↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy and safety profile of linezolid in the treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
108 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
166 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.
Title
Efficacy and safety profile of linezolid in the treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12941-016-0156-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Akosua Adom Agyeman, Richard Ofori-Asenso

Abstract

Treatment options for drug-resistant tuberculosis are still limited. Linezolid has been recommended for treatment of patients with multidrug-resistant (MDR) or extensively-drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis, although uncertainties remain regarding its safety and tolerability in these circumstances. To systematically evaluate the existing evidence regarding the efficacy and tolerability of linezolid in the treatment of MDR or XDR tuberculosis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science and EMBASE followed by direct search of abstracts in the International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease to retrieve primary studies published between January 2000 and January 2016 assessing linezolid efficacy and safety in the treatment of drug-resistant TB. We evaluated the occurrence of outcomes including culture conversion, treatment success and incidence of adverse events such as myelosuppression and neuropathy. Twenty-three (23) studies conducted in fourteen (14) countries and involving 507 patients were retrieved. Only 1 randomized controlled trial was identified and none of the identified studies involved participants from Africa. The pooled proportion for treatment success was 77.36 % (95 % CI = 71.38-82.83 %, I(2) = 37.6 %) with culture conversion rate determined as 88.45 % (95 % CI = 83.82-92.38 %, I(2) = 45.4 %). There was no strong evidence for both culture conversion (p = 0.0948) and treatment success (p = 0.0695) between linezolid daily doses ≤ 600 and > 600 mg. Only myelosuppression showed a strong statistical significance (p < 0.0001) between dose comparisons. The incidence of neuropathy and other adverse events leading to permanent discontinuation of linezolid also showed no significance upon dose comparisons (p = 0.3213, p = 0.9050 respectively). Available evidence presents Linezolid as a viable option in the treatment of MDR/XDR TB although patients ought to be monitored closely for the incidence of major adverse events such as myelosuppression and neuropathy. Additionally, highly powered randomized controlled trials including participants from endemic regions are urgently needed to better inform the magnitude and significance of Linezolid treatment effect in MDR and XDR TB patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 165 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Master 21 13%
Student > Postgraduate 16 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 9%
Student > Bachelor 12 7%
Other 28 17%
Unknown 53 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 31%
Immunology and Microbiology 15 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 3%
Other 18 11%
Unknown 58 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 15 December 2022.
All research outputs
#6,484,996
of 23,842,189 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#123
of 632 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,148
of 356,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#5
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,842,189 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 632 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 356,407 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.