: Lefamulin (n=728) can provide sustained high efficacy, which was noninferior to moxifloxacin (n=683). ECR and IACR success rates demonstrated similar elevation (≥ 84.0%). Comparable and elevated ECR and IACR rates across subgroup of PORT risk class III to V(84.1-88.6%) and subgroup of prior antibiotic treatment (81.8-85.6%) were observed. In the subgroup of age over 65 years old, higher ECR of lefamulin vs moxifloxacin in each ten years-stratification (65-74 years old: 87.2% vs 86.5%; 75-84 years old: 86.8 vs 85.4%; ≥85 years old: 88.5 vs 82.4%). The older the age over 65 years old, the more favorable lefamulin. Conclusion: Lefamulin, non-inferior to moxifloxacin, showed high effectiveness in CABP patients, especially in patients over 65 years old, those with PORT III-V or prior antibiotic treatment.
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.