-
Indian Journal of Critical Care... May 2021Leishmaniasis is one of the chronic debilitating vector-borne diseases caused by obligate intracellular protozoa. The global burden of disease although not increasing...
Leishmaniasis is one of the chronic debilitating vector-borne diseases caused by obligate intracellular protozoa. The global burden of disease although not increasing but potential risk of spread is there. At least 20 species of Leishmania are pathogenic to human beings. The transmission is from female sandfly through a blood meal. The disease pathogenesis is dependent on parasite and host mechanism-primarily cell-mediated immunity. The three common forms are visceral, cutaneous, and mucocutaneous. The diagnostic tests are mainly based on aspiration from the spleen or bone marrow. The use of K39 antibodies is the best serodiagnostic test. Antimonial, amphotericin B, miltefosine, and paromomycin are the drugs used to treat leishmaniasis. Amphotericin therapy shows the response within 7 to 10 days in most subjects, and 2 weeks of therapy is sufficient. However, those going into relapse need new treatment regimes. There is a definite benefit of combination therapy. However, there is still no breakthrough on a vaccine for prophylaxis. Daga MK, Rohatgi I, Mishra R. Leishmaniasis. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(Suppl 2):S166-S170.
PubMed: 34345133
DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23844 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Aug 2013Amoebic dysentery is caused by the protozoan parasite Entamoeba histolytica. It is transmitted in areas where poor sanitation allows contamination of drinking water and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Amoebic dysentery is caused by the protozoan parasite Entamoeba histolytica. It is transmitted in areas where poor sanitation allows contamination of drinking water and food with faeces. In these areas, up to 40% of people with diarrhoea may have amoebic dysentery.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of drug treatments for amoebic dysentery in endemic areas? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2013 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 6 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: diiodohydroxyquinoline (iodoquinol), diloxanide, emetine, metronidazole, nitazoxanide, ornidazole, paromomycin, secnidazole, and tinidazole.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Diarrhea; Dysentery, Amebic; Entamoeba histolytica; Feces; Humans; Metronidazole; Paromomycin; Tinidazole
PubMed: 23991750
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jan 2011Amoebic dysentery is caused by the protozoan parasite Entamoeba histolytica. It is transmitted in areas where poor sanitation allows contamination of drinking water and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Amoebic dysentery is caused by the protozoan parasite Entamoeba histolytica. It is transmitted in areas where poor sanitation allows contamination of drinking water and food with faeces. In these areas, up to 40% of people with diarrhoea may have amoebic dysentery.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of drug treatments for amoebic dysentery in endemic areas? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to April 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 6 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: diiodohydroxyquinoline (iodoquinol), diloxanide, emetine, metronidazole, nitazoxanide, ornidazole, paromomycin, secnidazole, and tinidazole.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Diarrhea; Dysentery, Amebic; Entamoeba histolytica; Humans; Incidence; Iodoquinol; Metronidazole; Paromomycin; Tinidazole
PubMed: 21477391
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jan 2007Amoebic dysentery is caused by the protozoan parasite Entamoeba histolytica. It is transmitted in areas where poor sanitation allows contamination of drinking water and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Amoebic dysentery is caused by the protozoan parasite Entamoeba histolytica. It is transmitted in areas where poor sanitation allows contamination of drinking water and food with faeces. In these areas, up to 40% of people with diarrhoea may have amoebic dysentery.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of drug treatments for amoebic dysentery in endemic areas? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to July 2006 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 11 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: emetine, metronidazole, ornidazole, paromomycin, secnidazole, and tinidazole.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Antibodies, Protozoan; Diarrhea; Dysentery, Amebic; Entamoeba histolytica; Feces; Gene Library; Humans; Metronidazole; Tinidazole
PubMed: 19454043
DOI: No ID Found -
The American Journal of Tropical... Jun 2014
Topics: Female; Gentamicins; Humans; Leishmaniasis, Cutaneous; Male; Paromomycin
PubMed: 24898982
DOI: 10.4269/ajtmh.14-0040b -
Iranian Journal of Medical Sciences May 2019Some treatment reported for cutaneous leishmaniasis. The studies examined the impact of the paromomycin has different characteristics and results. The aim of the present... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Some treatment reported for cutaneous leishmaniasis. The studies examined the impact of the paromomycin has different characteristics and results. The aim of the present study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of paromomycin in the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis in Iran.
METHODS
Literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Scientific Information Database, IranMedex, Magiran, Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (from February 2000 to May 2016), and references cited in the text of selected studies. Search terms used were "paromomycin", "cutaneous leishmaniasis", "randomized"," aminosidine", "controlled trial", and "clinical trial". Random effects models were used to calculate the measure of association, with 95% confidence intervals, to analyze the efficacy of paromomycin in the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis.
RESULTS
Initial search yielded 76 citations. Of these original results, 9 met our specific selection criteria. Four of the randomized controlled trials compared the efficacy of paromomycin in the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis with that of a placebo; they were included in the meta-analysis. The success rate of treatment with paromomycin was higher than that with the placebo (pooled RR=4.50, 95% CI: 2.54 to 8.02; P=0.001 and I=26.7%), whereas the difference with the non-placebo treatments was nonsignificant (pooled RR=0.79, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.073; P=0.131 and I=83.3%).
CONCLUSION
No significant difference was observed between paromomycin and the other treatments in their effectiveness in the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis. Because no single drug is effective against all the forms of leishmaniasis, we suggest multidrug therapy.
PubMed: 31182884
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Tropical Medicine 2021Visceral leishmaniasis, also known as kala-azar is one of the most commonly neglected tropical diseases affecting a large number of rural and resource-limited people in... (Review)
Review
Visceral leishmaniasis, also known as kala-azar is one of the most commonly neglected tropical diseases affecting a large number of rural and resource-limited people in South Asia, Africa, and South America. Paromomycin, an aminoglycoside drug, is frequently used for the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis. Despite limited therapies for visceral leishmaniasis and emerging drug resistance, a proper review on the action of paromomycin for kala-azar is lacking. This systematic review aims to look for the efficacy and safety aspects of paromomycin for the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis.
PubMed: 34349806
DOI: 10.1155/2021/8629039 -
Clinical Pharmacokinetics Feb 2018This review describes the pharmacokinetic properties of the systemically administered antileishmanial drugs pentavalent antimony, paromomycin, pentamidine, miltefosine... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
This review describes the pharmacokinetic properties of the systemically administered antileishmanial drugs pentavalent antimony, paromomycin, pentamidine, miltefosine and amphotericin B (AMB), including their absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion and potential drug-drug interactions. This overview provides an understanding of their clinical pharmacokinetics, which could assist in rationalising and optimising treatment regimens, especially in combining multiple antileishmanial drugs in an attempt to increase efficacy and shorten treatment duration. Pentavalent antimony pharmacokinetics are characterised by rapid renal excretion of unchanged drug and a long terminal half-life, potentially due to intracellular conversion to trivalent antimony. Pentamidine is the only antileishmanial drug metabolised by cytochrome P450 enzymes. Paromomycin is excreted by the kidneys unchanged and is eliminated fastest of all antileishmanial drugs. Miltefosine pharmacokinetics are characterized by a long terminal half-life and extensive accumulation during treatment. AMB pharmacokinetics differ per drug formulation, with a fast renal and faecal excretion of AMB deoxylate but a much slower clearance of liposomal AMB resulting in an approximately ten-fold higher exposure. AMB and pentamidine pharmacokinetics have never been evaluated in leishmaniasis patients. Studies linking exposure to effect would be required to define target exposure levels in dose optimisation but have only been performed for miltefosine. Limited research has been conducted on exposure at the drug's site of action, such as skin exposure in cutaneous leishmaniasis patients after systemic administration. Pharmacokinetic data on special patient populations such as HIV co-infected patients are mostly lacking. More research in these areas will help improve clinical outcomes by informed dosing and combination of drugs.
Topics: Animals; Antiprotozoal Agents; Coinfection; Drug Interactions; HIV Infections; Half-Life; Humans; Leishmaniasis
PubMed: 28756612
DOI: 10.1007/s40262-017-0570-0