Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 4 complete abstracts (1,055 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
An oxazolidinone and acetamide derived anti-bacterial agent and protein synthesis inhibitor that is used in the treatment of gram-positive bacterial infections of the skin and respiratory tract.
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Linezolide; N-((3-(3-fluoro-4-morpholinylphenyl)-2-oxo-5-oxazolidinyl)methyl)acetamide; U 100766; 100766, U; U-100766; U100766; PNU-100766; PNU100766.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Acetamides; Oxazolidinones
Related concepts
- Anti-Bacterial Agent
- Protein Synthesis Inhibitors
- Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 4,261 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Linezolid” (counts retrieved 2026-10-31). 1,291 of them (30.3%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is 2010-2019 with 1,729 records.
Reviews account for 496 records (11.6%) and meta-analyses for 68. Randomized controlled trials number 157 (3.7%) as a share of all records on the topic.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 0 |
| 2000-2009 | 1,265 |
| 2010-2019 | 1,729 |
| 2020 onward | 1,291 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 496 | 11.6% |
| Meta-analyses | 68 | 1.6% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 157 | 3.7% |
Method: PubMed query "Linezolid"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-31.
Reading the evidence in drugs and chemicals
Studies of a chemical or drug can answer very different questions: what it is and how it behaves in cells and animals, how the body handles it, and whether it changes outcomes in people. Laboratory and animal findings often do not carry over to patients, and observational studies of exposures are confounded by who uses a substance and why. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to use, avoid, start or stop any substance or medicine; talk to a qualified clinician or pharmacist about your own situation. Check the dose, the species, the comparison group and whether a patient-relevant outcome was measured.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
| Study / authors | Year | Source label / design | Europe PMC citations | Licence / source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment of Highly Drug-Resistant Pulmonary Tuberculosis | 2020 | Clinical trial Design not recorded in structured metadata | 778 | cc by PMID 32130813 · DOI · PMC6955640 |
| Treatment Strategy for Rifampin-Susceptible Tuberculosis | 2023 | Randomized controlled trial Design not recorded in structured metadata | 134 | cc by PMID 36808186 · DOI · PMC7616851 |
| Linezolid Dose That Maximizes Sterilizing Effect While Minimizing Toxicity and Resistance Emergence for Tuberculosis | 2017 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 98 | cc by PMID 28584143 · DOI · PMC5527615 |
| Ribosomal protection as a linezolid resistance mechanism in Mycobacterium abscessus | 2026 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 0 | cc by PMID 41770215 · DOI · PMC13041422 |
Treatment of Highly Drug-Resistant Pulmonary Tuberculosis [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundPatients with highly drug-resistant forms of tuberculosis have limited treatment options and historically have had poor outcomes.
- Closing excerpt
- ).
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (341 words)
BackgroundPatients with highly drug-resistant forms of tuberculosis have limited treatment options and historically have had poor outcomes.MethodsIn an open-label, single-group study in which follow-up is ongoing at three South African sites, we investigated treatment with three oral drugs - bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid - that have bactericidal activity against tuberculosis and to which there is little preexisting resistance. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the drug combination for 26 weeks in patients with extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis and patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis that was not responsive to treatment or for which a second-line regimen had been discontinued because of side effects. The primary end point was the incidence of an unfavorable outcome, defined as treatment failure (bacteriologic or clinical) or relapse during follow-up, which continued until 6 months after the end of treatment. Patients were classified as having a favorable outcome at 6 months if they had resolution of clinical disease, a negative culture status, and had not already been classified as having had an unfavorable outcome. Other efficacy end points and safety were also evaluated.ResultsA total of 109 patients were enrolled in the study and were included in the evaluation of efficacy and safety end points. At 6 months after the end of treatment in the intention-to-treat analysis, 11 patients (10%) had an unfavorable outcome and 98 patients (90%; 95% confidence interval, 83 to 95) had a favorable outcome. The 11 unfavorable outcomes were 7 deaths (6 during treatment and 1 from an unknown cause during follow-up), 1 withdrawal of consent during treatment, 2 relapses during follow-up, and 1 loss to follow-up. The expected linezolid toxic effects of peripheral neuropathy (occurring in 81% of patients) and myelosuppression (48%), although common, were manageable, often leading to dose reductions or interruptions in treatment with linezolid.ConclusionsThe combination of bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid led to a favorable outcome at 6 months after the end of therapy in a high percentage of patients with highly drug-resistant forms of tuberculosis; some associated toxic effects were observed. (Funded by the TB Alliance and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02333799.).
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 32130813 · DOI · PMC6955640
Treatment Strategy for Rifampin-Susceptible Tuberculosis [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundTuberculosis is usually treated with a 6-month rifampin-based regimen.
- Closing excerpt
- ).
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (328 words)
BackgroundTuberculosis is usually treated with a 6-month rifampin-based regimen. Whether a strategy involving shorter initial treatment may lead to similar outcomes is unclear.MethodsIn this adaptive, open-label, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned participants with rifampin-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis to undergo either standard treatment (rifampin and isoniazid for 24 weeks with pyrazinamide and ethambutol for the first 8 weeks) or a strategy involving initial treatment with an 8-week regimen, extended treatment for persistent clinical disease, monitoring after treatment, and retreatment for relapse. There were four strategy groups with different initial regimens; noninferiority was assessed in the two strategy groups with complete enrollment, which had initial regimens of high-dose rifampin-linezolid and bedaquiline-linezolid (each with isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol). The primary outcome was a composite of death, ongoing treatment, or active disease at week 96. The noninferiority margin was 12 percentage points.ResultsOf the 674 participants in the intention-to-treat population, 4 (0.6%) withdrew consent or were lost to follow-up. A primary-outcome event occurred in 7 of the 181 participants (3.9%) in the standard-treatment group, as compared with 21 of the 184 participants (11.4%) in the strategy group with an initial rifampin-linezolid regimen (adjusted difference, 7.4 percentage points; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 1.7 to 13.2; noninferiority not met) and 11 of the 189 participants (5.8%) in the strategy group with an initial bedaquiline-linezolid regimen (adjusted difference, 0.8 percentage points; 97.5% CI, -3.4 to 5.1; noninferiority met). The mean total duration of treatment was 180 days in the standard-treatment group, 106 days in the rifampin-linezolid strategy group, and 85 days in the bedaquiline-linezolid strategy group. The incidences of grade 3 or 4 adverse events and serious adverse events were similar in the three groups.ConclusionsA strategy involving initial treatment with an 8-week bedaquiline-linezolid regimen was noninferior to standard treatment for tuberculosis with respect to clinical outcomes. The strategy was associated with a shorter total duration of treatment and with no evident safety concerns. (Funded by the Singapore National Medical Research Council and others; TRUNCATE-TB ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03474198.).
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 36808186 · DOI · PMC7616851
Linezolid Dose That Maximizes Sterilizing Effect While Minimizing Toxicity and Resistance Emergence for Tuberculosis [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Linezolid has an excellent sterilizing effect in tuberculosis patients but high adverse event rates.
- Closing excerpt
- The linezolid dose of 300 mg/day performed well and should be compared to 600 mg/day or 1,200 mg every other day in clinical trials.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (249 words)
Linezolid has an excellent sterilizing effect in tuberculosis patients but high adverse event rates. The dose that would maximize efficacy and minimize toxicity is unknown. We performed linezolid dose-effect and dose-scheduling studies in the hollow fiber system model of tuberculosis (HFS-TB) for sterilizing effect. HFS-TB units were treated with several doses to mimic human-like linezolid intrapulmonary pharmacokinetics and repetitively sampled for drug concentration, total bacterial burden, linezolid-resistant subpopulations, and RNA sequencing over 2 months. Linezolid-resistant isolates underwent whole-genome sequencing. The expression of genes encoding efflux pumps in the first 1 to 2 weeks revealed the same exposure-response patterns as the linezolid-resistant subpopulation. Linezolid-resistant isolates from the 2nd month of therapy revealed mutations in several efflux pump/transporter genes and a LuxR-family transcriptional regulator. Linezolid sterilizing effect was linked to the ratio of unbound 0- to 24-h area under the concentration-time curve (AUC0-24) to MIC. Optimal microbial kill was achieved at an AUC0-24/MIC ratio of 119. The optimal sterilizing effect dose for clinical use was identified using Monte Carlo simulations. Clinical doses of 300 and 600 mg/day (or double the dose every other day) achieved this target in 87% and >99% of 10,000 patients, respectively. The susceptibility breakpoint identified was 2 mg/liter. The simulations identified that a 300-mg/day dose did not achieve AUC0-24s associated with linezolid toxicity, while 600 mg/day achieved those AUC0-24s in <20% of subjects. The linezolid dose of 300 mg/day performed well and should be compared to 600 mg/day or 1,200 mg every other day in clinical trials.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 28584143 · DOI · PMC5527615
Ribosomal protection as a linezolid resistance mechanism in Mycobacterium abscessus [4]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Mycobacterium abscessus has emerged as a significant pulmonary pathogen characterized by its resistance to most first-line antimycobacterial drugs.
- Closing excerpt
- These results demonstrate that targeting ABC-F proteins could help combat intrinsic resistance to several ribosome-targeting antibiotics in mycobacteria.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (137 words)
Mycobacterium abscessus has emerged as a significant pulmonary pathogen characterized by its resistance to most first-line antimycobacterial drugs. Recent investigations have highlighted the clinical efficacy of including the oxazolidinone antibiotic linezolid in M. abscessus combination therapies, despite moderate resistance frequently being observed in patient isolates. Even with the potential usefulness of linezolid, the mechanisms that drive linezolid resistance in M. abscessus remain poorly understood. In several bacterial pathogens, including Mycobacterium tuberculosis, ATP-binding cassette (ABC) family proteins of the F subtype (ABC-F) have been found to confer antibiotic resistance to ribosome-targeting antibiotics, including linezolid. Here, we identified an M. abscessus ABC-F protein, MAB_2736c, that causes specific resistance to antibiotics that bind the 50S ribosomal subunit, including linezolid, macrolides, and chloramphenicol. These results demonstrate that targeting ABC-F proteins could help combat intrinsic resistance to several ribosome-targeting antibiotics in mycobacteria.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41770215 · DOI · PMC13041422
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Linezolid: a review of its properties, function, and use in critical care [5]
- Research article Update on prevalence and mechanisms of resistance to linezolid, tigecycline and daptomycin in enterococci in Europe: Towards a common nomenclature [6]
- Research article Linezolid: a promising option in the treatment of Gram-positives [7]
- Research article The emerging problem of linezolid-resistant enterococci [8]
- Research article Efficacy and safety profile of linezolid in the treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis [9]
- Research article Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Can Improve Linezolid Dosing Regimens in Current Clinical Practice: A Review of Linezolid Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics [10]
References
- Conradie F, Diacon AH, Ngubane N, Howell P, Everitt D, Crook AM, et al.. Treatment of Highly Drug-Resistant Pulmonary Tuberculosis. . 2020. PMID 32130813 · DOI · PMC6955640
- Paton NI, Cousins C, Suresh C, Burhan E, Chew KL, Dalay VB, et al.. Treatment Strategy for Rifampin-Susceptible Tuberculosis. . 2023. PMID 36808186 · DOI · PMC7616851
- Srivastava S, Magombedze G, Koeuth T, Sherman C, Pasipanodya JG, Raj P, et al.. Linezolid Dose That Maximizes Sterilizing Effect While Minimizing Toxicity and Resistance Emergence for Tuberculosis. . 2017. PMID 28584143 · DOI · PMC5527615
- Funck T, McGowen K, Sullivan MR, Zinga S, Wolf ID, Nurjadi D, et al.. Ribosomal protection as a linezolid resistance mechanism in Mycobacterium abscessus. . 2026. PMID 41770215 · DOI · PMC13041422
- Hashemian SMR, Farhadi T, Ganjparvar M. Linezolid: a review of its properties, function, and use in critical care. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2018. PMID 29950810 · DOI · PMC6014438
- Bender JK, Cattoir V, Hegstad K, Sadowy E, Coque TM, Westh H, et al.. Update on prevalence and mechanisms of resistance to linezolid, tigecycline and daptomycin in enterococci in Europe: Towards a common nomenclature. Drug Resist Updat. 2018. PMID 30447411 · DOI
- Zahedi Bialvaei A, Rahbar M, Yousefi M, Asgharzadeh M, Samadi Kafil H. Linezolid: a promising option in the treatment of Gram-positives. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017. PMID 27999068 · DOI
- Bi R, Qin T, Fan W, Ma P, Gu B. The emerging problem of linezolid-resistant enterococci. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2018. PMID 29101082 · DOI
- Agyeman AA, Ofori-Asenso R. Efficacy and safety profile of linezolid in the treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2016. PMID 27334498 · DOI · PMC4917997
- Rao GG, Konicki R, Cattaneo D, Alffenaar JW, Marriott DJE, Neely M, et al.. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Can Improve Linezolid Dosing Regimens in Current Clinical Practice: A Review of Linezolid Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics. Ther Drug Monit. 2020. PMID 31652190 · DOI
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-10-31.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.