The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Efficacy and safety of tigecycline: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
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.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Outcome Reporting Among Drug Trials Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov
Bourgeois, F. T., Murthy, S., & Mandl, K. D. (2010) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-153-3-201008030-00006 · Cited by 332
Cited by
Tamma, P. D., Aitken, S. L., Bonomo, R. A., Mathers, A. J., van Duin, D., & Clancy, C. J. (2023) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/ciad428 · Cited by 740
The Surgical Infection Society Revised Guidelines on the Management of Intra-Abdominal Infection
Mazuski, J. E., Tessier, J. M., May, A. K., Sawyer, R. G., Nadler, E. P., Rosengart, M. R., Chang, P. K., O'Neill, P. J., Mollen, K. P., Huston, J. M., et al. (2017) · Surgical Infections · doi:10.1089/sur.2016.261 · Cited by 573
Current Epidemiology and Growing Resistance of Gram-Negative Pathogens
Livermore, D. M. (2012) · The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine · doi:10.3904/kjim.2012.27.2.128 · Cited by 417
Cerceo, E., Deitelzweig, S. B., Sherman, B. M., & Amin, A. N. (2016) · Microbial Drug Resistance · doi:10.1089/mdr.2015.0220 · Cited by 313
Colistin: new lessons on an old antibiotic
Yahav, D., Farbman, L., Leibovici, L., & Paul, M. (2012) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03734.x · Cited by 259
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Yahav, D., Lador, A., Paul, M., & Leibovici, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-06-18
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1963-1971
- ISSN
- 0305-7453 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2091
- OpenAlex
- W2146287754
- Cited by
- 266
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Efficacy and safety of tigecycline: a systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jac/dkr242
- The paper
- Yahav, D., Lador, A., Paul, M., & Leibovici, L. (2011). Efficacy and safety of tigecycline: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkr242
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.