Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT00352612

Comparison of Cephalexin Versus Clindamycin for Suspected CA-MRSA Skin Infections

The purpose of this study is to help define the role of antibiotics in the treatment of pediatric skin infections caused by community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA). The investigators hypothesize that treatment with cephalexin, a penicillin-like antibiotic to which CA-MRSA would be expected to be resistant, does not result in poorer outcomes than treatment with clindamycin, an antibiotic to which CA-MRSA is most often susceptible.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

About this study

Community-associated methicillin resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (CA-MRSA) infections have increased significantly over the past decade. Nearly every major region of the country has reported infections with this organism, with some areas reporting a prevalence as high as 80%. Epidemiologic evidence points to the emergence of a new strain of MRSA within the community, with unique genetic and clinical characteristics that differentiate it from traditional hospital-associated MRSA (HA-MRSA). Unlike HA-MRSA, these CA-MRSA are often susceptible in vitro to multiple antibiotic classes (other than penicillins and cephalosporins), and often cause significant, deep-seated abscesses in healthy individuals without any known risk factors for healthcare contact. Prior to awareness of this disease, many clinicians were using penicillin and cephalosporin antibiotics for empiric treatment of cutaneous abscesses, yet widespread treatment failures in the face of increasing CA-MRSA infections did NOT occur. During a one-year retrospective study in pediatric patients at our institution, we found that nearly 50% of CA-MRSA abscesses were treated with "inappropriate" antibiotics by susceptibility profiles without any significant adverse outcomes. Many clinicians are now confronted with the dilemma of whether to change empiric antibiotic therapy to other classes to which CA-MRSA would be expected to be susceptible; the most common choices including clindamycin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), or vancomycin. Unfortunately, each of these antibiotics has problems of its own in terms of increased cost, poor palatability of pediatric liquid formulation, poorer side effect profile, or necessity of IV infusion, and at this time the optimal, empiric antibiotic treatment for presumed CA-MRSA skin and soft tissue infections is unclear.

The purpose of this study is to help define the role of antibiotics in the treatment of pediatric skin infections caused by CA-MRSA. We hypothesize that treatment with cephalexin, a penicillin-like antibiotic to which CA-MRSA would be expected to be resistant, does not result in poorer outcomes than treatment with clindamycin, an antibiotic to which CA-MRSA is most often susceptible.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Children between the ages of 6 months and 18 years of age (inclusive)
  • Suspected purulent staphylococcal skin or soft tissue infection
  • No hospitalization within the previous 14 days
  • Must have reliable means of follow-up contact (e.g. working phone)
  • Outpatient management in the judgement of treating physician

Exclusion criteria

  • Hospitalization on initial visit
  • Voluntary withdrawal by the treating physician in order to dictate the antibiotic being used
  • Patients with a history of hypersensitivity to or intolerance of cephalexin (or other beta lactams) or clindamycin.
  • Patients with altered immunity (inherited or acquired)
  • Patients with skin infections related to surgical wounds or hardware.
  • Patients currently on antibiotic therapy

Treatment and study plan

Clindamycin

Drug

clindamycin suspension or tablets, 20mg/kg/day, given by mouth, divided TID, for 7 days

Cephalexin

Drug

cephalexin suspension or tablets, 40mg/kg/day, given by mouth, divided TID, for 7 days

Other names: keflex

Primary outcomes

  1. Clinical Improvement at the 48-72 Hour Clinical Follow-up

    Time frame: 48-72 hour clinical follow-up

    Clinical improvement was defined as improvement in at least one of the following four measures without regression in any: (1) erythema (2) pain (3) induration (4) patient or families self report of improvement.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Aaron Chen

Other

Collaborators

  • Johns Hopkins University
  • Thrasher Research Fund

Registry information

Official study title

Comparison of Cephalexin Versus Clindamycin in the Empiric, Outpatient Treatment of Suspected Staphylococcal Cutaneous Infections in the Era of Community-associated Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (CA-MRSA)

Important dates

Study start
2006
Primary completion
2009
Study completion
2009
First posted
Jul 14, 2006
Registry last updated
May 13, 2013

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.