Active clinical trials for "Communicable Diseases"

The purpose of this Phase 3 trial was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of oritavancin in acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs), including those caused by methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and to evaluate the potential economic benefit of oritavancin administered as a single 1200-milligram (mg) intravenous (IV) dose.

This is a Phase 2 Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of GS-5885, GS-9451, Tegobuvir and Ribavirin; GS-5885, GS-9451 and Tegobuvir; GS-5885, GS-9451 and Ribavirin in Interferon Ineligible or Intolerant Subjects with Chronic Genotype 1a or 1b HCV Infection.

The primary object is to compare the early clinical efficacy (after 48-72 hours of therapy) of dalbavancin to the comparator regimen (vancomycin with the option to switch to oral linezolid) for the treatment of patients with a suspected or proved gram-positive bacterial skin or skin structure infections.

The goal of this clinical research study is to learn if Vibativ (telavancin) can help to control blood stream infections (BSIs). The safety of this treatment will also be studied. Objectives: Evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of Telavancin given for treatment of gram positive bacteremia in cancer patients (including neutropenics).

The purpose of this study is to determine whether oral probiotic supplementation could reduce the incidence of nosocomial infections in preterm infants.

In 2008, our ED administered an average of 245 doses of vancomycin per month. Currently there is no consistency in the ED practice in regards to vancomycin dosing. In 2009, the IDSA put forth new recommendations for vancomycin dosing in order to achieve therapeutic levels more rapidly. It has been hypothesized that if therapeutic levels are reached more rapidly then patients will in turn have better clinical outcomes and that the development of resistant organisms will be decreased. Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged as one of the most deadly pathogens that are currently plaguing our patient population. Vancomycin is one of only a few antibiotics that are effective for treating MRSA. It is imperative that the ED physicians consistently and correctly dose vancomycin in order to give the patients the best chance to fight infection while helping to prevent further resistance in this already highly resistant organism. It is believed this study will reveal that the new dosing recommendations by the IDSA will lead to the achievement of therapeutic levels more rapidly. This information will in turn help to convince ED physicians that a change in current clinical practice is warranted and ultimately lead to better clinically outcomes for the patients.

The primary object is to compare the early clinical efficacy (after 48-72 hours of therapy) of dalbavancin to the comparator regimen (vancomycin with the option to switch to oral linezolid) for the treatment of patients with a suspected or proven gram-positive bacterial skin or skin structure infection.

In this study, patients with uncomplicated urinary infection are investigated. It is investigated if treatment of only symptoms of the uncomplicated urinary infection is as effective as treatment with antibiotics with respect to the outcome of the urinary infection. If this is the case, the use of antibiotics in the treatment of uncomplicated urinary infections might be reduced. Secondary aim of the study is the safety evaluation of both treatment strategies with respect to SAEs during treatment. Additionally, relapse frequency after 28 days is evaluated.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of Ceftaroline Fosamil versus Vancomycin plus Aztreonam in treatment of patients with complicated bacterial skin and soft tissue infections.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of adding 125 mg or 250 mg doses of relebactam (MK-7655) to imipenem/cilastatin in adults 18 years or older with Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infection (cIAI). The primary hypothesis is that the relebactam + imipenem/cilastatin treatment regimen is non-inferior to treatment with imipenem/cilastatin alone with respect to the percentage of participants with a favorable clinical response at completion of intravenous (IV) study therapy.