ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Clinical experience with eravacycline-based combination therapy for carbapenem-resistant
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study was conducted to investigate the clinical response, safety, and pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of eravacycline-based combination therapies in patients with pulmonary infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Methods: A prospective observational case series was conducted on patients with CRAB pneumonia treated at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital between February 2024 and August 2025. Prior to treatment, eravacycline minimum inhibitory concentration were determined. Patients received eravacycline-based combination therapy according to their susceptibility results. Data on clinical responses, microbiological clearance, adverse events, and 28-day all-cause mortality were collected. Eravacycline blood concentrations were measured in a subset of patients. Results: Twenty-two patients with CRAB pneumonia (21 with ventilator-associated pneumonia) were enrolled; all had a Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score >6. The mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) scores and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores were 13.77 and 6.23, respectively. All CRAB isolates were susceptible to eravacycline (ChiCAST breakpoint ≤1 mg/L). The clinical response rate, microbiological clearance rate, and 28-day mortality were 72.7%, 86.4%, and 13.6%, respectively. Two patients exhibited hypofibrinogenemia, considered an adverse drug reaction related to eravacycline. No associated bleeding events or other adverse events were observed. Nonresponders had significantly higher SOFA and APACHE II scores than clinical responders. Eravacycline PK was assessed in 14 patients and showed considerable interindividual variability. Among the PK parameters, C Conclusion: The preliminary findings of this prospective observational case series indicate that individualized eravacycline-based combination regimens are associated with promising clinical outcomes and microbiological clearance, with good tolerability and a low incidence of adverse events. Additionally, initial blood concentration data provide a reference for future exploration of PK/PD targets in CRAB pneumonia. However, due to the small sample size and limited statistical power, these findings should be considered preliminary and require validation in larger prospective cohorts.
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.