Assessment of Musculoskeletal Toxicity 5 Years After Therapy With Levofloxacin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Safety concerns for fluoroquinolones exist from animal studies demonstrating cartilage injury in weight-bearing joints, dependent on dose and duration of therapy. For children treated with levofloxacin or comparator in randomized, prospective, comparative studies for acute otitis media and community-acquired pneumonia, this 5-year follow-up safety study was designed to assess the presence/absence of cartilage injury. METHODS: Children enrolled in treatment studies were also enrolled in a 1-year follow-up safety study, which; focused on musculoskeletal adverse events (MSAE). Those with persisting MSAEs, protocol-defined musculoskeletal disorders, or of concern to the Data Safety and Monitoring Committee were requested to enroll in four additional years of follow-up, the subject of this report. RESULTS: Of the 2233 subjects participating in the 12-month follow-up study, 124 of 1340 (9%) of the levofloxacin subjects, and 83 of 893 (9%) of the comparator subjects were continued for 5-year posttreatment assessment. From children identified with an MSAE during years 2 through 5 posttreatment, the number that were "possibly related" to drug therapy was equal for both arms: 1 of 1340 for levofloxacin and 1 of 893 for comparator. Of all cases of MSAE assessed by the Data Safety and Monitoring Committee at 5 years' posttreatment, no case was assessed as "likely related" to study drug. CONCLUSIONS: With no clinically detectable difference between levofloxacin- and comparator-treated children in MSAEs presenting between 1 and 5 years in these safety studies, risks of cartilage injury with levofloxacin appear to be uncommon, are clinically undetectable during 5 years, or are reversible.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".