Comparison of tigecycline with imipenem/cilastatin for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia

Antonio T. Freire, Vasyl Melnyk, Min Ja Kim, Oleksiy Datsenko, Oleksandr Dzyublik, Felix Glumcher, Yin Ching Chuang, Robert T. Maroko, Gary Dukart, C. Angel Cooper, Joan M. Korth-Bradley, Nathalie Dartois, Hassan Gandjini

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

237 Citations (Scopus)


To compare efficacy and safety of a tigecycline regimen with an imipenem/cilastatin regimen in hospital-acquired pneumonia patients, a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, study evaluated 945 patients. Coprimary end points were clinical response in clinically evaluable (CE) and clinical modified intent-to-treat (c-mITT) populations at test-of-cure. Cure rates were 67.9% for tigecycline and 78.2% for imipenem (CE patients) and 62.7% and 67.6% (c-mITT patients), respectively. A statistical interaction occurred between ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and non-VAP subgroups, with significantly lower cure rates in tigecycline VAP patients compared to imipenem; in non-VAP patients, tigecycline was noninferior to imipenem. Overall mortality did not differ between the tigecycline (14.1%) and imipenem regimens (12.2%), although more deaths occurred in VAP patients treated with tigecycline than imipenem. Overall, the tigecycline regimen was noninferior to the imipenem/cilastatin regimen for the c-mITT but not the CE population; this difference appears to have been driven by results in VAP patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)140-151
Number of pages12
JournalDiagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2010 Oct


  • Antimicrobial
  • Glycylcycline
  • Nosocomial
  • Pneumonia
  • Ventilator/non-ventilator-associated pneumonia

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Microbiology (medical)
  • Infectious Diseases


Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of tigecycline with imipenem/cilastatin for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this