Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 414

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Efficacy and Safety of Tigecycline in the Treatment of Skin and Skin‐Structure Infections: Results of 2 Double‐Blind Phase 3 Comparison Studies with Vancomycin‐Aztreonam

Ellis‐Grosse, E. J., Babinchak, T., Dartois, N., Rose, G., Loh, E., Tigecycline 300 and 305 cSSSI Study Groups·2005·Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract

Two phase 3, double-blind studies in hospitalized adults with complicated skin and skin-structure infections (cSSSI) determined the safety and efficacy of tigecycline versus that of vancomycin-aztreonam. Patients received tigecycline (100 mg, followed by 50 mg intravenously twice daily) or vancomycin (1 g intravenously twice daily) plus aztreonam (2 g intravenously twice daily) for up to 14 days. Populations were as follows: 1116 patients (566 treated with tigecycline, and 550 treated with vancomycin-aztreonam) constituted the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population, 1057 patients (538 treated with tigecycline, and 519 treated with vancomycin-aztreonam) constituted the clinical mITT (c-mITT) population, and 833 patients (422 treated with tigecycline, and 411 treated with vancomycin-aztreonam) constituted the clinically evaluable population. Clinical responses to tigecycline and vancomycin-aztreonam at test-of-cure were similar: c-mITT, 79.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76.1%-83.1%) versus 81.9% (95% CI, 78.3%-85.1%) (P = .4183); and clinically evaluable, 86.5% (95% CI, 82.9%-89.6%) versus 88.6% (95% CI, 85.1%-91.5%) (P = .4233). Adverse events were similar, with increased nausea and vomiting in the tigecycline group and increased rash and elevated hepatic aminotransferase levels in the vancomycin-aztreonam group. Tigecycline monotherapy is as safe and efficacious as the vancomycin-aztreonam combination in treating patients with cSSSI.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/431675

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 414

Metadata

Authors
Ellis‐Grosse, E. J., Babinchak, T., Dartois, N., Rose, G., Loh, E., & Groups, T. 3. A. 3. C. S.
Venue
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Published
2005-09
Volume
41
Issue
s5
Pages
S341-S353
ISSN
  • 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-6591
OpenAlex
W2040587302
Cited by
414
References
0
FWCI
26.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Efficacy and Safety of Tigecycline in the Treatment of Skin and Skin‐Structure Infections: Results of 2 Double‐Blind Phase 3 Comparison Studies with Vancomycin‐Aztreonam. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/431675
The paper
Ellis‐Grosse, E. J., Babinchak, T., Dartois, N., Rose, G., Loh, E., & Groups, T. 3. A. 3. C. S. (2005). The Efficacy and Safety of Tigecycline in the Treatment of Skin and Skin‐Structure Infections: Results of 2 Double‐Blind Phase 3 Comparison Studies with Vancomycin‐Aztreonam. Clinical Infectious Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1086/431675

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.