Gemifloxacin once daily for 5 days versus 7 days for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: a randomized, multicentre, double-blind study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Short-course therapy has been advocated for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We compared the efficacy and safety of 5 and 7 day courses of gemifloxacin for outpatient treatment of mild–moderate CAP. In a multicentre, double-blind, parallel group study, patients were randomized to receive 320 mg of oral gemifloxacin once daily for 5 or 7 days. Over 95% of all patients in each cohort had a Fine score of ≤III. The primary efficacy endpoint was clinical cure at follow-up (days 24–30). Secondary outcomes were clinical and bacteriological responses at the end of therapy (days 7–9) and bacteriological and radiological responses at follow-up. Adverse events (AEs) were also monitored. In a total of 469 per protocol (PP) patients, clinical resolution at follow-up was 95% and 92% for 5 and 7 day treatments, respectively [95% confidence interval (CI) −1.48, 7.42], indicating non-inferiority of 5 day treatment. Clinical resolution at the end of therapy was 96% for both regimens (95% CI −3.85, 3.42). Bacteriological response rates in PP patients at the end of therapy were 94% and 96% for 5 and 7 day groups, respectively (95% CI −8.27, 3.25) and 91% for both groups at follow-up (95% CI –6.89, 7.93). Radiological success in PP patients at follow-up was 98% and 93% in 5 and 7 day groups, respectively (95% CI 0.35, 7.91). Pre-therapy pathogens were identified in 242 (47.3%) patients, most commonly Streptococcus pneumoniae. Frequency of treatment-related AEs was 21% in both cohorts with discontinuation rates of 1.2% and 2% in the 5 and 7 day groups, respectively. A lower incidence of rash was observed in the 5 day cohort (0.4%) versus the 7 day cohort (2.8%) (P = 0.04). Gemifloxacin once daily for 5 days is not inferior to 7 days in the PP population with respect to clinical, bacteriological and radiological efficacy. Further work is needed, however, to explore whether fewer treatment days would improve patient compliance and reduce the incidence of AEs.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".