Community Acquired PneumoniaPhase 3NCT00079885
Study Evaluating Tigecycline vs Levofloxacin in Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia
A Phase 3 study testing tigecycline in people with Community Acquired Pneumonia and Bacterial Pneumonia, run by Wyeth is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer.
Trial summary
To compare the efficacy and safety of tigecycline with those of levofloxacin in the treatment of subjects with CAP requiring hospitalization. The co-primary efficacy endpoints in the study will be the clinical response in the clinically evaluable population and the clinical response in the clinical modified… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Community Acquired Pneumonia, Bacterial Pneumonia, Cross Infection
- What is being tested?
- tigecycline
- How many people
- 430 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Nov 2003to Jul 2005
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Male and female subjects ≥ 18 years of ag.
- Subjects hospitalized with CAP for whom IV antibiotic treatment is indicated
- The presence of fever (within 24 hours prior to randomization), defined as oral temperature >38°C/100.4°F, axillary temperature >38.1°C/100.6°F, tympanic temperature >38.5°C/ 101.2°F, or a rectal/core temperature >39°C/102.2°F OR hypothermia (within 24 hours prior to randomization), core temperature <35°C/95°
Who cannot join
- Any concomitant condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, would preclude an evaluation of a response or make it unlikely that the contemplated course of therapy could be completed (eg, life expectancy <30 days)
- Hospitalization within 14 days prior to the onset of symptoms
- Residence in a long-term care facility or nursing home ≥14 days before the onset of symptoms
About this study
Official title: A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Comparative Study Of The Efficacy And Safety Of Tigecycline Vs Levofloxacin To Treat Subjects Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia
To compare the efficacy and safety of tigecycline with those of levofloxacin in the treatment of subjects with CAP requiring hospitalization. The co-primary efficacy endpoints in the study will be the clinical response in the clinically evaluable population and the clinical response in the clinical modified intent-to-treat population at the TOC visit. The primary efficacy analyses will first determine whether tigecycline is noninferior to levofloxacin. If tigecycline is found to be noninferior, the analyses will determine whether tigecycline is statistically better than levofloxacin.
- Being tested
- tigecycline
- Keywords
- Bacterial Pneumonia
- Medical subject headings
- Community-Acquired Pneumonia, Pneumonia, Bacterial, Cross Infection
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
tigecyclineDrug
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted19 Mar 2004 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2003
- Primary completionJul 2005
- Study completionJul 2005
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Community Acquired PneumoniaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Masking
- Double blind
- Enrolment
- 430 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Wyeth is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Medical Monitor, MD, Study director, Wyeth is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00079885
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 3074A1-308
- Status last verified
- Feb 2013
- First submitted
- 18 Mar 2004
- Last updated
- 8 Feb 2013
- Results posted
- No
Publications
Bergallo C, Jasovich A, Teglia O, Oliva ME, Lentnek A, de Wouters L, Zlocowski JC, Dukart G, Cooper A, Mallick R; 308 Study Group. Safety and efficacy of intravenous tigecycline in treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: results from a double-blind randomized phase 3 comparison study with levofloxacin. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2009 Jan;63(1):52-61. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2008.09.001. Epub 2008 Nov 5.
PubMed 18990531Tanaseanu C, Bergallo C, Teglia O, Jasovich A, Oliva ME, Dukart G, Dartois N, Cooper CA, Gandjini H, Mallick R; 308 Study Group; 313 Study Group. Integrated results of 2 phase 3 studies comparing tigecycline and levofloxacin in community-acquired pneumonia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2008 Jul;61(3):329-38. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2008.04.009. Epub 2008 May 27.
PubMed 18508226
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Feb 2013. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Comparative Study Of The Efficacy And Safety Of Tigecycline Vs Levofloxacin To Treat Subjects Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00079885
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 3074A1-308
- Keywords
- Bacterial Pneumonia
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 430 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Wyeth is now a wholly owned subsidiary of PfizerIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- Nov 2003
- Primary completion
- Jul 2005 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jul 2005 (actual)
- First posted
- 19 Mar 2004 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
To compare the efficacy and safety of tigecycline with those of levofloxacin in the treatment of subjects with CAP requiring hospitalization. The co-primary efficacy endpoints in the study will be the clinical response in the clinically evaluable population and the clinical response in the clinical modified intent-to-treat population at the TOC visit. The primary efficacy analyses will first determine whether tigecycline is noninferior to levofloxacin. If tigecycline is found to be noninferior, the analyses will determine whether tigecycline is statistically better than levofloxacin.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Masking
- Double blind
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Male and female subjects ≥ 18 years of ag.
- Subjects hospitalized with CAP for whom IV antibiotic treatment is indicated
- The presence of fever (within 24 hours prior to randomization), defined as oral temperature >38°C/100.4°F, axillary temperature >38.1°C/100.6°F, tympanic temperature >38.5°C/ 101.2°F, or a rectal/core temperature >39°C/102.2°F OR hypothermia (within 24 hours prior to randomization), core temperature <35°C/95°
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Any concomitant condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, would preclude an evaluation of a response or make it unlikely that the contemplated course of therapy could be completed (eg, life expectancy <30 days)
- Hospitalization within 14 days prior to the onset of symptoms
- Residence in a long-term care facility or nursing home ≥14 days before the onset of symptoms
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| tigecycline | Drug | – |
Primary outcome
Not reported in the source record.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Feb 2013.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 18990531Bergallo C, Jasovich A, Teglia O, Oliva ME, Lentnek A, de Wouters L, Zlocowski JC, Dukart G, Cooper A, Mallick R; 308 Study Group. Safety and efficacy of intravenous tigecycline in treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: results from a double-blind randomized phase 3 comparison study with levofloxacin. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2009 Jan;63(1):52-61. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2008.09.001. Epub 2008 Nov 5.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 18508226Tanaseanu C, Bergallo C, Teglia O, Jasovich A, Oliva ME, Dukart G, Dartois N, Cooper CA, Gandjini H, Mallick R; 308 Study Group; 313 Study Group. Integrated results of 2 phase 3 studies comparing tigecycline and levofloxacin in community-acquired pneumonia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2008 Jul;61(3):329-38. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2008.04.009. Epub 2008 May 27.
Related trials for Community Acquired Pneumonia
Not yet recruiting
Expanded Diagnostic Strategy in Older Adults Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Acute Respiratory Infection
Acute Respiratory Infection
RecruitingObservational study
Cardiovascular Disease Progression in Survivors of Community Acquired Pneumonia and Lung Infection by Covid-19.
Pneumonia, Community-Acquired, COVID-19 Pneumonia
Active, not recruitingPhase 2/3
Local Antibiotic Delivery for Community Acquired Pneumonia
Community Acquired Pneumonia (CAP)
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Ceftriaxone Dosage for Non-Critical Community-Acquired Pneumonia
Community Acquired Pneumonia (CAP)
Active, not recruitingPhase 2/3
Inhaled Lexofloxacin vs Usual Care for Treatment of Community-Acquired Pneumonia
Community-acquired Pneumonia, CAP
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Medical Monitor, MD study director
Wyeth is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing tigecycline in people with Community Acquired Pneumonia and Bacterial Pneumonia, run by Wyeth is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Feb 2013. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00079885, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Feb 2013.