1989
DOI: 10.11150/kansenshogakuzasshi1970.63.501
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Double-Blind Comparative Study of Roxithromycin (RU 28965) and Midecamycin acetate (MOM) in the Treatment of Pneumonia

Abstract: The clinical efficacy and safety of Roxithromycin (RU) were compared with those of Midecamycin acetate (MOM) in patients with pneumonia in a double blind study. RU and MOM were administered orally for 14 days with daily doses of 300 mg (150 mg b.i.d.) and 600 mg (200 mg t.i.d.), respectively. The following results were obtained. 1. RU and MOM were administered to a total of 204 patients (RU: 101, MOM: 103). The clinical efficacy was judged in 150 patients (RU: 70, MOM: 80), with 54 of the patients excluded fro… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1993
1993
2003
2003

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A double-blind comparison of roxithromycin and miocamycin showed no statistically significant differences in clinical or bacteriological responses between the 2 drugs (table V) [Soejima et al 1989]. No adverse reaction was observed and roxithromycin was tolerated by all patients.…”
Section: 26mentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A double-blind comparison of roxithromycin and miocamycin showed no statistically significant differences in clinical or bacteriological responses between the 2 drugs (table V) [Soejima et al 1989]. No adverse reaction was observed and roxithromycin was tolerated by all patients.…”
Section: 26mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Clinical and bacteriological success rates in a Japanese double-blind study(Soejima et al 1989) Success rate [no. of patients (%)]…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%