{"title":"Comparative efficacy and safety of tigecycline vs colistin for Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections in cancer patients","authors":"Sai Vaibhavi Gumudavelli , Akshay Shelke , Pallavi Priya , Richa Chauhan , Sameer Dhingra","doi":"10.1016/j.cegh.2025.101996","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections pose a significant threat owing to their high mortality rates and limited treatment options, exacerbated by antibiotic misuse and the spread of resistance genes.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This study aimed to compare the effectiveness, safety, and outcomes of tigecycline and colistin in the treatment of CRE infections in cancer patients.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A 9-month prospective observational study was conducted at a tertiary-care cancer hospital in Bihar, India. The study included 150 patients with CRE infections divided into tigecycline (n = 90) and colistin (n = 60) groups.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Patients receiving tigecycline had higher levels of direct bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, and creatinine. However, tigecycline was associated with shorter hospital stays (13.73 vs 17.45 days, p = 0.016) and therapy durations (5.7 vs 7.3 days, p = 0.04). Infection recurrence rates (3.3 % vs. 5 %) and 30-day mortality rates (17.6 % vs. 18.9 %, p = 0.663) were similar between the two groups.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Both tigecycline and colistin were effective in treating CRE infections in patients with cancer. Although tigecycline was associated with improved hospital stay and therapy duration, it also showed potential liver and kidney function adverse effects. These findings highlight the need for careful consideration of treatment options for CRE infections in patients with cancer.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46404,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health","volume":"33 ","pages":"Article 101996"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213398425000855","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections pose a significant threat owing to their high mortality rates and limited treatment options, exacerbated by antibiotic misuse and the spread of resistance genes.
Objective
This study aimed to compare the effectiveness, safety, and outcomes of tigecycline and colistin in the treatment of CRE infections in cancer patients.
Methods
A 9-month prospective observational study was conducted at a tertiary-care cancer hospital in Bihar, India. The study included 150 patients with CRE infections divided into tigecycline (n = 90) and colistin (n = 60) groups.
Results
Patients receiving tigecycline had higher levels of direct bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, and creatinine. However, tigecycline was associated with shorter hospital stays (13.73 vs 17.45 days, p = 0.016) and therapy durations (5.7 vs 7.3 days, p = 0.04). Infection recurrence rates (3.3 % vs. 5 %) and 30-day mortality rates (17.6 % vs. 18.9 %, p = 0.663) were similar between the two groups.
Conclusion
Both tigecycline and colistin were effective in treating CRE infections in patients with cancer. Although tigecycline was associated with improved hospital stay and therapy duration, it also showed potential liver and kidney function adverse effects. These findings highlight the need for careful consideration of treatment options for CRE infections in patients with cancer.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health (CEGH) is a multidisciplinary journal and it is published four times (March, June, September, December) a year. The mandate of CEGH is to promote articles on clinical epidemiology with focus on developing countries in the context of global health. We also accept articles from other countries. It publishes original research work across all disciplines of medicine and allied sciences, related to clinical epidemiology and global health. The journal publishes Original articles, Review articles, Evidence Summaries, Letters to the Editor. All articles published in CEGH are peer-reviewed and published online for immediate access and citation.