Efficacy and safety of tigecycline monotherapy vs. imipenem/cilastatin in Chinese patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections: a randomized controlled trial

Comparative efficacy and safety of non-polymyxin antibiotics against nosocomial pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal infection, or complicated urinary tract infection: A network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

The increasing epidemic of infections caused by drug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria has led to the development of several antibiotic therapies. Owing to the scarcity of head-to-head comparisons of current and emerging antibiotics, the present network meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of antibiotics in patients with nosocomial pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal infection, or complicated urinary tract infection.

METHODS

Two independent researchers systematically searched databases up to August 2022 and included 26 randomised controlled trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The protocol was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, PROSPERO (CRD42021237798). The frequentist random effects model (R version 3.5.1, netmeta package) was utilized. The DerSimonian-Laird random effects model was used to estimate heterogeneity. The calculated P-score was applied to rank the interventions. Additionally, inconsistencies, publication bias, and subgroup effects were assessed in the present study to avoid bias.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference among included antibiotics in terms of clinical response and mortality, probably because most antibiotic trials were designed to be non-inferior. In terms of P-score ranking, carbapenems may be the recommended choice considering both adverse events and clinical responses. On the other hand, for carbapenem-sparing options, ceftolozane-tazobactam was the preferred antibiotic for nosocomial pneumonia; eravacycline, for complicated intra-abdominal infection; and cefiderocol, for complicated urinary tract infection.

CONCLUSION

Carbapenems may be preferable options in terms of safety and efficacy for the treatment of Gram-negative bacterial complicated infections. However, to preserve the effectiveness of carbapenems, it is important to consider carbapenem-sparing regimens.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of antimicrobial agents for complicated intra-abdominal infection: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Which antimicrobial agents provide the optimal efficacy, safety, and tolerability for the empirical treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) remains unclear but is paramount in the context of evolving antimicrobial resistance. Therefore, updated meta-analyses on this issue are warranted.

METHODS

We systematically searched four major electronic databases from their inception through October 2022. Randomized controlled trials examining antimicrobial agents for cIAI treatment were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of included studies utilizing the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool as described in the updated version 1 of the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and extracted data from all manuscripts according to a predetermined list of topics. All meta-analyses were conducted using R software. The primary outcome was clinical success rate in patients with cIAIs.

RESULTS

Forty-five active-controlled trials with low to medium methodological quality and involving 14,267 adults with cIAIs were included in the network meta-analyses. The vast majority of patients with an acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score < 10 had low risk of treatment failure or death. Twenty-one regimens were investigated. In the network meta-analyses, cefepime plus metronidazole was more effective than tigecycline and ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole (odds ratio [OR] = 1.96, 95% credibility interval [CrI] 1.05 ~ 3.79; OR = 3.09, 95% CrI 1.02 ~ 9.79, respectively). No statistically significant differences were found among antimicrobial agents regarding microbiological success rates. Cefepime plus metronidazole had lower risk of all-cause mortality than tigecycline (OR = 0.22, 95% CrI 0.05 ~ 0.85). Statistically significant trends were observed favoring cefotaxime plus metronidazole, which exhibited fewer discontinuations because of adverse events (AEs) when compared with eravacycline, meropenem and ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole (OR = 0.0, 95% CrI 0.0 ~ 0.8; OR = 0.0, 95% CrI 0.0 ~ 0.7; OR = 0.0, 95% CrI 0.0 ~ 0.64, respectively). Compared with tigecycline, eravacycline was associated with fewer discontinuations because of AEs (OR = 0.17, 95% CrI 0.03 ~ 0.81). Compared with meropenem, ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole had a higher rate of discontinuation due to AEs (OR = 2.09, 95% CrI 1.0 ~ 4.41). In pairwise meta-analyses, compared with ceftriaxone plus metronidazole, ertapenem and moxifloxacin (one trial, OR = 1.93, 95% CI 1.06 ~ 3.50; one trial, OR = 4.24, 95% CI 1.18 ~ 15.28, respectively) were associated with significantly increased risks of serious AEs. Compared with imipenem/cilastatin, tigecycline (four trials, OR = 1.57, 95%CI 1.07 ~ 2.32) was associated with a significantly increased risk of serious AEs. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, Cefepime plus metronidazole was more likely to be optimal among all treatments in terms of efficacy and safety, tigecycline was more likely to be worst regimen in terms of tolerability, and eravacycline was more likely to be best tolerated.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that cefepime plus metronidazole is optimal for empirical treatment of patients with cIAIs and that tigecycline should be prescribed cautiously considering the safety and tolerability concerns. However, it should be noted that data currently available on the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of antimicrobial agents pertain mostly to lower-risk patients with cIAIs.

The efficacy and safety of eravacycline compared with current clinically common antibiotics in the treatment of adults with complicated intra-abdominal infections: A Bayesian network meta-analysis

Background

Eravacycline is a novel, fully synthetic fluorocycline antibiotic for the treatment of adults with complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs). However, the efficacy and safety of eravacycline compared with current clinically common antibiotics remain unknown.

Objective

This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of eravacycline and other clinically common antibiotics in China, including tigecycline, meropenem, ertapenem, ceftazidime/avibactam+metronidazole, piperacillin/tazobactam, imipenem/cilastatin, and ceftriaxone+metronidazole, for the treatment of adults with cIAIs and to provide a reference for clinical choice.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were electronically searched to collect clinical randomized controlled studies (RCTs) comparing different antibiotics in the treatment of patients with cIAIs from inception to June 1, 2021. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies.

Results

A total of 4050 articles were initially retrieved, and 25 RCTs were included after screening, involving eight treatment therapies and 9372 patients. The results of network meta-analysis showed that in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the clinically evaluable (CE) population, and the microbiologically evaluable (ME) population, the clinical response rate of eravacycline was not significantly different from that of the other 7 therapies (P > 0.05). In terms of microbiological response rate, eravacycline was significantly better than tigecycline [tigecycline vs. eravacycline: RR = 0.82, 95%CI (0.65,0.99)], and there was no significant difference between the other 6 regimens and eravacycline (P > 0.05). In terms of safety, the incidence of serious adverse events, discontinuation rate, and all-cause mortality of eravacycline were not significantly different from those of the other 7 treatment therapies (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Based on the evidence generated by the current noninferiority clinical trial design, the efficacy and safety of eravacycline for the treatment of adults with cIAIs are not significantly different from those of the other 7 commonly used clinical antibiotics in China. In terms of microbiological response rate, eravacycline was significantly better than tigecycline. In view of the severe multidrug-resistant situation in China, existing drugs have difficulty meeting the needs of clinical treatment, and the new antibacterial drug eravacycline may be one of the preferred options for the treatment of cIAIs in adults.

A Phase 3, Multicenter, Double-blind, Randomized Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Plus Metronidazole Versus Meropenem in Chinese Participants With Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole vs meropenem plus placebo for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) in Chinese adult participants.

METHODS

In this phase 3 clinical trial (NCT03830333), Chinese adult participants with cIAI were randomized 1:1 to receive ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole or meropenem plus placebo. The primary objective was to assess ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole for noninferiority vs meropenem for clinical response rate at the test of cure (TOC; 28 ± 2 days after study start) visit in the clinically evaluable (CE) population. Secondary end points included clinical and microbiologic responses at the TOC and end of treatment (EOT; ≤24 hours after last dose) visits and adverse event rates.

RESULTS

Clinical cure at the TOC visit in the CE population was 95.2% and 93.1% for ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole and meropenem, respectively (between-treatment difference: 2.1% [95% CI: -4.7%, 8.8%); thus, noninferiority was met. Clinical responses at the TOC and EOT visits and microbiologic responses at the TOC visit were consistent with the primary efficacy end point. Safety was comparable between study treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

In Chinese adult participants with cIAI, ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole was noninferior to meropenem, with comparable safety.

Diagnosis and Management of Intraabdominal Infection: Guidelines by the Chinese Society of Surgical Infection and Intensive Care and the Chinese College of Gastrointestinal Fistula Surgeons

The Chinese guidelines for IAI presented here were developed by a panel that included experts from the fields of surgery, critical care, microbiology, infection control, pharmacology, and evidence-based medicine. All questions were structured in population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes format, and evidence profiles were generated. Recommendations were generated following the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system or Best Practice Statement (BPS), when applicable. The final guidelines include 45 graded recommendations and 17 BPSs, including the classification of disease severity, diagnosis, source control, antimicrobial therapy, microbiologic evaluation, nutritional therapy, other supportive therapies, diagnosis and management of specific IAIs, and recognition and management of source control failure. Recommendations on fluid resuscitation and organ support therapy could not be formulated and thus were not included. Accordingly, additional high-quality clinical studies should be performed in the future to address the clinicians' concerns.

Optimal empiric treatment for KPC-2-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae infections in critically ill patients with normal or decreased renal function using Monte Carlo simulation

BACKGROUND

Limited clinical studies describe the pharmacodynamics of fosfomycin (FOS), tigecycline (TGC) and colistin methanesulfonate (CMS) in combination against KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (KPC-Kp). Population pharmacokinetic models were used in our study. Monte Carlo simulation was conducted to calculate probability of target attainment (PTA) and cumulative fraction of response (CFR) of each agent alone and in combination against KPC-Kp in patients with normal or decreased renal function.

RESULTS

The simulated regimen of FOS 6 g q8h reached ≥90% PTA against a MIC of 64 mg/L in patients with normal renal function. For patients with renal impairment, FOS 4 g q8h could provide sufficient antimicrobial coverage against a MIC of 128 mg/L. And increasing the daily dose could result to the cut-off value to 256 mg/L in decreased renal function. For TGC, conventional dosing regimens failed to reach 90% PTA against a MIC of 2 mg/L. Higher loading and daily doses (TGC 200/400 mg loading doses followed by 100 mg q12h/200 mg q24h) were needed. For CMS, none achieved 90% PTA against a MIC of 2 mg/L in normal renal function. Against KPC-Kp, the regimens of 200/400 mg loading dose followed by 100 q12h /200 mg q24h achieved > 80% CFRs regardless of renal function, followed by CMS 9 million IU loading dose followed by 4.5/3 million IU q12h in combination with FOS 8 g q8h (CFR 75-91%).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a loading dose and high daily dose of TGC and CMS in combination with FOS can provide sufficient antimicrobial coverage against critically ill patients infected with KPC-Kp.

Genome and Transcriptome Analysis of A. baumannii's "Transient" Increase in Drug Resistance under Tigecycline Pressure

OBJECTIVES

As a common nosocomial infection bacterium, A. baumannii's drug resistance rate continues to rise. In this study, the objective was to explore the possible reasons for the increased drug resistance of A. baumannii after tigecycline treatment.

METHODS

Based on the drug resistance analysis of 183 clinical isolates of A. baumannii, a pair of strains (AB711 and AB721) which changed their resistance after treatment was selected. Tigecycline was used to induce the drug resistance of strain AB711 in vitro. The differential expressed genes from A. baumannii strains were analyzed using whole gene sequencing (WGS) and RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) combined with online MLST, SNP tools and bioinformatics software, and verified by reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR).

RESULTS

AB721 became more resistant to tetracyclines than AB711 at the initial detection. However, after a period of time, the resistance of AB711 and AB721 became consistent. This phenomenon can also be repeated using AB711 in vitro. After induction, the AB711 with increased MIC value of tigecycline was named AB712. The results of WGS, MLST and SNP based Phylogenetic tree indicated that AB711, AB712, AB721 were co-origin and belong to ST2 (Pasteur) / ST1791 (Oxford). Comparative transcriptome indicated that the Differential expression of some genes can play an important role in the resistance enhancement process of AB711. For example, compared with AB711, genes related to benzene-containing compound metabolic process, translation, ribosomal structure and biogenesis and so on were upregulated significantly in AB712. In addition, efflux pumps such as RND transporter permease subunit, EmrAB, MacB, and Tet resistance operon were also upregulated.

CONCLUSION

Tigcycline induced changes in the expression of some related genes in A. baumannii, which may be the main reason for its increased drug resistance.

Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ-AVI) as empirical treatment comparing to ceftolozane/tazobactam and to meropenem for complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI)

Background

The rising incidence of resistance to currently available antibiotics among pathogens, particularly Gram-negative pathogens, in complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) has become a challenge for clinicians. Ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ-AVI) is a fixed-dose antibiotic approved in Europe and the United States for treating (in combination with metronidazole) cIAI in adult hospitalised patients who have limited or no alternative treatment options. The approval was based on the results of RECLAIM, a Phase III, parallel-group, comparative study (RECLAIM 1 [NCT01499290] and RECLAIM 2 [NCT01500239]). The objective of our study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of CAZ-AVI plus metronidazole compared with 1) ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole and 2) meropenem, as an empiric treatment for the management of cIAI in Italy.

Methods

A sequential, patient-level simulation model, with a 5-year time horizon and 3% annual discount rate (applied to both costs and health benefits), was developed using Microsoft Excel® to demonstrate the clinical course of the disease. The impact of resistant pathogens was included as an additional factor.

Results

In the base-case analysis, the CAZ-AVI sequence (CAZ-AVI plus metronidazole followed by a colistin + tigecycline + high-dose meropenem combination after treatment failure), when compared to sequences for ceftolozane/tazobactam (ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole followed by colistin + tigecycline + high-dose meropenem after treatment failure) and meropenem (meropenem followed by colistin + tigecycline + high-dose meropenem after treatment failure), had better clinical outcomes with higher cure rates (93.04% vs. 91.52%; 92.98% vs. 90.24%, respectively), shorter hospital stays (∆ = − 0.38 and ∆ = − 1.24 days per patient, respectively), and higher quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained per patient (4.021 vs. 3.982; 4.019 vs. 3.960, respectively). The incremental cost effectiveness ratio in the CAZ-AVI sequence was €4099 and €15,574 per QALY gained versus each comparator sequence, respectively, well below the willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 per QALY accepted in Italy.

Conclusions

The model results demonstrated that CAZ-AVI plus metronidazole could be a cost-effective alternative when compared with other antibiotic treatment options, as it is expected to provide better clinical benefits in hospitalised patients with cIAI in Italy.

Busting the Myth of "Static vs Cidal": A Systemic Literature Review

We sought to determine if clinical data validate the dogma that bactericidal antibiotics are more clinically effective than bacteriostatic agents. We performed a systematic literature review of published, randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a bacteriostatic agent to a bactericidal agent in the treatment of clinical, bacterial infections. Of 56 identified trials published since 1985, 49 found no significant difference in efficacy between bacteriostatic and bactericidal agents. In 6 trials it was found that the bacteriostatic agent was superior to the bactericidal agent in efficacy. Only 1 trial found that the bactericidal agent was superior; in that case, the inferiority of the static agent was explainable by underdosing of the drug based on pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis. Thus, virtually all available data from high-quality, RCTs demonstrate no intrinsic superiority of bactericidal compared to bacteriostatic agents. Other drug characteristics such as optimal dosing, pharmacokinetics, and tissue penetration may be more important efficacy drivers.

Carbapenems vs tigecycline for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections: A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) are common in clinical practice, caused by a mixture of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, increase the risk of mortality. Carbapenems and tigecycline (TGC) are recommended for antimicrobial therapies for cIAIs.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of different carbapenems vs TGC for the treatment of cIAIs.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Medline (via Ovid SP) and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different carbapenems vs TGC for the treatment of cIAIs. The pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% credible interval (CrI) was calculated by Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. We estimated summary ORs using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies involving 6745 participants were included in the analysis. Five different carbapenems and TGC were ultimately evaluated in this study. Although, the efficacy of carbapenems and TGC by ORs with corresponding 95% CrIs had not yet reached statistical differences, the cumulative rank probability indicated that clinical treatment success from best to worst was doripenem (DOPM), meropenem (MEPM), imipenem/cilastatin (IC), biapenem (BAPM), TGC and imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam (ICRB); microbiological treatment success from best to worst was DOPM, MEPM, IC, BAPM, ICRB and TGC. As for the risk of adverse events (AEs), TGC showed higher risk of AEs compared with IC (OR = 1.53, 95% CrI = 1.02-2.41), the remain antibiotic agents from lower to higher was MEPM, IC, BAPM, DOPM, ICRB and TGC. The risk of mortality from lower to higher was BAPM, DOPM, MEPM, IC, TGC and ICRB.

CONCLUSION

No differences in clinical and microbiological outcomes were observed between different carbapenems and TGC. Balancing the evidence for drug efficacy and side effects, DOPM appears to be the best available treatment for cIAIs. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider that DOPM is one of the best carbapenem monotherapy for cIAIs. MEPM and IC was also associated with higher rates of clinical and microbiological treatment success following DOPM. Empiric antimicrobial treatment of patients with cIAIs should be selected in light of the local bacterial epidemiology and patterns of resistance.

A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, comparison study of the efficacy and safety of tigecycline to imipenem/cilastatin to treat complicated intra-abdominal infections in hospitalized subjects in China

Purpose

To assess the efficacy and safety of tigecycline in treating complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) in hospitalized patients in China.

Patients and methods

A Phase IV, multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, active-controlled, non-inferiority study was conducted. Hospitalized cIAI patients ≥18 years of age were randomized (1:1) to receive intravenous tigecycline (initial dose 100 mg, then 50 mg q12h) or imipenem/cilastatin (500 mg/500 mg or adjusted for renal dysfunction, q6h) for 5–14 days. The primary end point was clinical response for clinically evaluable (CE) subjects at test-of-cure (TOC) assessment.

Results

Four hundred and seventy subjects were randomized; 232 in the tigecycline and 231 in the imipenem/cilastatin group were treated. Tigecycline was non-inferior to imipenem/cilastatin with respect to clinical response at TOC for all CE subjects, ie, the lower bound of the two-sided 95% CI (−12.0%, −1.4%) for the treatment difference in cure rate, tigecycline (89.9%) minus imipenem/cilastatin (96.6%), was >−15%. As non-inferiority was concluded in the CE population, superiority of tigecycline over imipenem/cilastatin and superiority of imipenem/cilastatin over tigecycline were tested on the CE and the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) populations according to pre-specified statistical criteria, and neither could be demonstrated (the cure rate was 82.8% vs 88.7%, difference −6.0% [−12.8%, 0.8%], for the mITT population). The subject-level microbiological response rate at TOC for the microbiologically evaluable population was 88.0% (110/125) vs 95.3% (102/107, difference −7.3% [−15.2%, 0.5%]). Nausea, drug ineffectiveness, postoperative wound infection, vomiting, and pyrexia were the most common adverse events in tigecycline-treated subjects; pyrexia, nausea, vomiting, and increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels were most common in imipenem/cilastatin-treated subjects; none were unanticipated.

Conclusion

Tigecycline was non-inferior to imipenem/cilastatin in treating hospitalized adult patients with cIAI. Superiority of tigecycline over imipenem/cilastatin or imipenem/cilastatin over tigecycline could not be demonstrated. Safety was consistent with the known profile for tigecycline.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

NCT01721408.

Efficacy of intravenous tigecycline in patients with Acinetobacter complex infections: results from 14 Phase III and Phase IV clinical trials

Background

Acinetobacter infections, especially multidrug-resistant (MDR) Acinetobacter infections, are a global health problem. This study aimed to describe clinical outcomes in patients with confirmed Acinetobacter spp. isolates who were treated with tigecycline in randomized clinical trials.

Materials and methods

Data from 14 multinational, randomized (open-label or double-blind), and active-controlled (except one) Phase III and IV studies were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results

A total of 174 microbiologically evaluable patients with Acinetobacter spp. infections (including MDR infections) were identified, and 95 received tigecycline to treat community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), diabetic foot infections (DFIs), hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs), infections with resistant pathogens (RPs), or complicated skin and skin-structure infections. The rate of cure of tigecycline for most indications was 70%–80%, with the highest (88.2%) in cIAIs. The rate of cure of the comparators was generally higher than tigecycline, but within each indication the 95% CIs for clinical cure for each treatment group overlapped. For most Acinetobacter isolates, the minimum inhibitory concentration of tigecycline was 0.12–2 μg/mL, with seven at 4 μg/mL and one at 8 μg/mL. The cure rate by tigecycline was 50% (95% CI 12.5%–87.5% in CAP) to 88.2% (95% CI 66.2%–97.1% in cIAIs) for all Acinetobacter, and 72.7% (95% CI 54.5%–93.2% in HAP) to 100% (95% CI 25%–100.0% in cIAIs) for MDR Acinetobacter. For the comparators, it was 83.8% (95% CI 62.8%–95.9% in HAP) to 100% (95% CI 75%–100% in cIAIs and 25%–100.0% in RPs) and 88% (95% CI 66%–97% in HAP) to 100% (95% CI 25%–100% in cIAIs and 75%–100% in DFIs), respectively.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that with appropriate monitoring, tigecycline may be a useful consideration for Acinetobacter infections alone or in combination with other anti-infective agents when other therapies are not suitable.

The Surgical Infection Society Revised Guidelines on the Management of Intra-Abdominal Infection

BACKGROUND

Previous evidence-based guidelines on the management of intra-abdominal infection (IAI) were published by the Surgical Infection Society (SIS) in 1992, 2002, and 2010. At the time the most recent guideline was released, the plan was to update the guideline every five years to ensure the timeliness and appropriateness of the recommendations.

METHODS

Based on the previous guidelines, the task force outlined a number of topics related to the treatment of patients with IAI and then developed key questions on these various topics. All questions were approached using general and specific literature searches, focusing on articles and other information published since 2008. These publications and additional materials published before 2008 were reviewed by the task force as a whole or by individual subgroups as to relevance to individual questions. Recommendations were developed by a process of iterative consensus, with all task force members voting to accept or reject each recommendation. Grading was based on the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system; the quality of the evidence was graded as high, moderate, or weak, and the strength of the recommendation was graded as strong or weak. Review of the document was performed by members of the SIS who were not on the task force. After responses were made to all critiques, the document was approved as an official guideline of the SIS by the Executive Council.

RESULTS

This guideline summarizes the current recommendations developed by the task force on the treatment of patients who have IAI. Evidence-based recommendations have been made regarding risk assessment in individual patients; source control; the timing, selection, and duration of antimicrobial therapy; and suggested approaches to patients who fail initial therapy. Additional recommendations related to the treatment of pediatric patients with IAI have been included.

SUMMARY

The current recommendations of the SIS regarding the treatment of patients with IAI are provided in this guideline.

Signal Detection of Imipenem Compared to Other Drugs from Korea Adverse Event Reporting System Database

PURPOSE

To detect signals of adverse drug events after imipenem treatment using the Korea Institute of Drug Safety & Risk Management-Korea adverse event reporting system database (KIDS-KD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed data mining using KIDS-KD, which was constructed using spontaneously reported adverse event (AE) reports between December 1988 and June 2014. We detected signals calculated the proportional reporting ratio, reporting odds ratio, and information component of imipenem. We defined a signal as any AE that satisfied all three indices. The signals were compared with drug labels of nine countries.

RESULTS

There were 807582 spontaneous AEs reports in the KIDS-KD. Among those, the number of antibiotics related AEs was 192510; 3382 reports were associated with imipenem. The most common imipenem-associated AE was the drug eruption; 353 times. We calculated the signal by comparing with all other antibiotics and drugs; 58 and 53 signals satisfied the three methods. We compared the drug labelling information of nine countries, including the USA, the UK, Japan, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, France, Canada, and South Korea, and discovered that the following signals were currently not included in drug labels: hypokalemia, cardiac arrest, cardiac failure, Parkinson's syndrome, myocardial infarction, and prostate enlargement. Hypokalemia was an additional signal compared with all other antibiotics, and the other signals were not different compared with all other antibiotics and all other drugs.

CONCLUSION

We detected new signals that were not listed on the drug labels of nine countries. However, further pharmacoepidemiologic research is needed to evaluate the causality of these signals.

The Antibiotic Drug Tigecycline: A Focus on its Promising Anticancer Properties

Tigecycline (TIG), the first member of glycylcycline bacteriostatic agents, has been approved to treat complicated infections in the clinic because of its expanded-spectrum antibiotic potential. Recently, an increasing number of studies have emphasized the anti-tumor effects of TIG. The inhibitory effects of TIG on cancer depend on several activating signaling pathways and abnormal mitochondrial function in cancer cells. The aim of this review is to summarize the cumulative anti-tumor evidence supporting TIG activity against different cancer types, including acute myeloid leukemia (AML), glioma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), among others. In addition, the efficacy and side effects of TIG in cancer patients are summarized in detail. Future clinical trials are also to be discussed that will evaluate the security and validate the underlying the tumor-killing properties of TIG.

Clinical Experience of Patients Receiving Doripenem-Containing Regimens for the Treatment of Healthcare-Associated Infections

In this study, we retrospectively reviewed the clinical experience of patients receiving doripenem-containing regimens for the treatment of healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs) in a tertiary care center and assessed the clinical usefulness of doripenem therapy in this clinical setting. In this retrospective study, the medical records of all adult patients who had ever received doripenem-containing therapy for the treatment of HCAIs were reviewed between September 1, 2012 and August 31, 2014, and the following data were extracted: age, gender, type of infection, disease severity, underlying comorbidities or conditions, and laboratory results. Additionally, we also extracted data regarding the rates of mortality and clinical and microbiological response. A total of 184 adult patients with HCAIs who had received doripenem-containing therapy were included in this study. Respiratory tract infections (n = 91, 49.5%) were the most common type of infection, followed by urinary tract infections, intra-abdominal infections and skin and soft tissue infections. The mean APACHE II score was 14.5. The rate of clinical success was 78.2%, and the overall in-hospital mortality rate was only 13.0%. Among patients, in-hospital mortality was independently and significantly associated with APACHE II score (odds ratio (OR), 1.2825; 95% CI, 1.1123–1.4788) and achieving clinical success (OR, 0.003; 95% CI, 0.0003–0.409). In conclusion, the overall in-hospital mortality rate was low and the clinical success rate was high among HCAI patients receiving doripenem treatment. These results suggest that doripenem may be judiciously used for the treatment of patients with HCAIs.

Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections in the Hospital Setting: Overview, Implications for Clinical Practice, and Emerging Treatment Options

The increasing prevalence of infections due to multidrug-resistant (MDR) gram-negative bacteria constitutes a serious threat to global public health due to the limited treatment options available and the historically slow pace of development of new antimicrobial agents. Infections due to MDR strains are associated with increased morbidity and mortality and prolonged hospitalization, which translates to a significant burden on healthcare systems. In particular, MDR strains of Enterobacteriaceae (especially Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli), Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter baumannii have emerged as particularly serious concerns. In the United States, MDR strains of these organisms have been reported from hospitals throughout the country and are not limited to a small subset of hospitals. Factors that have contributed to the persistence and spread of MDR gram-negative bacteria include the following: overuse of existing antimicrobial agents, which has led to the development of adaptive resistance mechanisms by bacteria; a lack of good antimicrobial stewardship such that use of multiple broad-spectrum agents has helped perpetuate the cycle of increasing resistance; and a lack of good infection control practices. The rising prevalence of infections due to MDR gram-negative bacteria presents a significant dilemma in selecting empiric antimicrobial therapy in seriously ill hospitalized patients. A prudent initial strategy is to initiate treatment with a broad-spectrum regimen pending the availability of microbiological results allowing for targeted or narrowing of therapy. Empiric therapy with newer agents that exhibit good activity against MDR gram-negative bacterial strains such as tigecycline, ceftolozane-tazobactam, ceftazidime-avibactam, and others in the development pipeline offer promising alternatives to existing agents.

Efficacy and safety of tigecycline for the treatment of severe infectious diseases: an updated meta-analysis of RCTs

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of tigecycline in comparison with other antimicrobial treatments for infectious diseases.

DESIGN

Databases of PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched through Feb. 2015. The reference lists of the initially identified articles and systemic review articles were manually searched. Randomized controlled trials assessing tigecycline and other antibiotics for infectious diseases in adult patients were included.

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs including 7689 cases were identified. We found that tigecycline was not as effective as the comparator agents for clinical treatment success (for the clinically evaluable population, odds ratio [OR] = 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] = (0.73, 0.96), P=0.01; for the clinically modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population, OR = 0.81, 95% CI = (0.72, 0.92), P=0.001). There was no significant difference in microbiological treatment success with lower eradication rate in tigecycline versus comparators (for the microbiologically evaluable population, OR = 0.94, 95% CI = (0.77, 1.16), P=0.56; for the microbiological mITT populations, OR = 0.91, 95% CI = (0.74, 1.11), P=0.35). Adverse events and all-cause mortality were more common in the tigecycline group.

CONCLUSIONS

Tigecycline is not as effective as other antibiotics with relatively more frequency of adverse events and higher mortality rate.

Empiric therapy for hospital-acquired, Gram-negative complicated intra-abdominal infection and complicated urinary tract infections: a systematic literature review of current and emerging treatment options

BACKGROUND

Empiric therapy for healthcare-associated infections remains challenging, especially with the continued development of Gram-negative organisms producing extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs) and the threat of multi-drug-resistant organisms. Current treatment options for resistant Gram-negative infections include carbapenems, tigecycline, piperacillin-tazobactam, cefepime, ceftazidime, and two recently approved therapies, ceftolozane-tazobactam and ceftazidime-avibactam.

METHODS

This systematic literature review surveys the published clinical trial evidence available since 2000 in support of both current and emerging treatment options in the settings of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) and complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI). When available, clinical cure rates for patients with infections from ESBL-producing strains are provided, as is information about efficacy against Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

RESULTS

Clinical trial evidence to guide selection of empiric antibiotic therapy in patients with complicated, hospital-acquired, Gram-negative IAIs and UTIs is limited. Though most of the clinical trials explored in this overview enrolled patients with complicated infections, often patients with severe infections and multiple comorbidities were excluded.

CONCLUSIONS

Practitioners in the clinical setting who are treating patients with complicated, hospital-acquired, Gram-negative IAIs and UTIs need to consider the possibility of polymicrobial infections, antibiotic-resistant organisms, and/or severely ill patients with multiple comorbidities. There is a severe shortage of evidence-based research to guide the selection of empiric antibiotic therapy for many patients in this setting. New therapies recently approved or in late-stage development promise to expand the number of options available for empiric therapy of these hospital-acquired, Gram-negative infections.

Clinical response and mortality in tigecycline complicated intra-abdominal infection and complicated skin and soft-tissue infection trials

An imbalance in all-cause mortality was noted in tigecycline phase 3 and 4 comparative clinical trials across all studied indications. We investigated clinical failure and mortality in phase 3 and 4 complicated skin and soft-tissue infection (cSSTI) and complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) tigecycline trials using descriptive analyses of a blinded adjudication of mortality and multivariate regression analyses. Attributable mortality analyses of cSSTI revealed death due to infection in 0.1% of each treatment group (P=1.000). In cIAI, there were no significant differences between tigecycline (1.2%) and comparator (0.7%) subjects who died due to infection (P=0.243). For cIAI clinical failure, treatment interaction with organ dysfunction was observed with no difference observed between clinical cure for tigecycline (85.4%) and comparator (76.7%) treatment groups (odds ratio=0.58, 95% confidence interval 0.28-1.19). Tigecycline-treated subjects had more adverse events of secondary pneumonias (2.1% vs. 1.2%) and more adverse events of secondary pneumonias with an outcome of death (0.5% vs. 0.1%). These analyses do not suggest that tigecycline is a factor either for failure (cSSTI and cIAI studies) or for death (cIAI studies).

Guidelines for management of intra-abdominal infections

Intra-abdominal infections are one of the most common gastrointestinal emergencies and a leading cause of septic shock. A consensus conference on the management of community-acquired peritonitis was published in 2000. A new consensus as well as new guidelines for less common situations such as peritonitis in paediatrics and healthcare-associated infections had become necessary. The objectives of these Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) were therefore to define the medical and surgical management of community-acquired intra-abdominal infections, define the specificities of intra-abdominal infections in children and describe the management of healthcare-associated infections. The literature review was divided into six main themes: diagnostic approach, infection source control, microbiological data, paediatric specificities, medical treatment of peritonitis, and management of complications. The GRADE(®) methodology was applied to determine the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations. After summarising the work of the experts and application of the GRADE(®) method, 62 recommendations were formally defined by the organisation committee. Recommendations were then submitted to and amended by a review committee. After 2 rounds of Delphi scoring and various amendments, a strong agreement was obtained for 44 (100%) recommendations. The CPGs for peritonitis are therefore based on a consensus between the various disciplines involved in the management of these patients concerning a number of themes such as: diagnostic strategy and the place of imaging; time to management; the place of microbiological specimens; targets of empirical anti-infective therapy; duration of anti-infective therapy. The CPGs also specified the value and the place of certain practices such as: the place of laparoscopy; the indications for image-guided percutaneous drainage; indications for the treatment of enterococci and fungi. The CPGs also confirmed the futility of certain practices such as: the use of diagnostic biomarkers; systematic relaparotomies; prolonged anti-infective therapy, especially in children.

Tigecycline use in critically ill patients: a multicentre prospective observational study in the intensive care setting

PURPOSE

This prospective observational study aimed at describing prescription patterns of tigecycline and patient outcomes in 26 French intensive care units (ICU).

METHODS

Data of consecutive cases of adult patients treated with tigecycline were collected from the initiation until 7 days after the end of treatment. Response to treatment was classified as success, failure or undetermined and analyses were presented according to severity (SOFA score <7 or ≥7). Survival was recorded at 28 days.

RESULTS

A total of 156 patients were included (64% male, age 60 ± 15 years). At inclusion, 53% had a SOFA score ≥7; 93% had received prior anti-infective agents. Tigecycline was given as first-line treatment in 47% of patients, mostly in combination (67%), for intra-abdominal (IAI 56%), skin and soft tissue (SSTI 19%) or other infections. A total of 76% of the treated infections were hospital-acquired. Bacteraemia was reported in 12% of patients. Median treatment duration was 9 days. Tigecycline was prematurely stopped in 42% patients. The global success rate was 60% at the end of treatment, and significantly higher with treatment duration more than 9 days (76 vs. 47%, P < 0.001). Success rate was 65% for patients alive at the end of treatment. Success rates tended to decrease with illness severity, immunosuppression, bacteraemia and obesity. Survival rate at day 28 was 85% in the whole cohort and significantly higher in the less severely ill patients (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Tigecycline success rates appear comparable to those reported in clinical studies in ICU with severe infections. Tigecycline could be an alternative in ICU patients.

Efficacy of tigecycline for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections in real-life clinical practice from five European observational studies

OBJECTIVES

Tigecycline is a broad-spectrum antibiotic approved for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs). The efficacy of tigecycline when administered as monotherapy or in combination with other antibacterials in the treatment of cIAIs in routine clinical practice is described.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Individual patient-level data were pooled from five European observational studies (July 2006 to October 2011).

RESULTS

A total of 785 cIAI patients who received tigecycline were included (mean age 63.1 ± 14.0 years). Of these, 56.6% were in intensive care units, 65.6% acquired their infection in hospital, 88.1% had at least one comorbidity and 65.7% had secondary peritonitis. The mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores at the beginning of treatment were 16.9 ± 7.6 (n = 614) and 7.0 ± 4.2 (n = 108), respectively, indicating high disease severity. Escherichia coli (41.8%), Enterococcus faecium (40.1%) and Enterococcus faecalis (21.1%) were the most frequently isolated pathogens; 49.1% of infections were polymicrobial and 17.5% were due to resistant pathogens. Overall, 54.8% (n = 430) received tigecycline as monotherapy and 45.2% (n = 355) as combination therapy for a mean duration of 10.6 days. Clinical response rates at the end of treatment were 77.4% for all patients (567/733), 80.6% for patients who received tigecycline as monotherapy (329/408), 75.2% for patients with a nosocomial infection (354/471), 75.8% for patients with an APACHE II score >15 (250/330) and 54.2% (32/59) for patients with a SOFA score ≥ 7.

CONCLUSIONS

In these real-life studies, tigecycline, alone and in combination, achieved favourable clinical response rates in patients with cIAI with a high severity of illness.

Excess deaths associated with tigecycline after approval based on noninferiority trials

BACKGROUND

On the basis of noninferiority trials, tigecycline received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 2005. In 2010, the FDA warned in a safety communication that tigecycline was associated with an increased risk of death.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched using the terms "tigecycline" and "randomized controlled trial (RCT)" through April 2011. Excess deaths and noncure rates for both approved and nonapproved indications were examined using meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Ten published and 3 unpublished studies met inclusion criteria (N = 7434). No significant heterogeneity was seen for mortality (I(2 )= 0%; P = .99) or noncure rates (I(2 )= 25%; P = .19). Across randomized controlled trials, tigecycline was associated with increased mortality (risk difference [RD], 0.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1%-1.2%; P = .01) and noncure rates (RD, 2.9%; 95% CI, 0.6%-5.2%; P = .01). Effects were not isolated to type of infection or comparator antibiotic regimen, and the impact on survival remained significant when limited to trials of approved indications (I(2 )= 0%; RD, 0.6%; P = .04). A pooled analysis of the 5 trials completed by early 2005 before tigecycline was approved would have demonstrated a similar harmful effect of tigecycline on survival (I(2 )= 0%; RD, 0.7%; P = .06).

CONCLUSIONS

Pooling noninferiority studies to examine survival may help ensure the safety and efficacy of new antibiotics. The association of tigecycline with excess deaths and noncure includes indications for which it is approved and marketed. Tigecycline cannot be relied on in serious infections.

In vitro activity of tigecycline against clinical isolates of carbapenem resistant Acinetobacter baumannii complex in Pretoria, South Africa

Background

The presence of multi-drug resistant Acinetobacter baumannii raises a big therapeutic challenge in our hospital. Tigecycline, a new glycylcycline with expanded broad spectrum of activity against multi-drug resistant organisms was recently licensed in South Africa.

Aim

The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vitro activity of tigecycline against carbapenem resistant A. baumannii complex.

Methods

Consecutive clinical isolates of carbapenem resistant A. baumannii complex were collected between February and July 2010. Species identification and susceptibility testing was performed by Vitek-2 colorimetric compact system with Advanced Expert System (AES). Strains were tested for carbapenemase production by the modified Hodge test, according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines.

Results

A total of 232 carbapenem resistant clinical isolates of A. baumannii complex were collected over the six months study period; 217 (93.5%) of these were modified Hodge test positive. All isolates were susceptible to colistin and 174 (78%) susceptible to amikacin whilst 20 (9%) were susceptible to ciprofloxacin. For tigecycline 169 (75.8%) were fully susceptible, 37 (16.6%) intermediately resistant and only 17 (7.6%) were fully resistant. None of the carbapenem resistant isolates were susceptible to ampicillin, amoxicillin/clavullanic acid, piperacillin/tazobactam, cefuroxime, cefuroxime axetil, cefoxitin, cefepime or nitrofurantoin.

Conclusion

All carbapenem resistant isolates were found to be fully susceptible to colistin; amikacin and tigecycline susceptibility was 78% and 76% respectively. Treatment options for infections due to carbapenem and multi-drug resistant A. baumannii organisms are limited and hence tigecycline and amikacin may be considered. The properties of tigecycline i.e. stability, safety, low toxicity, non cross-resistance with other antibiotics and its efficacy against multi-drug resistant A. baumannii isolates make it a good choice. However, ongoing monitoring of A. baumannii susceptibility to tigecycline is needed.

Emergence of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis due to enterococci - risk factors and outcome in a 12-year retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Third-generation cephalosporins (TGC) constitute the empirical first-line therapy for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP). Hospitalisation, invasive procedures and use of antibiotics may challenge this concept due to an increase in enterococci and other TGC-resistant microorganisms.

AIM

To determine prevalence, risk factors and outcome of ascitic fluid infections caused by enterococci.

METHODS

All independent episodes of culture-positive ascitic fluid between 2000 and 2011 in a German tertiary centre were analysed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Out of 244 positive ascitic fluid cultures, 90 episodes of monomicrobial SBP and 25 episodes of monomicrobial bacterascites (BA) in patients with decompensated cirrhosis were identified. Enterococcus spp. were isolated in 32 (28%) episodes. We noticed a profound increase in the frequency of enterococcal infection over the study period from 11% to 35% (P = 0.007). Univariate risk factors for enterococcal SBP/BA included nosocomial infection (OR = 4.56; 95% CI 1.90-10.97), previous use of antibiotics (OR = 5.63; 95% CI 1.81-17.49) and recent gastrointestinal endoscopy (OR = 3.17; 95% CI 1.33-7.54). Nosocomial infection (OR = 3.29; P = 0.011) and recent antibiotic therapy (OR = 3.88; P = 0.025) remained independent risk factors for enterococcal infection in multivariate logistic regression and these factors contributed also to the model when only SBP cases were considered. In subjects with monomicrobial SBP who were treated with TGC or ciprofloxacin, the probability of 90-day survival was 12% in enterococcal infection compared to 50% in non-enterococcal SBP (P = 0.022 in log-rank test).

CONCLUSION

Because of the increasing prevalence of enterococcal spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and its poor prognosis when treated inappropriately, clinicians should consider empirical therapy with anti-enterococcal antibiotics for patients with risk factors.

Efficacy and safety of tigecycline for the treatment of infectious diseases: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multidrug resistance among bacteria increases the need for new antimicrobial drugs with high potency and stability. Tigecycline is one candidate drug, and a previous meta-analysis of only published randomised controlled trials suggested that it might as effective as comparator treatments; we did a meta-analysis to include new and unpublished trials to assess its efficacy for the treatment of adult patients with serious bacterial infection.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register, and Embase up to March 30, 2011, to identify published studies, and we searched clinical trial registries to identify completed unpublished studies, the results of which were obtained through the manufacturer. Eligible studies were randomised trials assessing the clinical efficacy, safety, and eradication efficiency of tigecycline versus other antimicrobial agents for any bacterial infection. The primary outcome was treatment success in patients who received at least one dose of the study drug, had clinical evidence of disease, and had complete follow-up (the clinically assessable population). Meta-analysis was done with random-effects models because of heterogeneity across the trials.

FINDINGS

14 randomised trials, comprising about 7400 patients, were included. Treatment success was lower with tigecycline than with control antibiotic agents, but the difference was not significant (odds ratio 0·87, 95% CI 0·74-1·02). Adverse events were more frequent in the tigecycline group than in the control groups (1·45, 1·11-1·88), with significantly more vomiting and nausea. All-cause mortality was higher in the tigecycline group than in the comparator groups, but the difference was not significant (1·28, 0·97-1·69). Eradication efficiency did not differ between tigecycline and control regimens, but the sample size for these comparisons was small.

INTERPRETATION

Tigecycline is not better than standard antimicrobial agents for the treatment of serious infections. Our findings show that assessment with unpublished studies is needed to make appropriate decisions about new agents.

FUNDING

None.

Efficacy and safety of tigecycline: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Tigecycline is a novel glycylcycline that exhibits broad-spectrum antibacterial activity. Recently, the US FDA issued a warning concerning increased mortality with tigecycline in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs that compared tigecycline with any other antibiotic regimen for the treatment of any infection. A comprehensive search, without publication status or other restrictions, was conducted. The primary outcome was overall 30 day mortality. The secondary outcome included clinical and microbiological failure, superinfections and adverse events (AEs). The trials' risks of bias and their effects on results were assessed. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. Individual trials' relative risks (RRs) were pooled using a fixed effect meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Fifteen trials (7654 patients) were included. Overall mortality was higher with tigecycline compared with other regimens [RR 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.64, without heterogeneity]. The type of infection assessed and the trials' reported risks of bias did not affect this result. Clinical failure was significantly higher with tigecycline (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06-1.27) and non-statistically significant higher rates of microbiological failure were demonstrated (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.99-1.30). Development of septic shock was significantly more frequent with tigecycline (RR 7.01, 95% CI 1.27-38.66). Superinfections were significantly more common with tigecycline and so were AEs, including all AEs and AEs requiring discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

In the light of the increased mortality, probably explained by decreased clinical and microbiological efficacy, clinicians should avoid tigecycline monotherapy in the treatment of severe infections and reserve it as a last-resort drug.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of tigecycline for treatment of infectious disease

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of tigecycline, a newly developed glycylcycline antibiotic, with those of empirical antibiotic regimens which have been reported to possess good efficacy for complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSIs), complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs), community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), and other infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE). A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase was performed. Eight RCTs involving 4,651 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with therapy with empirical antibiotic regimens, tigecycline monotherapy was associated with similar clinical treatment success rates (for the clinically evaluable [CE] population, odds ratio [OR] = 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.76 to 1.12, P = 0.42; for the clinical modified intent-to-treat [c-mITT] population, OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.74 to 1.01, P = 0.06) and similar microbiological treatment success rates (for the microbiologically evaluable [ME] population, OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.69 to 1.07, P = 0.19). The incidence of adverse events in the tigecycline group was significantly higher than that in the other therapy groups with a statistical margin (for the modified intent-to-treat [mITT] population, OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.52, P < 0.0001), especially in the digestive system (mITT population, OR = 2.41, 95% CI = 1.67 to 3.46, P < 0.00001). No difference regarding all-cause mortality and drug-related mortality between tigecycline and the other regimens was found, although numerically higher mortality was found in the tigecycline group. This meta-analysis provides evidence that tigecycline monotherapy may be used as effectively as the comparison therapy for cSSSI, cIAIs, CAP, and infections caused by MRSA/VRE. However, because of the high risk of mortality, AEs, and emergence of resistant isolates, prudence with the clinical use of tigecycline monotherapy in infections is required.