↓ Skip to main content

Prescription Patterns for Tigecycline in Severely Ill Patients for Non-FDA Approved Indications in a Developing Country: A Compromised Outcome

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Prescription Patterns for Tigecycline in Severely Ill Patients for Non-FDA Approved Indications in a Developing Country: A Compromised Outcome
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2017.00497
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rima A. Moghnieh, Dania I. Abdallah, Ismail A. Fawaz, Tarek Hamandi, Mohammad Kassem, Nabila El-Rajab, Tamima Jisr, Anas Mugharbil, Nabila Droubi, Samaa Al Tabah, Loubna Sinno, Fouad Ziade, Ziad Daoud, Ahmad Ibrahim

Abstract

Introduction: With the rise in antibiotic resistance, tigecycline has been used frequently in off-label indications, based on its in-vitro activity against multidrug-resistant organisms. In this study, our aim was to assess its use in approved and unapproved indications. Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective chart review evaluating a 2-year experience of tigecycline use for > 72 h in 153 adult patients inside and outside critical care unit from January 2012 to December 2013 in a Lebanese tertiary-care hospital. Results: Tigecycline was mostly used in off-label indications (81%) and prescribed inside the critical care area, where the number of tigecycline cycles was 16/1,000 patient days. Clinical success was achieved in 43.4% of the patients. In the critically ill group, it was significantly higher in patients with a SOFA score <7 using multivariate analysis (Odds Ratio (OR) = 12.51 [4.29-36.51], P < 0.0001). Microbiological success was achieved in 43.3% of patients. Yet, the univariate and adjusted multivariate models failed to show a significant difference in this outcome between patients inside vs. outside critical care area, those with SOFA score <7 vs. ≥ 7, and in FDA-approved vs. off-label indications. Total mortality reached ~45%. It was significantly higher in critically ill patients with SOFA score ≥7 (OR = 5.17 [2.43-11.01], P < 0.0001) and in off-label indications (OR = 4.00 [1.30-12.31], P = 0.01) using an adjusted multivariate model. Gram-negative bacteria represented the majority of the clinical isolates (81%) and Acinetobacter baumannii predominated (28%). Carbapenem resistance was present in 85% of the recovered Acinetobacter, yet, more than two third of the carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter species were still susceptible to tigecycline. Conclusion: In our series, tigecycline has been mostly used in off-label indications, specifically in severely ill patients. The outcome of such infections was not inferior to that of FDA-approved indications, especially inside critical care area. The use of this last resort antibiotic in complicated clinical scenarios with baseline microbiological epidemiology predominated by extensively-drug resistant pathogens ought to be organized.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 6 17%
Professor 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Student > Master 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 9 25%
Unknown 7 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 9 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 May 2017.
All research outputs
#17,886,132
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#17,317
of 25,008 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,740
of 308,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#378
of 489 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,008 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 308,938 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 489 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.