Skip to content

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

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)

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00352612
Enrollment
200
Registered
2006-07-14
Start date
2006-09-30
Completion date
2009-08-31
Last updated
2013-05-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Abscess, Folliculitis, Staphylococcal Infection, Staphylococcal Skin Infection

Keywords

clinical trial, randomized, blinded, controlled

Brief summary

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.

Detailed description

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.

Interventions

DRUGcephalexin

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

DRUGclindamycin

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

Sponsors

Thrasher Research Fund
CollaboratorOTHER
Johns Hopkins University
CollaboratorOTHER
Aaron Chen
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Caregiver)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
6 Months to 18 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

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

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Clinical Improvement at the 48-72 Hour Clinical Follow-up48-72 hour clinical follow-upClinical 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.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Group 1
cephalexin arm
100
Group 2
clindamycin arm
100
Total200

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicGroup 1Group 2Total
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
100 Participants100 Participants200 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
55 Participants60 Participants115 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
45 Participants40 Participants85 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 1000 / 100
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 1000 / 100

Outcome results

Primary

Clinical Improvement at the 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.

Time frame: 48-72 hour clinical follow-up

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
CephalexinClinical Improvement at the 48-72 Hour Clinical Follow-up94 participants
ClindamycinClinical Improvement at the 48-72 Hour Clinical Follow-up97 participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026