-
The Lancet. Healthy Longevity Feb 2024Rapamycin and its derivatives (rapalogs) are inhibitors of mTOR, a major regulator of the ageing process. We aimed to summarise the effects of rapamycin and its... (Review)
Review
Rapamycin and its derivatives (rapalogs) are inhibitors of mTOR, a major regulator of the ageing process. We aimed to summarise the effects of rapamycin and its derivatives on the severity of ageing-related physiological changes and disease in adults. A search across five databases yielded 18 400 unique articles, resulting in 19 included studies. Rapamycin and its derivatives improved physiological parameters associated with ageing in the immune, cardiovascular, and integumentary systems of healthy individuals or individuals with ageing-related diseases. Overall, no significant effects on the endocrine, muscular, or neurological systems were found. The effects of rapamycin or its derivatives on the respiratory, digestive, renal, and reproductive systems were not assessed. No serious adverse events attributed to rapamycin and its derivatives were reported in healthy individuals; however, there were increased numbers of infections and increases in total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides in individuals with ageing-related diseases. Future studies should assess the remaining unexamined systems and test the effects of long-term exposure to rapamycin and its derivatives.
Topics: Humans; Aging; Sirolimus
PubMed: 38310895
DOI: 10.1016/S2666-7568(23)00258-1 -
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics Jul 2015Half-dose regimens may be equally effective but associated with diminished adverse events (AE) than standard-dose regimens. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Half-dose regimens may be equally effective but associated with diminished adverse events (AE) than standard-dose regimens.
AIM
To assess efficacy and safety of full- vs. half-dose clarithromycin in the treatment of H. pylori.
METHODS
Medline, EMBASE and PubMed databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that meet eligibility criteria. Only parallel group RCTs with ≥ 2 arms were eligible. Studies comparing triple, quadruple or sequential therapy for 7-14 days were selected. Regimens had to contain the same drug combination, differing only in dosage; the comparison of full- vs. half-dose clarithromycin was required, regardless if other drugs were dose-reduced or not. Data extraction was performed for primary outcome [eradication by intent-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses] and secondary outcome (AE).
RESULTS
A total of 1622 articles were identified, of which 19 studies were eligible. Overall, eradication was achieved in 82.5% of half-dose (n = 2115) vs. 83.4% of full-dose recipients (n = 2109) on ITT (87.1% vs. 88.4% on PP respectively). Pooled relative risk in the half- vs. full-dose regimen was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.95-1.02) on ITT and 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97-1.01) on PP by the random effects model. Heterogeneity was significant (chi-squared statistic P = 0.05, I(2) = 37%). AE were reported in 29.3% of half- vs. 44.0% of full-dose recipients [pooled RR 0.67 (95% CI: 0.60-0.75)]. Pre-planned subgroup analyses of dose modification, sample size, study origin and treatment duration, as well as sensitivity analysis showed no significant differences between arms.
CONCLUSION
A half-dose clarithromycin-based regimen is equally effective yet better tolerated than its full-dose counterpart in the treatment of H. pylori.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clarithromycin; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Therapy, Combination; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26011564
DOI: 10.1111/apt.13259 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2012Impetigo is a common, superficial bacterial skin infection, which is most frequently encountered in children. There is no generally agreed standard therapy, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Impetigo is a common, superficial bacterial skin infection, which is most frequently encountered in children. There is no generally agreed standard therapy, and guidelines for treatment differ widely. Treatment options include many different oral and topical antibiotics as well as disinfectants. This is an updated version of the original review published in 2003.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of treatments for impetigo, including non-pharmacological interventions and 'waiting for natural resolution'.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated our searches of the following databases to July 2010: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 2005), EMBASE (from 2007), and LILACS (from 1982). We also searched online trials registries for ongoing trials, and we handsearched the reference lists of new studies found in the updated search.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of treatments for non-bullous, bullous, primary, and secondary impetigo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two independent authors undertook all steps in data collection. We performed quality assessments and data collection in two separate stages.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 57 trials in the first version of this review. For this update 1 of those trials was excluded and 12 new trials were added. The total number of included trials was, thus, 68, with 5578 participants, reporting on 50 different treatments, including placebo. Most trials were in primary impetigo or did not specify this.For many of the items that were assessed for risk of bias, most studies did not provide enough information. Fifteen studies reported blinding of participants and outcome assessors.Topical antibiotic treatment showed better cure rates than placebo (pooled risk ratio (RR) 2. 24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.61 to 3.13) in 6 studies with 575 participants. In 4 studies with 440 participants, there was no clear evidence that either of the most commonly studied topical antibiotics (mupirocin and fusidic acid) was more effective than the other (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.11).In 10 studies with 581 participants, topical mupirocin was shown to be slightly superior to oral erythromycin (pooled RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.13). There were no significant differences in cure rates from treatment with topical versus other oral antibiotics. There were, however, differences in the outcome from treatment with different oral antibiotics: penicillin was inferior to erythromycin, in 2 studies with 79 participants (pooled RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.56), and cloxacillin, in 2 studies with 166 participants (pooled RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.08).There was a lack of evidence for the benefit of using disinfectant solutions. When 2 studies with 292 participants were pooled, topical antibiotics were significantly better than disinfecting treatments (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.32).The reported number of side-effects was low, and most of these were mild. Side-effects were more common for oral antibiotic treatment compared to topical treatment. Gastrointestinal effects accounted for most of the difference.Worldwide, bacteria causing impetigo show growing resistance rates for commonly used antibiotics. For a newly developed topical treatment, retapamulin, no resistance has yet been reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is good evidence that topical mupirocin and topical fusidic acid are equally, or more, effective than oral treatment. Due to the lack of studies in people with extensive impetigo, it is unclear if oral antibiotics are superior to topical antibiotics in this group. Fusidic acid and mupirocin are of similar efficacy. Penicillin was not as effective as most other antibiotics. There is a lack of evidence to support disinfection measures to manage impetigo.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Erythromycin; Fusidic Acid; Humans; Impetigo; Mupirocin; Penicillins; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 22258953
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003261.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Asthma is a chronic disease in which inflammation of the airways causes symptomatic wheezing, coughing and difficult breathing. Macrolides are antibiotics with... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Asthma is a chronic disease in which inflammation of the airways causes symptomatic wheezing, coughing and difficult breathing. Macrolides are antibiotics with antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory activities that have been explored for the long-term control of asthma symptoms.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of macrolides compared with placebo for managing chronic asthma.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register up to March 2021. We also manually searched bibliographies of previously published reviews and conference proceedings and contacted study authors. We included records published in any language in the search.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) involving both children and adults with asthma treated with macrolides versus placebo for four or more weeks. Primary outcomes were exacerbation requiring hospitalisation, severe exacerbations (exacerbations requiring emergency department (ED) visits or systemic steroids, or both), symptom scales, asthma control questionnaire (ACQ, score from 0 totally controlled, to 6 severely uncontrolled), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ, with score from 1 to 7 with higher scores indicating better QoL), rescue medication puffs per day, morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF; litres per minutes), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV; litres), bronchial hyperresponsiveness, and oral corticosteroid dose. Secondary outcomes were adverse events (including mortality), withdrawal, blood eosinophils, sputum eosinophils, eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) in serum, and ECP in sputum.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently examined all records identified in the searches then reviewed the full text of all potentially relevant articles before extracting data in duplicate from all included studies. As per protocol, we used a fixed-effect model. We conducted a sensitivity analysis for analyses with high heterogeneity (I greater than 30%). GRADE was used to assess the certainty of the body of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria, randomising 1973 participants to receive macrolide or placebo for at least four weeks. Most of the included studies reported data from adults (mean age 21 to 61 years) with persistent or severe asthma, while four studies included children. All participants were recruited in outpatient settings. Inclusion criteria, interventions and outcomes were highly variable. The evidence suggests macrolides probably deliver a moderately sized reduction in exacerbations requiring hospitalisations compared to placebo (odds ratio (OR) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 1.12; studies = 2, participants = 529; moderate-certainty evidence). Macrolides probably reduce exacerbations requiring ED visits and/or treatment with systemic steroids (rate ratio (RaR) 0.65, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.80; studies = 4, participants = 640; moderate-certainty evidence). Macrolides may reduce symptoms (as measured on symptom scales) (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.46, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.11; studies = 4, participants = 136 ; very low-certainty evidence). Macrolides may result in a little improvement in ACQ (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.31 to -0.03; studies = 5, participants = 773; low-certainty evidence). Macrolides may have little to no effect on AQLQ (mean difference (MD) 0.24, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.35; studies = 6, participants = 802; very low-certainty evidence). For both the ACQ and the AQLQ the suggested effect of macrolides versus placebo did not reach a minimal clinically important difference (MCID, 0.5 for ACQ and AQLQ) (ACQ: low-certainty evidence; AQLQ: very low-certainty evidence). Due to high heterogeneity (I > 30%), we conducted sensitivity analyses on the above results, which reduced the size of the suggested effects by reducing the weighting on the large, high quality studies. Macrolides may result in a small effect compared to placebo in reducing need for rescue medication (MD -0.43 puffs/day, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.04; studies = 4, participants = 314; low-certainty evidence). Macrolides may increase FEV, but the effect is almost certainly below a level discernible to patients (MD 0.04 L, 95% CI 0 to 0.08; studies = 10, participants = 1046; low-certainty evidence). It was not possible to pool outcomes for non-specific bronchial hyperresponsiveness or lowest tolerated oral corticosteroid dose (in people requiring oral corticosteroids at baseline). There was no evidence of a difference in severe adverse events (including mortality), although less than half of the studies reported the outcome (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.31; studies = 8, participants = 854; low-certainty evidence). Reporting of specific adverse effects was too inconsistent across studies for a meaningful analysis.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Existing evidence suggests an effect of macrolides compared with placebo on the rate of exacerbations requiring hospitalisation. Macrolides probably reduce severe exacerbations (requiring ED visit and/or treatment with systemic steroids) and may reduce symptoms. However, we cannot rule out the possibility of other benefits or harms because the evidence is of very low quality due to heterogeneity among patients and interventions, imprecision and reporting biases. The results were mostly driven by a well-designed, well powered RCT, indicating that azithromycin may reduce exacerbation rate and improve symptom scores in severe asthma. The review highlights the need for researchers to report outcomes accurately and according to standard definitions. Macrolides can reduce exacerbation rate in people with severe asthma. Future trials could evaluate if this effect is sustained across all the severe asthma phenotypes, the comparison with newer biological drugs, whether effects persist or wane after treatment cessation and whether effects are associated with infection biomarkers.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Asthma; Disease Progression; Humans; Macrolides; Middle Aged; Quality of Life; Young Adult
PubMed: 34807989
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002997.pub5 -
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and... Aug 2023The emergence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) strains of genital pathogens, notably Mycoplasma genitalium and Ureaplasma spp., constitutes a significant global threat... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The emergence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) strains of genital pathogens, notably Mycoplasma genitalium and Ureaplasma spp., constitutes a significant global threat today. The present study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and trend of changes in MDR mycoplasma and ureaplasma strains.
METHODS
An exhaustive search was performed across the ISI Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar databases to accumulate relevant studies without restrictions until April 2023. We used event rate and corresponding 95% confidence intervals to determine the frequency of resistance-related mutations and examine the trend of antibiotic resistance changes.
RESULTS
The data from 27 studies, including 24,662 patients across 14 countries, were evaluated. Out of the total studies, 20 focused on M. genitalium infections, and five on Ureaplasma spp. The frequency of resistance-associated mutations to macrolides, tetracyclines, and fluoroquinolones in clinical strains of M. genitalium was 43.5%, 13.1%, and 18.6%, respectively. The prevalence of M. genitalium strains with double resistance and MDR was 11.0% and 17.4%, respectively. The incidence of both double-drug-resistant and MDR strains was higher in the World Health Organization (WHO) Western Pacific Region than in European and American populations. For Ureaplasma strains, resistance-associated mutations to macrolides, tetracyclines, and fluoroquinolones were 40.8%, 25.7%, and 90.3%, respectively. The rate of antibiotic resistance was higher in the African population compared to the European and WHO Western Pacific Regions. The rate of MDR Ureaplasma infections was 13.2%, with a higher incidence in the African population compared to the WHO Western Pacific and European regions.
CONCLUSION
The proliferation and spread of MDR Mycoplasma and Ureaplasma strains present a significant public health challenge. The situation is indeed alarming, and the rising trend of MDR M. genitalium and MDR Ureaplasma infections suggests that therapies involving macrolides and fluoroquinolones may become less effective.
Topics: Humans; Mycoplasma; Mycoplasma Infections; Ureaplasma Infections; Mycoplasma hominis; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Ureaplasma; Fluoroquinolones; Tetracyclines; Macrolides; Mutation; Prevalence
PubMed: 37563660
DOI: 10.1186/s12941-023-00627-6 -
Ophthalmology and Therapy Apr 2022Since 2009, the Antibiotic Resistance Monitoring in Ocular Microorganisms (ARMOR) surveillance study has been assessing in vitro antibiotic resistance for bacterial... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Since 2009, the Antibiotic Resistance Monitoring in Ocular Microorganisms (ARMOR) surveillance study has been assessing in vitro antibiotic resistance for bacterial isolates sourced from ocular infections in the US. The main goal of this systematic review was to compare in vitro resistance data for ocular pathogens from published US studies with the most recently published data from the ARMOR study (2009-2018) and, where possible, to evaluate trends in bacterial resistance over time over all studies.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE®, BIOSIS Previews®, and EMBASE databases (1/1/1995-6/30/2021). Data were extracted from relevant studies and antibiotic susceptibility rates for common ocular pathogens (Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci [CoNS], Streptococcus pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Haemophilus influenzae), longitudinal changes in susceptibility, and multidrug resistance (MDR) were compared descriptively.
RESULTS
Thirty-two relevant studies were identified. High in vitro resistance was found among S. aureus and CoNS to fluoroquinolones, macrolides, and methicillin/oxacillin across studies, with high rates of MDR noted, specifically among methicillin-resistant staphylococci. Data from studies pre-dating or overlapping the early years of ARMOR reflected increasing rates of S. aureus resistance to fluoroquinolones, macrolides, methicillin/oxacillin, and aminoglycosides, while the ARMOR data suggested slight decreases in resistance to these classes between 2009 and 2018. Overall, methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) prevalence peaked from 2005 to 2015 with a possible decreasing trend in more recent years.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Data from local and regional US datasets were generally consistent with data from the national ARMOR surveillance study. Continued surveillance of ocular bacterial pathogens is needed to track trends such as methicillin resistance and MDR prevalence and any new emerging antibiotic resistance phenotypes. Susceptibility data from ARMOR can inform initial choice of therapy, especially in practice areas where local antibiograms are unavailable.
PubMed: 35113406
DOI: 10.1007/s40123-021-00449-9 -
International Journal of Antimicrobial... Jul 2021Antibiotic consumption is a key driver of antimicrobial resistance (AR), particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where risk factors for AR emergence and...
Antibiotic consumption is a key driver of antimicrobial resistance (AR), particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where risk factors for AR emergence and spread are prevalent. However, the potential contribution of mass drug administration (MDA) and systematic drug administration (SDA) of antibiotics to AR spread is unknown. We conducted a systematic review to provide an overview of MDA/SDA in LMICs, including indications, antibiotics used and, if investigated, levels of AR over time. This systematic review is reported in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Of 2438 identified articles, 63 were reviewed: indications for MDA/SDA were various, and targeted populations were particularly vulnerable, including pregnant women, children, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected populations, and communities in outbreak settings. Available data suggest that MDA/SDA may lead to a significant increase in AR, especially following azithromycin administration. However, only 40% of studies evaluated AR. Integrative approaches that evaluate AR in addition to clinical outcomes are needed to understand the consequences of MDA/SDA implementation, combined with standardised AR surveillance for timely detection of AR emergence.
Topics: Amoxicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Azithromycin; Ciprofloxacin; Developing Countries; Doxycycline; Drug Resistance, Microbial; Drug Utilization; Female; Humans; Mass Drug Administration; Pregnancy; Trimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination
PubMed: 34044108
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2021.106364 -
Journal of the Pediatric Infectious... Aug 2018With the continued high prevalence of chlamydia worldwide and high risk of transfer from mothers to their infant during delivery, a need for safe and effective therapies... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
With the continued high prevalence of chlamydia worldwide and high risk of transfer from mothers to their infant during delivery, a need for safe and effective therapies for infants who acquire a chlamydial infection remains. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of antibiotic treatments, including oral erythromycin, azithromycin, and trimethoprim, for neonatal chlamydial conjunctivitis.
METHODS
We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from their inception to July 14, 2017. We included randomized and nonrandomized studies that evaluated the effects of erythromycin, azithromycin, or trimethoprim in neonates with chlamydial conjunctivitis. A meta-analysis using a random-effects generic inverse-variance method was performed, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
RESULTS
We found 12 studies (n = 292 neonates) and were able to meta-analyze 7 studies that used erythromycin at a dose of 50 mg/kg body weight per day for 14 days. The clinical and microbiological cure were 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94%-100%) and 97% (95% CI, 95%-99%), respectively, and adverse gastrointestinal effects occurred in 14% (95% CI, 1%-28%) of the neonates. The microbiological cure in the study that assessed azithromycin at 20 mg/kg per day were 60% (95% CI, 27%-93%) when it was given in a single dose and 86% (95% CI, 61%-100%) when given in a 3-day course. Two studies reported compliance with treatments, and 1 study reported no pyloric stenosis events. Because of the risk of bias and the few neonates included across the studies, the certainty of evidence is low to very low. No studies assessed trimethoprim.
CONCLUSIONS
Although evidence suggests that erythromycin at 50 mg/kg per day for 14 days results in higher numbers of cure than does azithromycin, compliance and risk of pyloric stenosis related to their use for other infections in neonates will factor into treatment recommendations. More data are needed to compare these treatments directly.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Azithromycin; Bias; Chlamydia Infections; Chlamydia trachomatis; Conjunctivitis, Bacterial; Drug Administration Schedule; Erythromycin; Female; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Male; Pyloric Stenosis; Risk Factors; Trimethoprim
PubMed: 30007329
DOI: 10.1093/jpids/piy060 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Dec 2022The intestinal microbiome provides a reservoir for antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs). The neonatal microbiome is more susceptible to disturbance from external factors... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The intestinal microbiome provides a reservoir for antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs). The neonatal microbiome is more susceptible to disturbance from external factors than the established microbiome in later life.
OBJECTIVES
In this review, we systematically summarize studies which investigated the intestinal resistome in neonates.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included original studies which investigated ARGs in stool or rectal swabs in neonates using molecular diagnostics.
METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS
Two authors independently extracted data, which were summarized in tables.
RESULTS
Our search identified 2701 studies, of which 23 (22 cohorts) were included. The studies show that the neonatal intestine harbours a high abundance and variety of ARGs, even in the absence of direct antibiotic exposure. The most commonly found ARGs confer resistance to aminoglycosides, β-lactams, macrolides, tetracyclines, or multidrug resistance. There is evidence that ARGs can be transferred from mothers to neonates. Interestingly, however, compared to mothers, neonates are reported to have a higher abundance of ARGs. One likely reason for this is the bacterial phylogenetic composition with a high abundance of Gammaproteobacteria in neonatal stool. Factors that have been associated with a higher abundance of ARGs are intrapartum and neonatal antibiotic use. Breastfeeding and neonatal probiotic use have been associated with a lower abundance of ARGs. Antibiotics during pregnancy, delivery mode, or sex are reported to have little effect. However, this might be because studies were underpowered and because it is difficult to account for effect modifiers.
CONCLUSIONS
The neonatal intestine seems to have a lower colonization resistance, which could make it easier for antibiotic-resistant populations to establish themselves. Future studies will help in the development of evidence-based interventions to modulate the abundance of ARGs in neonates, for example, by the use of pre- and probiotics and bacteriophages.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Phylogeny; Drug Resistance, Microbial; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bacteria; Intestines
PubMed: 35868586
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2022.07.014 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2018Scrub typhus, an important cause of acute fever in Asia, is caused by Orientia tsutsugamushi, an obligate intracellular bacterium. Antibiotics currently used to treat... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Scrub typhus, an important cause of acute fever in Asia, is caused by Orientia tsutsugamushi, an obligate intracellular bacterium. Antibiotics currently used to treat scrub typhus include tetracyclines, chloramphenicol, macrolides, and rifampicin.
OBJECTIVES
To assess and compare the effects of different antibiotic regimens for treatment of scrub typhus.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to 8 January 2018: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group specialized trials register; CENTRAL, in the Cochrane Library (2018, Issue 1); MEDLINE; Embase; LILACS; and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT). We checked references and contacted study authors for additional data. We applied no language or date restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing antibiotic regimens in people with the diagnosis of scrub typhus based on clinical symptoms and compatible laboratory tests (excluding the Weil-Felix test).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
For this update, two review authors re-extracted all data and assessed the certainty of evidence. We meta-analysed data to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes when appropriate, and elsewhere tabulated data to facilitate narrative analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six RCTs and one quasi-RCT with 548 participants; they took place in the Asia-Pacific region: Korea (three trials), Malaysia (one trial), and Thailand (three trials). Only one trial included children younger than 15 years (N = 57). We judged five trials to be at high risk of performance and detection bias owing to inadequate blinding. Trials were heterogenous in terms of dosing of interventions and outcome measures. Across trials, treatment failure rates were low.Two trials compared doxycycline to tetracycline. For treatment failure, the difference between doxycycline and tetracycline is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence). Doxycycline compared to tetracycline may make little or no difference in resolution of fever within 48 hours (risk ratio (RR) 1.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.44, 55 participants; one trial; low-certainty evidence) and in time to defervescence (116 participants; one trial; low-certainty evidence). We were unable to extract data for other outcomes.Three trials compared doxycycline versus macrolides. For most outcomes, including treatment failure, resolution of fever within 48 hours, time to defervescence, and serious adverse events, we are uncertain whether study results show a difference between doxycycline and macrolides (very low-certainty evidence). Macrolides compared to doxycycline may make little or no difference in the proportion of patients with resolution of fever within five days (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.10; 185 participants; two trials; low-certainty evidence). Another trial compared azithromycin versus doxycycline or chloramphenicol in children, but we were not able to disaggregate date for the doxycycline/chloramphenicol group.One trial compared doxycycline versus rifampicin. For all outcomes, we are uncertain whether study results show a difference between doxycycline and rifampicin (very low-certainty evidence). Of note, this trial deviated from the protocol after three out of eight patients who had received doxycycline and rifampicin combination therapy experienced treatment failure.Across trials, mild gastrointestinal side effects appeared to be more common with doxycycline than with comparator drugs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Tetracycline, doxycycline, azithromycin, and rifampicin are effective treatment options for scrub typhus and have resulted in few treatment failures. Chloramphenicol also remains a treatment option, but we could not include this among direct comparisons in this review.Most available evidence is of low or very low certainty. For specific outcomes, some low-certainty evidence suggests there may be little or no difference between tetracycline, doxycycline, and azithromycin as treatment options. Given very low-certainty evidence for rifampicin and the risk of inducing resistance in undiagnosed tuberculosis, clinicians should not regard this as a first-line treatment option. Clinicians could consider rifampicin as a second-line treatment option after exclusion of active tuberculosis.Further research should consist of additional adequately powered trials of doxycycline versus azithromycin or other macrolides, trials of other candidate antibiotics including rifampicin, and trials of treatments for severe scrub typhus. Researchers should standardize diagnostic techniques and reporting of clinical outcomes to allow robust comparisons.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Azithromycin; Child, Preschool; Chloramphenicol; Doxycycline; Humans; Macrolides; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rifampin; Scrub Typhus; Tetracycline
PubMed: 30246875
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002150.pub2