Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 322
Filter
1.
BMC Infect Dis ; 23(1): 252, 2023 Apr 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2325849

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recommends changing the first-line antimicrobial treatment for gonorrhoea when ≥ 5% of Neisseria gonorrhoeae cases fail treatment or are resistant. Susceptibility to ceftriaxone, the last remaining treatment option has been decreasing in many countries. We used antimicrobial resistance surveillance data and developed mathematical models to project the time to reach the 5% threshold for resistance to first-line antimicrobials used for N. gonorrhoeae. METHODS: We used data from the Gonococcal Resistance to Antimicrobials Surveillance Programme (GRASP) in England and Wales from 2000-2018 about minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) for ciprofloxacin, azithromycin, cefixime and ceftriaxone and antimicrobial treatment in two groups, heterosexual men and women (HMW) and men who have sex with men (MSM). We developed two susceptible-infected-susceptible models to fit these data and produce projections of the proportion of resistance until 2030. The single-step model represents the situation in which a single mutation results in antimicrobial resistance. In the multi-step model, the sequential accumulation of resistance mutations is reflected by changes in the MIC distribution. RESULTS: The single-step model described resistance to ciprofloxacin well. Both single-step and multi-step models could describe azithromycin and cefixime resistance, with projected resistance levels higher with the multi-step than the single step model. For ceftriaxone, with very few observed cases of full resistance, the multi-step model was needed to describe long-term dynamics of resistance. Extrapolating from the observed upward drift in MIC values, the multi-step model projected ≥ 5% resistance to ceftriaxone could be reached by 2030, based on treatment pressure alone. Ceftriaxone resistance was projected to rise to 13.2% (95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.7-44.8%) among HMW and 19.6% (95%CrI: 2.6-54.4%) among MSM by 2030. CONCLUSIONS: New first-line antimicrobials for gonorrhoea treatment are needed. In the meantime, public health authorities should strengthen surveillance for AMR in N. gonorrhoeae and implement strategies for continued antimicrobial stewardship. Our models show the utility of long-term representative surveillance of gonococcal antimicrobial susceptibility data and can be adapted for use in, and for comparison with, other countries.


Subject(s)
Gonorrhea , Sexual and Gender Minorities , Male , Humans , Female , Neisseria gonorrhoeae/genetics , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Gonorrhea/drug therapy , Gonorrhea/epidemiology , Cefixime/pharmacology , Cefixime/therapeutic use , Ceftriaxone/pharmacology , Ceftriaxone/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/pharmacology , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Homosexuality, Male , Drug Resistance, Bacterial , Ciprofloxacin/pharmacology , Ciprofloxacin/therapeutic use , Microbial Sensitivity Tests
2.
Probl Sotsialnoi Gig Zdravookhranenniiai Istor Med ; 31(2): 157-163, 2023 Mar.
Article in Russian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2313284

ABSTRACT

In pandemic conditions, situation of active and uncontrolled use by population of antimicrobial preparations treating COVID-19 occurs. So, new risks of development of medication resistance among patients with various infectious diseases, tuberculosis included, appear. The purpose of the study is to characterize prevalence of antimicrobial preparations use by population in relationship with development of medication resistance in patients with tuberculosis during COVID-19 pandemic. Material and methods. The analysis of sales of antimicrobial medicines was implemented on the basis of published official data from the joint-stock company DSM Group presenting monthly audit of the Russian pharmaceutical market. The determination of primary antibiotic resistance was carried out in 2018-2020 on 3312 patients with tuberculosis. The modified method of proportions on liquid nutrient medium in system with automated accounting of microorganisms growth, the method of absolute concentrations and the method of polymerase chain reaction with real-time detection were applied. The results of the study. It was established that the most demanding antimicrobial medications among population were ceftriaxone, azithromycin, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, azithromycin. At the same time, the maximum increase in sales in 2020 up to 150% as compared with of 2019 was determined in medications derived from quinolone moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, which began to be used in treatment of coronavirus infection. At the same time, these medications are traditionally used in tuberculosis treatment. But in 2020, alarming trend was established that limits treatment of tuberculosis patients. The primary resistance of mycobacteria was also established in newly diagnosed tuberculosis patients, also for the same antimicrobial medications of quinolone derivatives, and increasing in proportion of patients with primary medication resistance to levofloxacin, moxifloxacin in 2020 as compared to 2018 was 189-480%. At the same time, increasing of resistance to other antibiotics made up to 60.8% on average. Conclusion. The study results imply alarming scenario of medication resistance shifts towards very virulent and highly medication-resistant genotypes. This trend can result in conditions of successful transmission of deadly medication-resistant mutants that can seriously undermine effectiveness of implemented programs of struggle with tuberculosis worldwide.


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents , COVID-19 , Mycobacterium tuberculosis , Quinolones , Tuberculosis , Humans , Levofloxacin/therapeutic use , Moxifloxacin/therapeutic use , Antitubercular Agents/pharmacology , Antitubercular Agents/therapeutic use , Fluoroquinolones/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/genetics , Pandemics , Drug Resistance, Bacterial/genetics , Tuberculosis/drug therapy , Tuberculosis/epidemiology , Anti-Infective Agents/therapeutic use , Quinolones/therapeutic use
4.
J Infect Dev Ctries ; 17(3): 311-318, 2023 03 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2278693

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has globally challenged health services, especially because when the pandemic first reached Mexico, in February 2020, there was no known effective and safe treatment. A treatment scheme was offered by the Institute for the Integral Development of Health (IDISA) in Mexico City from March 2020 to August 2021 when there were many patients with COVID-19. This report summarizes the experience managing COVID-19 with this scheme. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a descriptive, retrolective study. The data was obtained from the case files of the patients who attended the IDISA from March 2020 to August 2021 with COVID-19. All the cases were treated with the scheme consisting of nitazoxanide, azithromycin, and prednisone. Various laboratory blood tests and chest computerized tomography scan were done. When indicated, supplementary oxygen, and another specific treatment were used. A standardized clinical recording was conducted for 20 days based on symptoms and systemic symptoms. RESULTS: Based on the World Health Organization criteria, the patients were classified according to the disease severity: 170 mild, 70 moderate, and 312 severe cases. The outcome was the discharge of 533 patients after their recovery, 16 were excluded from the study, and 6 died. CONCLUSIONS: The use of nitazoxanide, azithromycin, and prednisone proved to be effective as it resulted in improvement of symptoms and in successful outcomes for the management of COVID-19 outpatients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Outpatients , Prednisone , Mexico/epidemiology , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome
5.
Sex Transm Dis ; 50(6): 363-369, 2023 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2258264

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the sexual health and well-being of individuals, directly through risk of contracting COVID-19, and indirectly through government lockdowns. Government restrictions were especially strict and long-lasting in Australia, they also varied by state, offering an interesting opportunity to study the impacts of varying restrictions. This study compares the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting restrictions on chlamydia treatment prescriptions during 2020, through to July 2021 between different states and demographic groups in Australia. METHODS: The rate of prescriptions per 100,000 population filled each month from January 2017 to July 2021 from Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme for Azithromycin with a restricted indication to treat Chlamydia trachomatis was used to measure chlamydia treatment. The impact of COVID-19 lockdowns was modeled using an interrupted time-series Poisson regression model. RESULTS: The data included 520,025 prescriptions to treat chlamydia, averaging 37.5 prescriptions per month per 100,000 population. Prescriptions declined 26% in April to May 2020 when initial COVID-19 lockdowns began in Australia; prescriptions increased in the following months but remained on average 21% below prepandemic (2017-2019) levels through to July 2021. Prescriptions declined the most in 1 Australian state, Victoria, both in the initial lockdown and the following period; generally, states with more COVID-19 cases saw bigger reductions in prescriptions. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine how treatment for chlamydia in Australia was impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and restrictions not only in the immediate-term, but also ongoing up to July 2021, providing important information for planning for sexual health services in future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Victoria , Azithromycin/therapeutic use
6.
Int J Antimicrob Agents ; 61(5): 106778, 2023 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2257123

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To define the factors associated with overprescription of antibiotics by general practitioners (GPs) for patients diagnosed with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS: Anonymised electronic prescribing records of 1370 GPs were analysed. Diagnosis and prescriptions were retrieved. The initiation rate by GP for 2020 was compared with 2017-2019. Prescribing habits of GPs who initiated antibiotics for > 10% of COVID-19 patients were compared with those who did not. Regional differences in prescribing habits of GPs who had consulted at least one COVID-19 patient were also analysed. RESULTS: For the March-April 2020 period, GPs who initiated antibiotics for > 10% of COVID-19 patients had more consultations than those who did not. They also more frequently prescribed antibiotics for non-COVID-19 patients consulting with rhinitis and broad-spectrum antibiotics for treating cystitis. Finally, GPs in the Île-de-France region saw more COVID-19 patients and more frequently initiated antibiotics. General practitioners in southern France had a higher but non-significant ratio of azithromycin initiation rate over total antibiotic initiation rate. CONCLUSION: This study identified a subset of GPs with overprescribing profiles for COVID-19 and other viral infections; they also tended to prescribe broad-spectrum antibiotics for a long duration. There were also regional differences concerning antibiotic initiation rates and the ratio of azithromycin prescribed. It will be necessary to evaluate the evolution of prescribing practices during subsequent waves.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , General Practitioners , Respiratory Tract Infections , Humans , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , COVID-19/diagnosis , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Drug Prescriptions , Electronics , Respiratory Tract Infections/drug therapy , COVID-19 Testing
7.
Heart Lung ; 60: 127-132, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2288002

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Azithromycin has been adopted as a component of the COVID-19 management protocol throughout the global healthcare settings but with a questionable if not downright unsubstantiated evidence base. OBJECTIVES: In order to amalgamate and critically appraise the conflicting evidence around the clinical efficacy of Azithromycin (AZO) vis a vis COVID-19 management outcomes, a meta-analysis of meta-analyses was carried out to establish an evidence-based holistic status of AZO vis a vis its efficacy as a component-in-use of the COVID-19 management protocol. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic search was carried out through PubMed/Medline, Cochrane and Epistemonikos with a subsequent appraisal of abstracts and full-texts, as required. The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) checklist and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) methodology were adopted to assess the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses. Random-effects models were developed to calculate summarized pool Odds Ratios (with 95% confidence interval) for the afore determined primary and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: AZO, when compared with best available therapy (BAT) including or excluding Hydroxychloroquine, exhibited statistically insignificant reduction in mortality [(n= 27,204 patients) OR= 0.77 (95% CI: 0.51-1.16) (I2= 97%)], requirement of mechanical ventilation [(n= 14,908 patients) OR= 1.4 (95% CI: 0.58-3.35) (I2= 98%)], induction of arrhythmia [(n= 9,723 patients) OR= 1.21 (95% CI: 0.63-2.32) (I2= 92%)] and QTc prolongation (a surrogate for torsadogenic effect) [(n= 6,534 patients) OR= 0.62 (95% CI: 0.23-1.73) (I2= 96%)]. CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis of meta-analyses portrays AZO as a pharmacological agent that does not appear to have a comparatively superior clinical efficacy than BAT when it comes to COVID-19 management. Secondary to a very real threat of anti-bacterial resistance, it is suggested that AZO be discontinued and removed from COVID-19 management protocols.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Treatment Outcome
9.
JAMA ; 323(24): 2493-2502, 2020 06 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2219559

ABSTRACT

Importance: Hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, has been considered as a possible therapeutic agent for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, there are limited data on efficacy and associated adverse events. Objective: To describe the association between use of hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, and clinical outcomes among hospital inpatients diagnosed with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective multicenter cohort study of patients from a random sample of all admitted patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in 25 hospitals, representing 88.2% of patients with COVID-19 in the New York metropolitan region. Eligible patients were admitted for at least 24 hours between March 15 and 28, 2020. Medications, preexisting conditions, clinical measures on admission, outcomes, and adverse events were abstracted from medical records. The date of final follow-up was April 24, 2020. Exposures: Receipt of both hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine alone, azithromycin alone, or neither. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiac arrest and abnormal electrocardiogram findings (arrhythmia or QT prolongation). Results: Among 1438 hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 (858 [59.7%] male, median age, 63 years), those receiving hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both were more likely than those not receiving either drug to have diabetes, respiratory rate >22/min, abnormal chest imaging findings, O2 saturation lower than 90%, and aspartate aminotransferase greater than 40 U/L. Overall in-hospital mortality was 20.3% (95% CI, 18.2%-22.4%). The probability of death for patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin was 189/735 (25.7% [95% CI, 22.3%-28.9%]), hydroxychloroquine alone, 54/271 (19.9% [95% CI, 15.2%-24.7%]), azithromycin alone, 21/211 (10.0% [95% CI, 5.9%-14.0%]), and neither drug, 28/221 (12.7% [95% CI, 8.3%-17.1%]). In adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, compared with patients receiving neither drug, there were no significant differences in mortality for patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 0.76-2.40]), hydroxychloroquine alone (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.63-1.85]), or azithromycin alone (HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.26-1.21]). In logistic models, compared with patients receiving neither drug cardiac arrest was significantly more likely in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (adjusted OR, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.12-4.05]), but not hydroxychloroquine alone (adjusted OR, 1.91 [95% CI, 0.96-3.81]) or azithromycin alone (adjusted OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.27-1.56]), . In adjusted logistic regression models, there were no significant differences in the relative likelihood of abnormal electrocardiogram findings. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients hospitalized in metropolitan New York with COVID-19, treatment with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both, compared with neither treatment, was not significantly associated with differences in in-hospital mortality. However, the interpretation of these findings may be limited by the observational design.


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hospital Mortality , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Anti-Infective Agents/adverse effects , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/chemically induced , Azithromycin/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Heart Arrest/etiology , Hospitalization , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , New York , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
10.
Med Trop Sante Int ; 2(3)2022 09 30.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2091754

ABSTRACT

The authors report on their experience of managing COVID-19 at the Regional hospital of Lambaréné, capital of the Moyen-Ogooué province in central Gabon.The infectious diseases department was the referral and follow-up site for COVID-19, with an intervention team to follow up outpatients. The department followed national recommendations for overall management with mild cases receiving vitamin therapy, moderate cases hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, severe cases azithromycin, another antibiotic and oxygen.Over 1 year in 2020, 495 cases (RT-PCR +) were recruited; 92 were hospitalized (comorbidities or severe signs). The average duration of hospitalization was 21 +/- 3 days.These 92 cases are composed of 38 mild cases all cured by symptomatic treatments; 32 moderate cases treated and cured; and 26 severe cases treated with azithromycin plus a second antibiotic with 24 cured without sequelae, 1 with sequelae and 1 death (co-infected with HIV).The 399 cases followed up in the outpatient department all recovered and are distributed as follows: 199 asymptomatic and without co-morbidity, untreated; 102 with mild signs under vitamins; 98 with moderate signs treated with azithromycin + HCHQ + vitamins.In total, all 495 cases recovered without sequelae except for 1 patient with sequelae and 1 death; 199 received no treatment. However, 6 deaths occurred before the diagnosis was made. This strategy encountered difficulties in terms of overloading the carers and feeding the patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hydroxychloroquine , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Gabon , Treatment Outcome , Hospitals , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Vitamins , Oxygen
11.
J Pak Med Assoc ; 72(7): 1384-1390, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2057184

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To identify various emerging diagnostics parameters of coronavirus disease 2019 related to disease progression and fatality. METHODS: The cross-sectional study was conducted at Mardan Medical Complex, Khyber Pakhtunkhwah, Pakistan, from February 9, 2021, to April 21, 2021, and comprised patients of either gender aged >18 years diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 on the basis of polymerase chain reaction testing and who were admitted to the hospital using the World Health Organisation interim guidelines. Disease progression was categorised as mild, moderate, severe and critical, and they were monitored closely till the final outcome. Data was analysed using SPSS 26. RESULTS: Of the 408 patients, 215(52.69%) were male and 193(47.30%) were female. The overall median age of the sample was 55 years (interquartile range: 18-84 years). Symptoms included cough 92(22.54%), fever 80(19.60%), shortness of breath 78(19.60%), fatigue 60(14.70%) and loss of smell and test 52(12.74%), while 46(11.27%) were asymptomatic. Azithromycin was the most used drug 304(74.50%), while antiviral Remdesivir was given to 279(68.38%) patients and hydrocortisone to 143(35.04%). Plasma treatment was given to 55(13.48%) patients and mechanical ventilation to 87(21.32%). Compared to baseline, disease progression was mild in 72(17.64%) patients, moderate 96(23.52%), severe 98(24.01%) and critical in 89(21.81%), while no change was seen 53(12.99%) cases. Severity level was significantly associated with liver and renal function parameters (p<0.05). Overall, 47(11.51%) patients died. CONCLUSIONS: Different severity levels during hospitalisation among patients of coronavirus disease 2019 were noted, and severity level was significantly associated with liver and renal function parameters.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Testing , Cross-Sectional Studies , Disease Progression , Female , Humans , Hydrocortisone , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
12.
PLoS One ; 17(9): e0267815, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2043198

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe differences by race and ethnicity in treatment patterns among hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the US from March-August 2020. METHODS: Among patients in de-identified Optum electronic health record data hospitalized with COVID-19 (March-August 2020), we estimated odds ratios of receiving COVID-19 treatments of interest (azithromycin, dexamethasone, hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, and other steroids) at hospital admission, by race and ethnicity, after adjusting for key covariates of interest. RESULTS: After adjusting for key covariates, Black/African American patients were less likely to receive dexamethasone (adj. OR [95% CI]: 0.83 [0.71, 0.96]) and more likely to receive other steroids corticosteroids (adj. OR [95% CI]: 2.13 [1.90, 2.39]), relative to White patients. Hispanic/Latino patients were less likely to receive dexamethasone than Not Hispanic/Latino patients (adj. OR [95% CI]: 0.69 [0.58, 0.82]). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that COVID-19 treatments patients received in Optum varied by race and ethnicity after adjustment for other possible explanatory factors. In the face of rapidly evolving treatment landscapes, policies are needed to ensure equitable access to novel and repurposed therapeutics to avoid disparities in care by race and ethnicity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , COVID-19 , Pandemics , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Ethnicity , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , White People
13.
PLoS One ; 17(5): e0267645, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1910614

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess efficacy and safety of the combined treatment of antibiotics (3rd-generation cephalosporin and azithromycin) and antiviral agents (lopinavir/ritonavir or hydroxychloroquine) on moderate COVID-19 patients in South Korea. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of the 358 laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) patients was conducted. 299 patients met inclusion criteria for analysis. Propensity score matching (PSM) and Cox regression method were used to control and adjust for confounding factors. Mild to moderate COVID-19 patients were managed with either CA/LoP (cephalosporin, azithromycin, and lopinavir/ritonavir) (n = 57), CA/HQ (cephalosporin, azithromycin, and hydroxychloroquine) (n = 25) or standard supportive care (n = 217). We analyzed the association between treatment group and standard supportive group in terms of three endpoints: time to symptom resolution, time to viral clearance, and hospital stay duration. Using propensity-score matching analysis, three rounds of propensity-matching analysis were performed to balance baseline characteristics among three cohorts. RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier curves fitted using propensity score-matched data revealed no significant differences on time to symptom resolution, time to viral clearance, hospital stay duration among the three treatment arms (CA/LoP vs Standard, log-rank p-value = 0.2, 0.58, and 0.74 respectively for the three endpoints) (CA/HQ vs Standard, log-rank p-value = 0.46, 0.99, and 0.75 respectively). Similarly, Cox regression analysis on matched cohorts of CA/LoP and standard supportive group showed that hazard ratios of time to symptom resolution (HR: 1.447 [95%-CI: 0.813-2.577]), time to viral clearance(HR: 0.861, [95%-CI: 0.485-1.527]), and hospital stay duration (HR: 0.902, [95%-CI: 0.510-1.595]) were not significant. For CA/HQ and standard supportive group, hazard ratios of the three endpoints all showed no statistical significance (HR: 1.331 [95%-CI:0.631-2.809], 1.005 [95%-CI:0.480-2.105], and 0.887, [95%-CI:0.422-1.862] respectively). No severe adverse event or death was observed in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Combined treatment of 3rd cephalosporin, azithromycin and either low-dose lopinavir/ritonavir or hydroxychloroquine was not associated with better clinical outcomes in terms of time to symptom resolution, time to viral clearance, and hospital stay duration compared to standard supportive treatment alone. Microbiological evidence should be closely monitored when treating SARS-CoV-2 patients with antibiotics to prevent indiscreet administration of empirical antimicrobial treatments.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , SARS-CoV-2 , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Cephalosporins/therapeutic use , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome
14.
J Clin Lab Anal ; 36(6): e24427, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1877605

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Azithromycin (AZM), sold under the name Zithromax, is classified as a macrolide. It has many benefits due to its immunomodulatory, anti-inflammatory, and antibacterial effects. This review aims to study different clinical and biochemisterial aspects and properties of this drug which has a priority based on literature published worldwide. METHODS: Several databases including Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Scopus were searched to obtain the relevant studies. RESULTS: AZM mechanism of action including the inhibition of bacterial protein synthesis, inhibition of proinflammatory cytokine production, inhibition of neutrophil infestation, and macrophage polarization alteration, gives it the ability to act against a wide range of microorganisms. Resistant organisms are spreading and being developed because of the irrational use of the drug in the case of dose and duration. AZM shows synergistic effects with other drugs against a variety of organisms. This macrolide is considered a valuable antimicrobial agent because of its use as a treatment for a vast range of diseases such as asthma, bronchiolitis, COPD, cystic fibrosis, enteric infections, STIs, and periodontal infections. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows an increasing global prevalence of AZM resistance. Thus, synergistic combinations are recommended to treat different pathogens. Moreover, continuous monitoring of AZM resistance by registry centers and the development of more rapid diagnostic assays are urgently needed.


Subject(s)
Azithromycin , Cystic Fibrosis , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/pharmacology , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Bacterial Proteins , Cystic Fibrosis/drug therapy , Cystic Fibrosis/microbiology , Humans
15.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand ; 101(8): 889-900, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1874382

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Cesarean scar defect (CSD) is a long-term outcome of cesarean section (CS) and associated with numerous gynecological and obstetric problems. Previous studies indicate that infection may be a risk factor for CSD. Adjunctive azithromycin was shown to reduce the risk of postoperative infection in patients undergoing non-elective primary cesarean delivery in labor or after the rupture of membranes compared with standard antibiotic prophylaxis. This study investigated the protective effect of adjunctive azithromycin in combination with single-dose cephalosporin against CSD in women undergoing non-elective cesarean delivery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial was conducted in a University hospital in Shanghai, China. A total of 242 women who underwent their first non-elective CS were randomly assigned to receive 1500 mg cefuroxime sodium plus 500 mg intravenous azithromycin (n = 121; experimental group) or 1500 mg cefuroxime sodium plus a placebo (n = 121; placebo group). The primary outcome was CSD prevalence, as determined by transvaginal ultrasound and saline infusion sonohysterography within 6 months of delivery. Secondary outcomes were changes in infectious indicators (eg hypersensitive C-reactive protein and procalcitonin), postoperative morbidity, and use of postoperative antibiotics. We also examined the operative procedure, pathogenic microorganism cultures, and fetal outcomes. Outcomes were compared between groups with the chi-squared test, Fisher's exact test, or Student's t test. RESULTS: Between May 2018 and May 2021, 121 women were randomized to each arm. Because the sonographic follow up was disrupted by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and strict management policies, we merged the follow-up time points (6 weeks and 6 months) into a single time period (6 weeks to 6 months); 104 and 108 women in the experimental and placebo groups, respectively, completed the first sonographic follow up. CSD was diagnosed by sonography in 34/104 (32.7%) and 50/108 (46.3%) patients in the experimental and placebo groups, respectively (relative risk 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.50-0.99; p = 0.043). Characteristics of CSD and short-term infection outcomes did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of intravenous 500 mg azithromycin adjunctive to single-dose cefuroxime prophylaxis significantly reduced the incidence of CSD in women undergoing non-elective CS.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Antibiotic Prophylaxis/adverse effects , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Cefuroxime/therapeutic use , Cesarean Section/adverse effects , Cesarean Section/methods , China , Cicatrix/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/drug therapy , Sodium
16.
Cell Mol Biol (Noisy-le-grand) ; 67(5): 371-386, 2022 Feb 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1870146

ABSTRACT

Due to the emergency and uncontrolled situation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic that arising in the entire world, it is necessary to choose available drugs that can inhibit or prevent the disease. Therefore, the repurposing of the commercial antibiotic, dirithromycin has been screened for the first time against fifteen receptors and compared to the azithromycin using a molecular docking approach to identify possible SARS-CoV-2 inhibitors. Our docking results showed that dirithromycin fit significantly in the Furin catalytic pocket having the lowest binding score (-9.9 Kcal/mol) with respect to azithromycin (-9.4 Kcal/mol) and can interact and block both Asp154 and Ser368 residues by Van der Walls interaction as well as bound to His194 and Ser368 residues via hydrogen bonds. Good results were also obtained with the Tmprss-2 receptor. A Molecular Dynamic simulation was assessed to confirm this interaction. Additionally, detailed receptor-ligand interactions with SARS-CoV-2 and pro-inflammatory mediators were investigated suggesting more target information with interesting results. The findings of this study are very efficient and provide a basis for the development of dirithromycin for clinical trial applications to be efficient in treating SARS-CoV-2 infections.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , SARS-CoV-2 , Antiviral Agents/chemistry , Antiviral Agents/pharmacology , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/chemistry , Azithromycin/pharmacology , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Erythromycin/analogs & derivatives , Humans , Molecular Docking Simulation , Molecular Dynamics Simulation , Pandemics , Viral Nonstructural Proteins/chemistry , Viral Nonstructural Proteins/metabolism
17.
J Infect Chemother ; 28(7): 948-954, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1851524

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Macrolide antibiotics have immunomodulatory properties which may be beneficial in viral infections. However, the precise effects of macrolides on T cell responses to COVID, differences between different macrolides, and synergistic effects with other antibiotics have not been explored. METHODS: We investigated the effect of antibiotics (amoxicillin, azithromycin, clarithromycin, and combined amoxicillin with clarithromycin) on lymphocyte intracellular cytokine levels and monocyte phagocytosis in healthy volunteer PBMCs stimulated ex vivo with SARS-CoV-2 S1+2 spike protein. A retrospective cohort study was performed on intensive care COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: Co-incubation of clarithromycin with spike protein-stimulated healthy volunteer PBMCs ex vivo resulted in an increase in CD8+ (p = 0.004) and CD4+ (p = 0.007) IL-2, with a decrease in CD8+ (p = 0.032) and CD4+ (p = 0.007) IL-10. The addition of amoxicillin to clarithromycin resulted in an increase in CD8+ IL-6 (p = 0.010), decrease in CD8+ (p = 0.014) and CD4+ (p = 0.022) TNF-alpha, and decrease in CD8+ IFN-alpha (p = 0.038). Amoxicillin alone had no effect on CD4+ or CD8+ cytokines. Co-incubation of azithromycin resulted in increased CD8+ (p = 0.007) and CD4+ (p = 0.011) IL-2. There were no effects on monocyte phagocytosis. 102 COVID-19 ICU patients received antibiotics on hospital admission; 62 (61%) received clarithromycin. Clarithromycin use was associated with reduction in mortality on univariate analysis (p = 0.023), but not following adjustment for confounders (HR = 0.540; p = 0.076). CONCLUSIONS: Clarithromycin has immunomodulatory properties over and above azithromycin. Amoxicillin in addition to clarithromycin is associated with synergistic ex vivo immunomodulatory properties. The potential benefit of clarithromycin in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and other viral pneumonitis merits further exploration.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Clarithromycin , Amoxicillin , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/pharmacology , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Clarithromycin/pharmacology , Clarithromycin/therapeutic use , Cytokines , Humans , Interleukin-2 , Macrolides/pharmacology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus
18.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0263437, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1793528

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was great enthusiasm for the use of azithromycin with or without hydroxychloroquine. OBJECTIVES: We analyzed azithromycin consumption in Croatia in 2020 and compared this to the period 2017-2019. METHODS: Azithromycin consumption was evaluated using the IQVIA Adriatic d.o.o. database which collects data on azithromycin distribution from wholesale pharmacies to hospital and non-hospital pharmacies in Croatia. We analyzed data for the period from January 2017 to December 2020. Azithromycin distribution was measured as days of therapy (DOT) and reported as per 1000 inhabitants or per 1000 inhabitant-days. RESULTS: In the period 2017-2020, total azithromycin DOT in Croatia increased in 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020 (1.76, 1.91, 1.91 and 2.01/1000 inhabitant-days, respectively). Non-hospital pharmacies received 2.18 times and hospital pharmacies 4.39 times more DOT units/1000 inhabitants of azithromycin in March 2020 compared to the average distribution rate in March 2017-2019. During the peak of the COVID-19 epidemic (November and December 2020) azithromycin distribution increased considerably in hospital (3.62 and 3.19 times, respectively) and non-hospital pharmacies (1.93 and 1.84 times, respectively) compared to the average consumption in the same months in 2017-2019. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed increased azithromycin distribution in the period 2017-2020 which indicates azithromycin overuse. Preliminary information on COVID-19 treatments with a desire to offer and try what is available even in the absence of strong scientific evidence may have influenced practices of antimicrobial prescriptions.


Subject(s)
Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Drug Utilization/trends , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Anti-Bacterial Agents , Anti-Infective Agents , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Croatia/epidemiology , Databases, Factual , Drug Therapy, Combination , Hospitalization , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pandemics , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
19.
J Gen Intern Med ; 37(16): 4183-4188, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1750820

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of data comparing azithromycin to alternative antibiotic choices in managing COPD exacerbations, making appropriate antibiotic selection controversial. OBJECTIVE: To compare treatment failure in hospitalized patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) receiving azithromycin or beta-lactams. DESIGN: Retrospective, multicenter cohort study using logistic regression for multivariable analysis. Patients were included if they were at least 18 years old, admitted with AECOPD, and received at least two consecutive days of either a beta-lactam or azithromycin. Patients were excluded if they received concomitant azithromycin and beta-lactam antibiotics during the first 2 days, had a history of other severe underlying pulmonary diseases, pregnancy, COVID-19, alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency, or received a corticosteroid for a diagnosis other than COPD. PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred ninety-five patients were included, of which 428 (72%) received azithromycin and 167 patients (28%) received a beta-lactam. MAIN MEASURES: The primary endpoint was treatment failure rate in patients receiving azithromycin versus beta-lactams, which was a composite endpoint defined as in-hospital mortality, admission to intensive care, initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation, initiation of a new antibiotic, steroid therapy escalation, or readmission due to AECOPD within 30 days. KEY RESULTS: The composite primary outcome occurred in 84 patients (19.6%) in the azithromycin group and 54 (32.3%) in the beta-lactam group (p<0.01). The difference in the composite outcome was a result of higher rates of new antibiotics during admission (12.6% vs 4.2%; p<0.01) and higher readmission within 30 days (19.3% vs 12.4%; p=0.032). After controlling for potential confounders, beta-lactams continued to demonstrate a higher risk for treatment failure (OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.46-3.63). There was no difference in adverse effects between the groups. CONCLUSION: Azithromycin was associated with less treatment failure in AECOPD which was driven by lower readmission rates and prescription of new antimicrobials.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Humans , Adolescent , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , beta-Lactams/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , Cohort Studies , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/drug therapy , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Disease Progression , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
20.
Monaldi Arch Chest Dis ; 92(4)2022 Feb 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1715883

ABSTRACT

To The Editor, The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2021 update was published on the 28th of April, 2021. There are significant changes, including treatment of mild asthma, the role of azithromycin, treatment of asthma in COVID-19 times, and role of biologics...


Subject(s)
Asthma , Biological Products , COVID-19 , Asthma/drug therapy , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL