ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01170221ABSSSIUpdated Aug 29, 2018Results posted

TR-701 FA vs. Linezolid for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections.

A Phase 3 interventional study of TR-701 FA and Linezolid in Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Bacterial Infections, sponsored by Trius Therapeutics LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc. (Rahway, New Jersey USA). Completed at 84 sites in 11 countries. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-08-29.

Sponsored by Trius Therapeutics LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc. (Rahway, New Jersey USA) (part of Merck & Co., Inc) · Phase 3, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
667
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This is a randomized, double-blind, double dummy, multicenter Phase 3 study of oral TR-701 FA 200 mg once daily for 6 days versus oral Zyvox® (linezolid) 600 mg every 12 hours for 10 days for the treatment of ABSSSI in adults.

Approximately 75 to 100 sites globally will participate in this study. Patients with an ABSSSI caused by suspected or documented gram positive pathogen(s) at baseline will be randomized 1:1 to study treatment

Read the detailed description

The primary objective is to determine the noninferiority in the early clinical response rate of 6 day oral TR-701 FA compared with that of 10-day oral linezolid treatment at the 48-72 Hour Visit in the ITT analysis set in patients with ABSSSI.

02

Conditions studied

  • Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Bacterial Infections

Keywords

  • ABSSSI
  • Tedizolid Phosphate
  • TR-701
  • Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Trius Therapeutics LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc. (Rahway, New Jersey USA) is the lead sponsor of 19 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

First submitted before Trius Therapeutics LLC became part of Merck & Co., Inc.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients with systemic signs of infection diagnosed with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI)
  • Diagnosed with Cellulitis/ erysipelas, major cutaneous abscess, or wound infections

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Uncomplicated skin infections
  • Severe sepsis or septic shock
  • ABSSSI solely due to gram-negative pathogens
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Quadruple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
667 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    TR-701 FA

    TR0-701 FA 200 mg tablets once a day for six days followed by 4 days of placebo

    Drug: TR-701 FA

  • Active comparator
    Linezolid

    Linezolid 600 mg tablets oral twice a day for 10 days

    Drug: Linezolid

Interventions

  • Oral TR-701 FA 200 mg once daily for six days followed by four days of placebo.

    Also known as: Tedizolid Phosphate, TR-700 active moiety

  • Oral Linezolid 600 mg twice daily for 10 days

    Also known as: Trade name = Zyvox, Generic name = linezolid

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Early Clinical Response Rate

    Responder: No increase in lesion surface area from baseline and oral temperature ≤37.6°C

    Time frame: 48-72 hours

Secondary outcomes

  1. Clinical Response at 48-72 Hours That is Sustained at the End of Therapy Visit.

    Responder: No increase in lesion surface area from baseline and oral temperature ≤37.6°C.

    Time frame: Day 11

  2. Clinical Response at 48-72 Hours That is Sustained at the End of Therapy Visit in the Clinically Evaluable-End of Therapy Analysis Sets

    Responder: No increase in lesion surface area from baseline and oral temperature ≤37.6°C

    Time frame: EOT Day 11

  3. Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Success at the Post Treatment Evaluation Visit

    Clinical success defined as resolution/near resolution of most disease-specific signs and symptoms, absence/near resolution of systemic signs of infection, if present at baseline, no new signs, symptoms, or complications attributable to the ABSSSIs so no further antibiotic therapy was required for the treatment of the primary lesion.

    Time frame: Post-Treatment Evaluation (7-14 days after the End of Therapy)

  4. To Compare the Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Success at the Post Treatment Evaluation Visit in the Clinically Evaluable-Post Treatment Evaluation Analysis Set

    Clinical success defined as resolution/near resolution of most disease-specific signs and symptoms, absence/near resolution of systemic signs of infection, no new signs, symptoms, or complications attributable to the ABSSSIs so no further antibiotic therapy was required for the treatment of the primary lesion.

    Time frame: Post-Treatment Evaluation (7-14 days after the End of Therapy)

  5. Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Response at the 48-72 Hour Visit

    Clinical improvement was defined as improvement in overall clinical status.

    Time frame: 48-72 Hour Visit

  6. Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Response at the Day 7 Visit

    Clinical improvement was defined as improvement in overall clinical status.

    Time frame: Day 7

  7. Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Pain, by Study Visit

    0=no pain, 10=worst pain Only 1 visit per participant for Day 4-6, only 1 visit for Day 7-9, and only 1 visit for Day 10-13.

    Time frame: Multiple

07

Results

Posted Sep 3, 2014

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneTedizolid PhosphateLinezolid
Started332335
Completed299307
Not completed3328
Withdrew: Lost to follow-up2221
Withdrew: Withdrawal by subject97
Withdrew: Subject completed only screening and lfu10
Withdrew: Randomized but not treated10

Outcome measures

PrimaryEarly Clinical Response Rate

Responder: No increase in lesion surface area from baseline and oral temperature ≤37.6°C

Time frame:
48-72 hours
Reported as:
Number · Responders
Early Clinical Response Rate
RespondersTedizolid PhosphateLinezolid
Early Clinical Response Rate264 (-6.1 to 6.2)266 (-6.1 to 6.2)
Statistical analysis
  • Tedizolid Phosphate vs Linezolid · Risk difference (rd): 0.1 · 95% CI -6.1 to 6.2Risk difference corresponds to tedizolid clinical response rate minus linezolid clinical response rate. The confidence interval was calculated using the Miettinen and Nurminen with stratification for the presence or absence of fever at baseline.
SecondaryClinical Response at 48-72 Hours That is Sustained at the End of Therapy Visit.

Responder: No increase in lesion surface area from baseline and oral temperature ≤37.6°C.

Time frame:
Day 11
Reported as:
Number · participants
Clinical Response at 48-72 Hours That is Sustained at the End of Therapy Visit.
participantsTedizolid PhosphateLinezolid
Clinical Response at 48-72 Hours That is Sustained at the End of Therapy Visit.230241
Statistical analysis
  • Tedizolid Phosphate vs Linezolid · Risk difference (rd): -2.6 · 95% CI -9.6 to 4.2Risk difference corresponds to the tedizolid clinical response rate minus the linezolid clinical response rate.
SecondaryClinical Response at 48-72 Hours That is Sustained at the End of Therapy Visit in the Clinically Evaluable-End of Therapy Analysis Sets

Responder: No increase in lesion surface area from baseline and oral temperature ≤37.6°C

Time frame:
EOT Day 11
Reported as:
Number · participants
Clinical Response at 48-72 Hours That is Sustained at the End of Therapy Visit in the Clinically Evaluable-End of Therapy Analysis Sets
participantsTedizolid PhosphateLinezolid
Clinical Response at 48-72 Hours That is Sustained at the End of Therapy Visit in the Clinically Evaluable-End of Therapy Analysis Sets219232
Statistical analysis
  • Tedizolid Phosphate vs Linezolid · Risk difference (rd): -0.9 · 95% CI -7.7 to 5.4Risk difference corresponds to the tedizolid clinical response rate minus the linezolid clinical response rate.
SecondaryInvestigator's Assessment of Clinical Success at the Post Treatment Evaluation Visit

Clinical success defined as resolution/near resolution of most disease-specific signs and symptoms, absence/near resolution of systemic signs of infection, if present at baseline, no new signs, symptoms, or complications attributable to the ABSSSIs so no further antibiotic therapy was required for the treatment of the primary lesion.

Time frame:
Post-Treatment Evaluation (7-14 days after the End of Therapy)
Reported as:
Number · participants
Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Success at the Post Treatment Evaluation Visit
participantsTedizolid PhosphateLinezolid
Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Success at the Post Treatment Evaluation Visit284288
Statistical analysis
  • Tedizolid Phosphate vs Linezolid · Risk difference (rd): -0.5 · 95% CI -5.8 to 4.9Risk difference corresponds to the tedizolid clinical success rate minus the linezolid clinical success rate.
SecondaryTo Compare the Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Success at the Post Treatment Evaluation Visit in the Clinically Evaluable-Post Treatment Evaluation Analysis Set

Clinical success defined as resolution/near resolution of most disease-specific signs and symptoms, absence/near resolution of systemic signs of infection, no new signs, symptoms, or complications attributable to the ABSSSIs so no further antibiotic therapy was required for the treatment of the primary lesion.

Time frame:
Post-Treatment Evaluation (7-14 days after the End of Therapy)
Reported as:
Number · participants
To Compare the Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Success at the Post Treatment Evaluation Visit in the Clinically Evaluable-Post Treatment Evaluation Analysis Set
participantsTedizolid PhosphateLinezolid
To Compare the Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Success at the Post Treatment Evaluation Visit in the Clinically Evaluable-Post Treatment Evaluation Analysis Set264267
Statistical analysis
  • Tedizolid Phosphate vs Linezolid · Risk difference (rd): -0.8 · 95% CI -4.6 to 3.0Risk difference corresponds to the tedizolid clinical success rate minus the linezolid clinical success rate.
SecondaryInvestigator's Assessment of Clinical Response at the 48-72 Hour Visit

Clinical improvement was defined as improvement in overall clinical status.

Time frame:
48-72 Hour Visit
Reported as:
Number · participants
Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Response at the 48-72 Hour Visit
participantsTedizolid PhosphateLinezolid
Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Response at the 48-72 Hour Visit299290
Statistical analysis
  • Tedizolid Phosphate vs Linezolid · Risk difference (rd): 3.5 · 95% CI -1.4 to 8.5Risk difference corresponds to the tedizolid clinical response rate minus the linezolid clinical response rate.
SecondaryInvestigator's Assessment of Clinical Response at the Day 7 Visit

Clinical improvement was defined as improvement in overall clinical status.

Time frame:
Day 7
Reported as:
Number · participants
Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Response at the Day 7 Visit
participantsTedizolid PhosphateLinezolid
Investigator's Assessment of Clinical Response at the Day 7 Visit302299
Statistical analysis
  • Tedizolid Phosphate vs Linezolid · Risk difference (rd): 1.7 · 95% CI -2.8 to 6.4Risk difference corresponds to the tedizolid clinical response rate minus the linezolid clinical response rate.
SecondaryChange From Baseline in Patient-reported Pain, by Study Visit

0=no pain, 10=worst pain Only 1 visit per participant for Day 4-6, only 1 visit for Day 7-9, and only 1 visit for Day 10-13.

Time frame:
Multiple
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Change From Baseline in Patient-reported Pain, by Study Visit
units on a scaleTedizolid PhosphateLinezolid
Day 2-1.3 ± 2.05-1.5 ± 1.99
Day 4-6-3.4 ± 2.44-3.1 ± 2.41
Day 7-9-4.5 ± 2.71-4.6 ± 2.67
Day 10-13-5.3 ± 2.65-5.5 ± 2.58

Adverse events

Collected over Collected from signing of the ICF through the late follow-up visit (up to 38 days).. Non-serious events are listed at a 2% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Tedizolid Phosphate—5/331 (1.5%)84/331 (25.4%)
Linezolid—4/335 (1.2%)100/335 (29.9%)
Most frequent serious events
Showing 10 of 15
Most frequent serious events
EventTedizolid PhosphateLinezolid
Cardiac arrestCardiac disorders1/3310/335
Gastrointestinal haemorrhageGastrointestinal disorders1/3310/335
VomitingGastrointestinal disorders1/3310/335
AbscessInfections and infestations1/3310/335
EndophthalmitisInfections and infestations1/3310/335
PneumoniaInfections and infestations1/3310/335
Septic shockInfections and infestations1/3310/335
Weight decreasedInvestigations1/3310/335
DehydrationMetabolism and nutrition disorders1/3310/335
VIIth nerve paralysisNervous system disorders1/3310/335
Most frequent other events
Most frequent other events
EventTedizolid PhosphateLinezolid
NauseaGastrointestinal disorders28/33145/335
HeadacheNervous system disorders21/33117/335
VomitingGastrointestinal disorders9/33120/335
DiarrheaGastrointestinal disorders15/33118/335
AbscessInfections and infestations14/3318/335
Abscess limbInfections and infestations12/33110/335
CellulitisInfections and infestations8/3318/335
DizzinessNervous system disorders8/3317/335
PruritusSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders3/3318/335
DyspepsiaGastrointestinal disorders2/3317/335

Baseline characteristics

All randomized participants

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(Years)Tedizolid PhosphateLinezolidTotal
Mean43.6 ± 14.9643.1 ± 15.0643.3 ± 15.0
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Tedizolid PhosphateLinezolidTotal
Female128137265
Male204198402
08

Study locations

84 sites
  • Trius investigator site 109
    Dothan, Alabama 36301, United States
  • Trius Investigator site 130
    Anaheim, California 92801, United States
  • Trius investigator site 118
    Anaheim, California 92804, United States
  • Trius investigator site 129
    Buena Park, California 90620, United States
  • Trius Investigator Site 103
    Chula Vista, California 91911, United States
  • Trius Investigator Site 105
    La Mesa, California 91942, United States
  • Trius investigator site 126
    Laguna Beach, California 92651, United States
  • Trius investigator site 125
    Norwalk, California 90650, United States
  • Trius Investigator Site 104
    Oceanside, California 92056, United States
  • Trius investigator site 113
    Oxnard, California 93030, United States
  • Trius investigator site 123
    Pasadena, California 91105, United States
  • Trius Investigator Site 106
    Rolling Hills Estates, California 90274, United States
  • Trius investigator site 111
    Torrance, California 90501, United States
  • Trius investigator site 132
    Torrance, California 90502, United States
  • Trius investigator site 127
    Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33308, United States
  • Trius investigator site 135
    Hialeah, Florida 33012, United States
  • Trius investigator site 101
    Columbus, Georgia 31904, United States
  • Trius Investigator Site 102
    Savannah, Georgia 31406, United States
  • Trius Investigator site 116
    Chicago, Illinois 60637, United States
  • Trius Investigator Site 108
    Springfield, Illinois 62701, United States
  • Trius investigator site 112
    Evansville, Indiana 47714, United States
  • Trius Investigator Site 107
    Detroit, Michigan 48202, United States
  • Trius investigator site 133
    Butte, Montana 59701, United States
  • Trius investigator site 128
    Las Vegas, Nevada 89109, United States
  • Trius investigator site 115
    Somers Point, New Jersey 08244, United States
  • Trius investigator site 114
    Toledo, Ohio 43608, United States
  • Trius investigator site 122
    Houston, Texas 77002, United States
  • Trius investigator site 120
    Houston, Texas 77005, United States
  • Trius investigator site 131
    Houston, Texas 77081, United States
  • Trius Investigator site 121
    Houston, Texas 77093, United States
  • Trius investigator site 307
    Avellaneda, Pcia Buenos Aires B1870CID, Argentina
  • Trius investigator site 304
    Loma Hermosa, Pcia Buenos Aires 1657, Argentina
  • Trius investigator site 309
    Buenos Aires, C1181ACH, Argentina
  • Trius investigator site 310
    Buenos Aires, C1405CNF, Argentina
  • Trius Investigator site 301
    Córdoba, cp5000, Argentina
  • Trius investigator site 305
    Córdoba, X5000AAI, Argentina
  • Trius investigator site 300
    Córdoba, X5000FAL, Argentina
  • Trius investigator site 308
    Paraná, E3100BBJ, Argentina
  • Trius investigator site 303
    Rosario, S2002QEA, Argentina
  • Trius investigator site 306
    Santa Fe, S3000EOY, Argentina
  • Trius investigator site 322
    Barro Preto, Belo Horizonte 30140062, Brazil
  • Trius investigator site 321
    São José do Rio Preto, São Paulo CEP 15090 000, Brazil
  • Trius investigator site 323
    São Paulo, São Paulo 04038-705, Brazil
  • Trius investigator site 320
    Belo Horizonte, MG - 30150221, Brazil
  • Trius investigator site 170
    Winnipeg, Manitoba R3A 1R9, Canada
  • Trius investigator site 172
    Hamilton, Ontario L8N 4A6, Canada
  • Trius investigator site 171
    Hamilton, Ontario L8N3Z5, Canada
  • Trius investigator site 175
    Brownsburg, Quebec 46112, Canada
  • Trius investigator site 173
    Chicoutimi, Quebec G7H 5H6, Canada
  • Trius investigator site 174
    Sherbrooke, Quebec J1H 5N4, Canada
  • Trius investigator site 234
    Hradec Králové, 500 05, Czechia
  • Trius investigator site 235
    Mělník, 276 01, Czechia
  • Trius investigator site 233
    Ostrava, 708 52, Czechia
  • Trius investigator site 236
    Pardubice, 532 03, Czechia
  • Trius investigator site 231
    Prague, 180 81, Czechia
  • Trius investigator site 201
    Berlin, 10117, Germany
  • Trius investigator site 202
    Hanau, 63450, Germany
  • Trius investigator site 200
    Mannheim, 68135, Germany
  • Trius investigator site 203
    Plauen, 08529, Germany
  • Trius investigator site 241
    Debrecen, H-4032, Hungary
  • Trius investigator site 242
    Komló, H-7300, Hungary
  • Trius investigator site 240
    Szeged, H-6721, Hungary
  • Trius investigator site 258
    Daugavpils, LV- 5417, Latvia
  • Trius investigator site 256
    Liepāja, LV -3414, Latvia
  • Trius investigator site 257
    Rēzekne, LV-4600, Latvia
  • Trius investigator site 255
    Riga, LV-1002, Latvia
  • Trius investigator site 343
    Lima Cercado, Lima region 01, Peru
  • Trius investigator site 342
    Miraflores, Lima region 18, Peru
  • Trius investigator site 341
    San Juan de Miraflores, Lima region 29, Peru
  • Trius investigator site 340
    Arequipa, 054, Peru
  • Trius investigator site 251
    Banská Bystrica, 97517, Slovakia
  • Trius investigator site 250
    Martin, 036 59, Slovakia
  • Trius investigator site 271
    Cherkassy, 18009, Ukraine
  • Trius investigator site 264
    Dnipro, 49000, Ukraine
  • Trius investigator site 263
    Dnipro, 49600, Ukraine
  • Trius investigator site 269
    Ivano-Frankivsk, 07618, Ukraine
  • Trius investigator site 260
    Kharkiv, 61037, Ukraine
  • Trius investigator site 261
    Kyiv, 03110, Ukraine
  • Trius investigator site 268
    Lviv, 79000, Ukraine
  • Trius investigator site 265
    Lviv, 79044, Ukraine
  • Trius Investigator site 270
    Ternopil, 46000, Ukraine
  • Trius investigator site 266
    Uzhhorod, 88018, Ukraine
  • Trius investigator site 262
    Zaporizhzhya, 69032, Ukraine
  • Trius investigator site 267
    Zhytomyr, 10002, Ukraine
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Sandison T, De Anda C, Fang E, Das AF, Prokocimer P. Clinical Response of Tedizolid versus Linezolid in Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections by Severity Measure Using a Pooled Analysis from Two Phase 3 Double-Blind Trials. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017 Apr 24;61(5):e02687-16. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02687-16. Print 2017 May. PubMed 28264845 ↗
  • Nathwani D, Corey R, Das AF, Sandison T, De Anda C, Prokocimer P. Early Clinical Response as a Predictor of Late Treatment Success in Patients With Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections: Retrospective Analysis of 2 Randomized Controlled Trials. Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Jan 15;64(2):214-217. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciw750. Epub 2016 Dec 21. PubMed 28003218 ↗
  • Powers JH 3rd, Das AF, De Anda C, Prokocimer P. Clinician-reported lesion measurements in skin infection trials: Definitions, reliability, and association with patient-reported pain. Contemp Clin Trials. 2016 Sep;50:265-72. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2016.08.010. Epub 2016 Aug 13. PubMed 27530088 ↗
  • Shorr AF, Lodise TP, Corey GR, De Anda C, Fang E, Das AF, Prokocimer P. Analysis of the phase 3 ESTABLISH trials of tedizolid versus linezolid in acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015 Feb;59(2):864-71. doi: 10.1128/AAC.03688-14. Epub 2014 Nov 24. PubMed 25421472 ↗
  • Lodise TP, Fang E, Minassian SL, Prokocimer PG. Platelet profile in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections receiving tedizolid or linezolid: findings from the Phase 3 ESTABLISH clinical trials. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014 Dec;58(12):7198-204. doi: 10.1128/AAC.03509-14. Epub 2014 Sep 22. PubMed 25246392 ↗
  • Bien P, De Anda C, Prokocimer P. Comparison of digital planimetry and ruler technique to measure ABSSSI lesion sizes in the ESTABLISH-1 study. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2014 Apr;15(2):105-10. doi: 10.1089/sur.2013.070. Epub 2014 Jan 22. PubMed 24450727 ↗
  • Prokocimer P, De Anda C, Fang E, Mehra P, Das A. Tedizolid phosphate vs linezolid for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: the ESTABLISH-1 randomized trial. JAMA. 2013 Feb 13;309(6):559-69. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.241. PubMed 23403680 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — https://www.merck.com/clinical-trials/pdf/ProcedureAccessClinicalTrialData.pdf

Data sharing details ↗ · engagezone.msd.com

10

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Aug 2010 to primary completion in Sep 2011, 13 months.

Results were first posted in Sep 2014, 2 years 11 months after primary completion. A results delay was requested in Apr 2014.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jul 23, 2010
First posted
Jul 27, 2010
StartActual
Aug 15, 2010
Primary completionActual
Sep 30, 2011
CompletionActual
Sep 30, 2011
Results delay requested
Apr 2, 2014
Results first posted
Sep 3, 2014
Last update
Aug 29, 2018
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 29, 2018, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01170221
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jul 27, 2010
Start date
Aug 15, 2010
Primary completion
Sep 30, 2011
Completion
Sep 30, 2011
Results posted
Sep 3, 2014
Last update
Aug 29, 2018

Study contacts

Philippe G Prokocimer, MD
study director · Trius Therapeutics

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2018. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Studies of the drug tested here: Tedizolid phosphate

Start the discussion