↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
19 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
111 X users
patent
2 patents
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
353 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Effect of Meropenem-Vaborbactam vs Piperacillin-Tazobactam on Clinical Cure or Improvement and Microbial Eradication in Complicated Urinary Tract Infection: The TANGO I Randomized Clinical Trial
Published in
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, February 2018
DOI 10.1001/jama.2018.0438
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Meropenem-vaborbactam is a combination carbapenem/beta-lactamase inhibitor and a potential treatment for severe drug-resistant gram-negative infections. To evaluate efficacy and adverse events of meropenem-vaborbactam in complicated urinary tract infection (UTI), including acute pyelonephritis. Phase 3, multicenter, multinational, randomized clinical trial (TANGO I) conducted November 2014 to April 2016 and enrolling patients (≥18 years) with complicated UTI, stratified by infection type and geographic region. Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to receive meropenem-vaborbactam (2g/2g over 3 hours; n = 274) or piperacillin-tazobactam (4g/0.5g over 30 minutes; n = 276) every 8 hours. After 15 or more doses, patients could be switched to oral levofloxacin if they met prespecified criteria for improvement, to complete 10 days of total treatment. Primary end point for FDA criteria was overall success (clinical cure or improvement and microbial eradication composite) at end of intravenous treatment in the microbiologic modified intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Primary end point for European Medicines Agency (EMA) criteria was microbial eradication at test-of-cure visit in the microbiologic modified ITT and microbiologic evaluable populations. Prespecified noninferiority margin was -15%. Because the protocol prespecified superiority testing in the event of noninferiority, 2-sided 95% CIs were calculated. Among 550 patients randomized, 545 received study drug (mean age, 52.8 years; 361 [66.2%] women; 374 [68.6%] in the microbiologic modified ITT population; 347 [63.7%] in the microbiologic evaluable population; 508 [93.2%] completed the trial). For the FDA primary end point, overall success occurred in 189 of 192 (98.4%) with meropenem-vaborbactam vs 171 of 182 (94.0%) with piperacillin-tazobactam (difference, 4.5% [95% CI, 0.7% to 9.1%]; P < .001 for noninferiority). For the EMA primary end point, microbial eradication in the microbiologic modified ITT population occurred in 128 of 192 (66.7%) with meropenem-vaborbactam vs 105 of 182 (57.7%) with piperacillin-tazobactam (difference, 9.0% [95% CI, -0.9% to 18.7%]; P < .001 for noninferiority); microbial eradication in the microbiologic evaluable population occurred in 118 of 178 (66.3%) vs 102 of 169 (60.4%) (difference, 5.9% [95% CI, -4.2% to 16.0%]; P < .001 for noninferiority). Adverse events were reported in 106 of 272 (39.0%) with meropenem-vaborbactam vs 97 of 273 (35.5%) with piperacillin-tazobactam. Among patients with complicated UTI, including acute pyelonephritis and growth of a baseline pathogen, meropenem-vaborbactam vs piperacillin-tazobactam resulted in a composite outcome of complete resolution or improvement of symptoms along with microbial eradication that met the noninferiority criterion. Further research is needed to understand the spectrum of patients in whom meropenem-vaborbactam offers a clinical advantage. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02166476.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 111 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 353 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 353 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 36 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 10%
Researcher 33 9%
Student > Bachelor 23 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 6%
Other 65 18%
Unknown 140 40%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 96 27%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 33 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 20 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 2%
Other 23 7%
Unknown 154 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 230. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 November 2025.
All research outputs
#209,358
of 34,411,289 outputs
Outputs from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#2,865
of 42,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,946
of 372,070 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#51
of 384 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,411,289 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 42,310 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 73.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 372,070 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 384 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.