OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of P-gp modulation on the efficacy of treatment regimen.
METHOD: P-gp modulation in rats was performed by using P-gp inducer (150 mg/kg rifampicin) and P-gp inhibitor (10 mg/kg cyclosporine A) for 14 days prior to be infected with Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori). The rats were further divided into groups, which were normal control, vehicle control, antibiotics and omeprazole, antibiotics only and omeprazole only for another 2 weeks of treatment. The ulcer formation and P-gp expression were determined by using macroscopic evaluation and western blot analysis, respectively.
RESULTS: The highest P-gp expression was shown in the induced P-gp rats (2.00 ± 0.68) while the lowest P-gp expression was shown in the inhibited P-gp rats (0.45 ± 0.36) compared to the normal P-gp rats. In all groups, the rats which were infected with H. pylori, had a significant increase (p
METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of patients aged ≥12 years, diagnosed with an ALRTI in primary care in 2014-15 was conducted using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Current asthma status, asthma medication and oral antibiotic use within 3 days of ALRTI infection was determined. Treatment frequency was calculated by asthma status. Mixed-effect regression models were used to explore between-practice variation and treatment determinants.
RESULTS: There were 127,976 ALRTIs reported among 110,418 patients during the study period, of whom 17,952 (16%) had asthma. Respectively, 81 and 79% of patients with and without asthma received antibiotics, and 41 and 15% asthma medication. There were significant differences in between-practice prescribing for all treatments, with greatest differences seen for oral steroids (odds ratio (OR) 18; 95% CI 7-82 and OR = 94; 33-363, with and without asthma) and asthma medication only (OR 7; 4-18 and OR = 17; 10-33, with and without asthma). Independent predictors of antibiotic prescribing among patients with asthma included fewer previous ALRTI presentations (≥2 vs. 0 previous ALRTI: OR = 0.25; 0.16-0.39), higher practice (OR = 1.47; 1.35-1.60 per SD) and prior antibiotic prescribing (3+ vs. 1 prescriptions OR = 1.28; 1.04-1.57) and concurrent asthma medication (OR = 1.44; 1.32-1.57). Independent predictors of asthma medication in patients without asthma included higher prior asthma medication prescribing (≥7 vs. 0 prescriptions OR = 2.31; 1.83-2.91) and concurrent antibiotic prescribing (OR = 3.59; 3.22-4.01).
CONCLUSION: Findings from the study indicate that antibiotics are over-used for ALRTI, irrespective of asthma status, and asthma medication is over-used in patients without asthma, with between-practice variation suggesting considerable clinical uncertainty. Further research is urgently needed to clarify the role of these medications for ALRTI.
METHODOLOGY: From January 2001 to December 2005, we reviewed case reports of all bacteraemic melioidosis admitted to a tertiary teaching hospital, Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia.
RESULTS: Thirty-five patients had positive blood culture for meliodosis and 27 case reports were traceable for further analysis. The mean age was 46.8 + 20.0 years. Twenty patients (74.1%) were male. The main clinical presentation was fever that occurred in 23 (85.2%) patients. Eighteen patients (66.7%) had lung involvement and three patients had liver abscess. Two patients presented with scrotal swelling, one of whom further developed Fournier's Gangrene. Nineteen (70.4%) patients had underlying diabetes, five of whom were newly diagnosed during the admission. Thirteen (48.1%) patients were treated with high-dose ceftazidime and six (22.2%) patients were treated with imipenem. Eight (29.6%) patients were not given anti-melioidosis therapy because the causative agents were not identified until after the patients died. The patients were admitted 16.8 days + 18.1. Seventeen patients (63.0%) died in this series, 13 patients of whom died within four days of admission.
CONCLUSIONS: The wide range of clinical presentations and the fatal outcomes of melioidosis require a high level of suspicion among physicians to develop an early appropriate therapy and reduce the mortality rate.
METHODS: Bacterial DNA was extracted from biopsy samples of patients presenting dyspepsia symptoms with H. pylori positive from cultures and histology. DNA was amplified from the V3-V4 regions of the 16S rRNA gene. In-vitro E-test was used to detect antibiotic resistance. Microbiome community analysis was conducted through α-diversity, β-diversity, and relative abundance.
RESULTS: Sixty-nine H. pylori positive samples were eligible after quality filtering. Following resistance status to five antibiotics, samples were classified into 24 sensitive, 24 single resistance, 16 double resistance, 5 triple resistance. Samples were mostly resistant to metronidazole (73.33%; 33/45). Comparation of four groups displayed significantly elevated α-diversity parameters under the multidrug resistance condition (all P <0.05). A notable change was observed in triple-resistant compared to sensitive (P <0.05) and double-resistant (P <0.05) groups. Differences in β-diversity by UniFrac and Jaccard were not significant in terms of the resistance (P = 0.113 and P = 0.275, respectively). In the triple-resistant group, the relative abundance of Helicobacter genera was lower, whereas that of Streptococcus increased. Moreover, the linear discriminant analysis effect size (LEfSe) was associated with the presence of Corynebacterium and Saccharimonadales in the single-resistant group and Pseudomonas and Cloacibacterium in the triple-resistant group.
CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the resistant samples showed a higher trend of diversity and evenness than the sensitive samples. The abundance of H. pylori in the triple-resistant samples decreased with increasing cohabitation of pathogenic bacteria, which may support antimicrobial resistance. However, antibiotic susceptibility determined by the E-test may not completely represent the resistance status.
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.