Enzyme replacement therapy for late-onset Pompe disease.

BACKGROUND: Pompe disease is caused by a deficiency of the enzyme acid alpha-glucosidase (GAA). People with infantile-onset disease have either a complete or a near-complete enzyme deficiency; people with late-onset Pompe disease (LOPD) retain some residual enzyme activity. GAA deficiency is treated with an intravenous infusion of recombinant human acid alglucosidase alfa, an enzyme replacement therapy (ERT). Alglucosidase alfa and avalglucosidase alfa are approved treatments, but cipaglucosidase alfa with miglustat is not yet approved. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of enzyme replacement therapies in people with late-onset Pompe disease. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Inborn Errors of Metabolism Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We also searched MEDLINE OvidSP, clinical trial registries, and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. Date of last search: 21 April 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ERT in people with LOPD of any age. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence (using GRADE). We resolved disagreements through discussion and by consulting a third author. MAIN RESULTS: We included six trials (358 randomised participants) lasting from 12 to 78 weeks. A single trial reported on each comparison listed below. None of the included trials assessed two of our secondary outcomes: need for respiratory support and use of a walking aid or wheelchair. Certainty of evidence was most commonly downgraded for selective reporting bias. Alglucosidase alfa versus placebo (90 participants) After 78 weeks, alglucosidase alfa probably improves the six-minute walk test (6MWT) distance compared to placebo (mean difference (MD) 30.95 metres, 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.98 to 53.92; moderate-certainty evidence) and probably improves respiratory function, measured as the change in per cent (%) predicted forced vital capacity (FVC) (MD 3.55, 95% CI 1.46 to 5.64; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference between the groups in occurrence of infusion reactions (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.61; low-certainty evidence), quality of life physical component score (MD -1.36 points, 95% CI -5.59 to 2.87; low-certainty evidence), or adverse events (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.39; low-certainty evidence). Alglucosidase alfa plus clenbuterol versus alglucosidase alfa plus placebo (13 participants) The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of alglucosidase alfa plus clenbuterol compared to alglucosidase alfa plus placebo on: change in 6MWT distance after 52 weeks (MD 34.55 metres, 95% CI-10.11 to 79.21; very low-certainty evidence) and change in % predicted FVC (MD -13.51%, 95% CI -32.44 to 5.41; very low-certainty evidence). This study did not measure infusion reactions, quality of life, and adverse events. Alglucosidase alfa plus albuterol versus alglucosidase alfa plus placebo (13 participants) The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of alglucosidase alfa plus albuterol compared to alglucosidase alfa plus placebo on: change in 6MWT distance after 52 weeks (MD 30.00 metres, 95% CI 0.55 to 59.45; very low-certainty evidence), change in % predicted FVC (MD -4.30%, 95% CI -14.87 to 6.27; very low-certainty evidence), and risk of adverse events (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.18; very low-certainty evidence). This study did not measure infusion reactions and quality of life. VAL-1221 versus alglucosidase alfa (12 participants) Insufficient information was available about this trial to generate effect estimates measured at one year or later. Compared to alglucosidase alfa, VAL-1221 may increase or reduce infusion-associated reactions at three months, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 2.80, 95% CI 0.18 to 42.80). This study did not measure quality of life and adverse events. Cipaglucosidase alfa plus miglustat versus alglucosidase alfa plus placebo (125 participants) Compared to alglucosidase alfa plus placebo, cipaglucosidase alfa plus miglustat may make little or no difference to: 6MWT distance at 52 weeks (MD 13.60 metres, 95% CI -2.26 to 29.46); infusion reactions (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.80); quality of life scores for physical function (MD 1.70, 95% CI -2.13 to 5.53) and fatigue (MD -0.30, 95% CI -2.76 to 2.16); and adverse effects potentially related to treatment (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.40) (all low-certainty evidence). Cipaglucosidase alfa plus miglustat probably improves % predicted FVC compared to alglucosidase alfa plus placebo (MD 3.10%, 95% CI 1.04 to 5.16; moderate-certainty evidence); however, it may make little or no change in % predicted sniff nasal inspiratory pressure (MD -0.06%, 95% CI -8.91 to 7.71; low-certainty evidence). Avalglucosidase alfa versus alglucosidase alfa (100 participants) After 49 weeks, avalglucosidase alfa probably improves 6MWT compared to alglucosidase alfa (MD 30.02 metres, 95% CI 1.84 to 58.20; moderate-certainty evidence). Avalglucosidase alfa probably makes little or no difference to % predicted FVC compared to alglucosidase alfa (MD 2.43%, 95% CI -0.08 to 4.94; moderate-certainty evidence). Avalglucosidase alfa may make little or no difference to infusion reactions (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.45), quality of life (MD 0.77, 95% CI -2.09 to 3.63), or treatment-related adverse events (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.40), all low-certainty evidence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: One trial compared the effect of ERT to placebo in LOPD, showing that alglucosidase alfa probably improves 6MWT and respiratory function (both moderate-certainty evidence). Avalglucosidase alfa probably improves 6MWT compared with alglucosidase alfa (moderate-certainty evidence). Cipaglucosidase plus miglustat probably improves FVC compared to alglucosidase alfa plus placebo (moderate-certainty evidence). Other trials studied the adjunct effect of clenbuterol and albuterol along with alglucosidase alfa, with little to no evidence of benefit. No significant rise in adverse events was noted with all ERTs. The impact of ERT on some outcomes remains unclear, and longer RCTs are needed to generate relevant information due to the progressive nature of LOPD. Alternative resources, such as post-marketing registries, could capture some of this information.

Single versus combination intravenous anti-pseudomonal antibiotic therapy for people with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: The choice of antibiotic, and the use of single or combined therapy are controversial areas in the treatment of respiratory infection due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis (CF). Advantages of combination therapy include wider range of modes of action, possible synergy and reduction of resistant organisms; advantages of monotherapy include lower cost, ease of administration and reduction of drug-related toxicity. Current evidence does not provide a clear answer and the use of intravenous antibiotic therapy in CF requires further evaluation. This is an update of a previously published review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of single compared to combination intravenous anti-pseudomonal antibiotic therapy for treating people with CF. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Most recent search of the Group's Trials Register: 07 October 2020. We also searched online trials registries on 16 November 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a single intravenous anti-pseudomonal antibiotic with a combination of that antibiotic plus a second anti-pseudomonal antibiotic in people with CF. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We assessed the certainty of the data using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 59 trials, of which we included eight trials (356 participants) comparing a single anti-pseudomonal agent to a combination of the same antibiotic and one other. There was a wide variation in the individual antibiotics used in each trial. In total, the trials included seven comparisons of a beta-lactam antibiotic (penicillin-related or third generation cephalosporin) with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination and three comparisons of an aminoglycoside with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination.  There was considerable heterogeneity amongst these trials, leading to difficulties in performing the review and interpreting the results. These results should be interpreted cautiously. Six of the included trials were published between 1977 and 1988; these were single-centre trials with flaws in the randomisation process and small sample size. Overall, the methodological quality was poor and the certainty of the evidence ranged from low to moderate. The review did not find any differences between monotherapy and combination therapy in either the short term or in the long term for the outcomes of different lung function measures, bacteriological outcome measures, need for additional treatment, adverse effects, quality of life or symptom scores. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review are inconclusive. The review raises important methodological issues. There is a need for an RCT which needs to be well-designed in terms of adequate randomisation allocation, blinding, power and long-term follow-up. Results need to be standardised to a consistent method of reporting, in order to validate the pooling of results from multiple trials.

Standard versus biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing to guide antibiotic therapy in cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians typically select the antibiotics used to treat pulmonary infections in people with cystic fibrosis based on the results of antimicrobial susceptibility testing performed on bacteria traditionally grown in a planktonic mode (grown in a liquid). However, there is considerable evidence to suggest that Pseudomonas aeruginosa actually grows in a biofilm (or slime layer) in the airways of people with cystic fibrosis with chronic pulmonary infections. Therefore, choosing antibiotics based on biofilm rather than conventional antimicrobial susceptibility testing could potentially improve response to treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in people with cystic fibrosis. This is an update of a previously published Cochrane Review. OBJECTIVES: To compare biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing-driven therapy to conventional antimicrobial susceptibility testing-driven therapy in the treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in people with cystic fibrosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. Most recent search: 07 April 2020. We also searched two ongoing trials registries and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. Most recent searches: 07 April 2020 and 05 September 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antibiotic therapy based on biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing compared to antibiotic therapy based on conventional antimicrobial susceptibility testing in the treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa pulmonary infection in people with cystic fibrosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected RCTs, assessed their risk of bias and extracted data from eligible trials. Additionally, the review authors contacted the trial investigators to obtain further information. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: The searches identified two multicentre, double-blind RCTs eligible for inclusion in the review with a total of 78 participants (adults and children); one RCT was undertaken in people who were clinically stable, the second was in people experiencing pulmonary exacerbations. Both RCTs prospectively assessed whether the use of biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing improved microbiological and clinical outcomes in participants with cystic fibrosis who were infected with Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The primary outcome was the change in sputum Pseudomonas aeruginosa density from the beginning to the end of antibiotic therapy. Although the intervention was shown to be safe, the data from these two RCTs did not provide evidence that biofilm susceptibility testing was superior to conventional susceptibility testing either in terms of microbiological or lung function outcomes. One of the trials also measured risk and time to subsequent exacerbation as well as quality of life measures and did not demonstrate any difference between groups in these outcomes. Both RCTs had an overall low risk of bias and the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria was deemed to be moderate to high for the outcomes selected. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence is insufficient to recommend choosing antibiotics based on biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing rather than conventional antimicrobial susceptibility testing in the treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa pulmonary infections in people with cystic fibrosis. Biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing may be more appropriate in the development of newer, more effective formulations of drugs which can then be tested in clinical trials.

Antibiotic treatment for Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in people with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is one of the most common emerging multi-drug resistant organisms found in the lungs of people with cystic fibrosis and its prevalence is increasing. Chronic infection with Stenotrophomonas maltophilia has recently been shown to be an independent predictor of pulmonary exacerbation requiring hospitalization and antibiotics. However, the role of antibiotic treatment of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia infection in people with cystic fibrosis is still unclear. This is an update of a previously published review. OBJECTIVES: The objective of our review is to assess the effectiveness of antibiotic treatment for Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in people with cystic fibrosis. The primary objective is to assess this in relation to lung function and pulmonary exacerbations in the setting of acute pulmonary exacerbations. The secondary objective is to assess this in relation to the eradication of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We also searched a registry of ongoing trials and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. Date of latest search: 03 March 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia mono-infection or Stenotrophomonas maltophilia co-infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa in either the setting of an acute pulmonary exacerbation or a chronic infection treated with suppressive antibiotic therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both authors independently assessed the trials identified by the search for potential inclusion in the review. MAIN RESULTS: We identified only one trial of antibiotic treatment of pulmonary exacerbations that included people with cystic fibrosis with Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. However, this trial had to be excluded because data was not available per pathogen. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review did not identify any evidence regarding the effectiveness of antibiotic treatment for Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in people with cystic fibrosis. Until such evidence becomes available, clinicians need to use their clinical judgement as to whether or not to treat Stenotrophomonas maltophilia infection in people with cystic fibrosis. Randomized clinical trials are needed to address these unanswered clinical questions.

Once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing with intravenous aminoglycosides for cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: People with cystic fibrosis, who are chronically colonised with the organism Pseudomonas aeruginosa, often require multiple courses of intravenous aminoglycoside antibiotics for the management of pulmonary exacerbations. The properties of aminoglycosides suggest that they could be given in higher doses less often. This is an update of a previously published review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing of intravenous aminoglycoside antibiotics for the management of pulmonary exacerbations in cystic fibrosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cystic Fibrosis Specialist Register held at the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's editorial base, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals and handsearching abstract books of conference proceedings.Date of the most recent search: 31 January 2019.We also searched online trial registries. Date of latest search: 25 February 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials, whether published or unpublished, in which once-daily dosing of aminoglycosides has been compared with multiple-daily dosing in terms of efficacy or toxicity or both, in people with cystic fibrosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The two authors independently selected the studies to be included in the review and assessed the risk of bias of each study; authors also assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE criteria. Data were independently extracted by each author. Authors of the included studies were contacted for further information. As yet unpublished data were obtained for one of the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 15 studies for possible inclusion in the review. Five studies reporting results from a total of 354 participants (aged 5 to 50 years) were included in this review. All studies compared once-daily dosing with thrice-daily dosing. One cross-over trial had 26 participants who received the first-arm treatment but only 15 received the second arm. One study had a low risk of bias for all criteria assessed; the remaining included studies had a high risk of bias from blinding, but for other criteria were judged to have either an unclear or a low risk of bias.There was little or no difference between treatment groups in: forced expiratory volume in one second, mean difference (MD) 0.33 (95% confidence interval (CI) -2.81 to 3.48, moderate-quality evidence); forced vital capacity, MD 0.29 (95% CI -6.58 to 7.16, low-quality evidence); % weight for height, MD -0.82 (95% CI -3.77 to 2.13, low-quality evidence); body mass index, MD 0.00 (95% CI -0.42 to 0.42, low-quality evidence); or in the incidence of ototoxicity, relative risk 0.56 (95% CI 0.04 to 7.96, moderate-quality evidence). Once-daily treatment in children probably improved the percentage change in creatinine, MD -8.20 (95% CI -15.32 to -1.08, moderate-quality evidence), but showed no difference in adults, MD 3.25 (95% CI -1.82 to 8.33, moderate-quality evidence). The included trials did not report antibiotic resistance patterns or quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Once- and three-times daily aminoglycoside antibiotics appear to be equally effective in the treatment of pulmonary exacerbations of cystic fibrosis. There is evidence of less nephrotoxicity in children.

Oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics for cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the most common bacterial pathogen causing lung infections in people with cystic fibrosis and appropriate antibiotic therapy is vital. Antibiotics for pulmonary exacerbations are usually given intravenously, and for long-term treatment, via a nebuliser. Oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics with the same efficacy and safety as intravenous or nebulised antibiotics would benefit people with cystic fibrosis due to ease of treatment and avoidance of hospitalisation. This is an update of a previous review. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefit or harm of oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotic therapy for people with cystic fibrosis, colonised with Pseudomonas aeruginosa, in the:1. treatment of a pulmonary exacerbation; and2. long-term treatment of chronic infection. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.We contacted pharmaceutical companies and checked reference lists of identified trials.Date of last search: 08 July 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any dose of oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics, to other combinations of inhaled, oral or intravenous antibiotics, or to placebo or usual treatment for pulmonary exacerbations and long-term treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected the trials, extracted data and assessed quality. We contacted trial authors to obtain missing information. MAIN RESULTS: We included three trials examining pulmonary exacerbations (171 participants) and two trials examining long-term therapy (85 participants). We regarded the most important outcomes as quality of life and lung function. The analysis did not identify any statistically significant difference between oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics and other treatments for these outcome measures for either pulmonary exacerbations or long-term treatment. One of the included trials reported significantly better lung function when treating a pulmonary exacerbation with ciprofloxacin when compared with intravenous treatment; however, our analysis did not confirm this finding. We found no evidence of difference between oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics and other treatments regarding adverse events or development of antibiotic resistance, but trials were not adequately powered to detect this. None of the studies had a low risk of bias from blinding which may have an impact particularly on subjective outcomes such as quality of life. The risk of bias for other criteria could not be clearly stated across the studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no conclusive evidence that an oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotic regimen is more or less effective than an alternative treatment for either pulmonary exacerbations or long-term treatment of chronic infection with P. aeruginosa. Until results of adequately-powered future trials are available, treatment needs to be selected on a pragmatic basis, based upon any available non-randomised evidence, the clinical circumstances of the individual, the known effectiveness of drugs against local strains and upon individual preference.

Newborn screening for homocystinuria.

BACKGROUND: Homocystinuria is a rare inherited disorder due to a deficiency in cystathionine beta synthase. Individuals with this condition appear normal at birth but develop serious complications in childhood. Diagnosis and treatment started sufficiently early in life can effectively prevent or reduce the severity of these complications. This is an update of a previously published review. OBJECTIVES: To determine if newborn population screening for the diagnosis of homocystinuria due to cystathionine beta synthase deficiency leads to clinical benefit compared to later clinical diagnosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Inborn Errors of Metabolism Trials Register.Date of the most recent search of the Inborn Errors of Metabolism Register: 08 June 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials assessing the use of any neonatal screening test to diagnose infants with homocystinuria before the condition becomes clinically evident. Eligible studies compare a screened population versus a non-screened population. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: No studies were identified for inclusion in the review. MAIN RESULTS: No studies were identified for inclusion in the review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to identify eligible studies for inclusion in this review and hence it is not possible to draw any conclusions based on controlled studies; however, we are aware of uncontrolled case-series which support the efficacy of newborn screening for homocystinuria and its early treatment. Any future randomised controlled trial would need to be both multicentre and long term in order to provide robust evidence for or against screening and to allow a cost effectiveness analysis to be undertaken.

Single versus combination intravenous antibiotic therapy for people with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Choice of antibiotic, and the use of single or combined therapy are controversial areas in the treatment of respiratory infection in cystic fibrosis (CF). Advantages of combination therapy include wider range of modes of action, possible synergy and reduction of resistant organisms; advantages of monotherapy include lower cost, ease of administration and reduction of drug-related toxicity. Current evidence does not provide a clear answer and the use of intravenous antibiotic therapy in CF requires further evaluation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of single compared to combination intravenous antibiotic therapy for treating people with CF. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.Most recent search of the Group's Trials Register: 22 August 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a single intravenous antibiotic with a combination of that antibiotic plus a second antibiotic in people with CF. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 43 trials, of which eight trials (356 participants) comparing a single agent to a combination of the same antibiotic and one other, were included.There was a wide variation in the individual antibiotics used in each trial. In total, the trials included seven comparisons of a beta-lactam antibiotic (penicillin-related or third generation cephalosporin) with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination and three comparisons of an aminoglycoside with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination. These two groups of trials were analysed as separate subgroups.There was considerable heterogeneity amongst these trials, leading to difficulties in performing the review and interpreting the results. The meta-analysis did not demonstrate any significant differences between monotherapy and combination therapy, in terms of lung function; symptom scores; adverse effects; and bacteriological outcome measures.These results should be interpreted cautiously. Six of the included trials were published between 1977 and 1988; these were single-centre trials with flaws in the randomisation process and small sample size. Overall, the methodological quality was poor. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review are inconclusive. The review raises important methodological issues. There is a need for an RCT which needs to be well-designed in terms of adequate randomisation allocation, blinding, power and long-term follow up. Results need to be standardised to a consistent method of reporting, in order to validate the pooling of results from multiple trials.

Finding and filling the gaps in the evidence with high quality clinical trials - the experience of one Cochrane Review Group.

The Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group publishes systematic reviews of randomized trials for many genetic disorders. Given the rarity of these disorders, there are often few relevant trials to be included. Therefore, it is common for the reviews to be 'empty' and unable to present evidence which aids decision-making in clinical practice. However, we do not regard this as negative; rather we see this as a challenge and an opportunity to influence the research agenda. We have several reviews which clearly illustrate the cycle of assessing the evidence base, identifying the lack of data, generating high quality research and incorporating the resulting data into the original systematic review.

Oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics for cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the most common bacterial pathogen causing lung infections in people with CF and appropriate antibiotic therapy is vital. Antibiotics for pulmonary exacerbations are usually given intravenously, and for long-term treatment, via a nebuliser. Oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics with the same efficacy and safety as intravenous or nebulised antibiotics would benefit people with CF due to ease of treatment and avoidance of hospitalisation. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefit or harm of oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotic therapy for people with CF, colonised with Pseudomonas aeruginosa, in the:1. treatment of a pulmonary exacerbation; and 2. long-term treatment of chronic infection. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.We contacted pharmaceutical companies and checked reference lists of identified trials.Date of last search: 28 June 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any dose of oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics, to other combinations of inhaled, oral or intravenous antibiotics, or to placebo or usual treatment for pulmonary exacerbations and long-term treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected the trials, extracted data and assessed quality. We contacted trial authors to obtain missing information. MAIN RESULTS: We included three trials examining pulmonary exacerbations (171 participants) and two trials examining long-term therapy (85 participants). We regarded the most important outcomes as quality of life and lung function. The analysis did not identify any statistically significant difference between oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics and other treatments for these outcome measures for either pulmonary exacerbations or long-term treatment. One of the included trials reported significantly better lung function when treating a pulmonary exacerbation with ciprofloxacin when compared with intravenous treatment; however, our analysis did not confirm this finding. We found no evidence of difference between oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics and other treatments regarding adverse events or development of antibiotic resistance, but trials were not adequately powered to detect this. None of the studies had a low risk of bias from blinding which may have an impact particularly on subjective outcomes such as quality of life. The risk of bias for other criteria could not be clearly stated across the studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no conclusive evidence that an oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotic regimen is more or less effective than an alternative treatment for either pulmonary exacerbations or long-term treatment of chronic infection with P. aeruginosa. Until results of adequately-powered future trials are available, treatment needs to be selected on a pragmatic basis, based upon any available non-RCT evidence, the clinical circumstances of the individual, the known effectiveness of drugs against local strains and upon individual preference.

Newborn screening for homocystinuria.

BACKGROUND: Homocystinuria is a rare inherited disorder due to a deficiency in cystathionine beta synthase. Individuals with this condition appear normal at birth but develop serious complications in childhood. Diagnosis and treatment started sufficiently early in life can effectively prevent or reduce the severity of these complications. OBJECTIVES: To determine if newborn population screening for the diagnosis of homocystinuria due to cystathionine beta synthase deficiency leads to clinical benefit compared to later clinical diagnosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Inborn Errors of Metabolism Trials Register.Date of the most recent search of the Inborn Errors of Metabolism Register: 15 May 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials assessing the use of any neonatal screening test to diagnose infants with homocystinuria before the condition becomes clinically evident. Eligible studies compare a screened population versus a non-screened population. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: No studies were identified for inclusion in the review. MAIN RESULTS: No studies were identified for inclusion in the review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to identify eligible studies for inclusion in this review and hence it is not possible to draw any conclusions based on controlled studies; however, we are aware of uncontrolled case-series which support the efficacy of newborn screening for homocystinuria and its early treatment. Any future randomised controlled trial would need to be both multicentre and long term in order to provide robust evidence for or against screening and to allow a cost effectiveness analysis to be undertaken.

Inhaled antibiotics for pulmonary exacerbations in cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis is a genetic disorder in which abnormal mucus in the lungs is associated with susceptibility to persistent infection. Pulmonary exacerbations are when symptoms of infection become more severe. Antibiotics are an essential part of treatment for exacerbations and inhaled antibiotics may be used alone or in conjunction with oral antibiotics for milder exacerbations or with intravenous antibiotics for more severe infections. Inhaled antibiotics do not cause the same adverse effects as intravenous antibiotics and may prove an alternative in people with poor access to their veins. OBJECTIVES: To determine if treatment of pulmonary exacerbations with inhaled antibiotics in people with cystic fibrosis improves their quality of life, reduces time off school or work and improves their long-term survival. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry for relevant trials. Date of last search: 15 March 2012We also searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register. Date of the last search: 01 June 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in people with cystic fibrosis with a pulmonary exacerbation in whom treatment with inhaled antibiotics was compared to placebo, standard treatment or another inhaled antibiotic for between one and four weeks. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected eligible trials, assessed the risk of bias in each trial and extracted data. Authors of the included trials were contacted for more information. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials with 208 participants were included in the review. Trials were heterogenous in design and interventions (however, all included trials compared inhaled versus intravenous antibiotic regimens). Risk of bias was difficult to assess in most trials. Results were not fully reported and only limited data were available for analysis. Four trials reported some results on forced expiratory volume at one second and found no significant differences between the inhaled antibiotic and the comparison intervention. In two of these trials using 300 mg of inhaled tobramycin, the change in forced expiratory volume at one second was similar to intravenous tobramycin; and in one trial the time until the next exacerbation was not different. No important adverse effects were reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is little useful high-level evidence to judge the effectiveness of inhaled antibiotics for the treatment of pulmonary exacerbations in people with cystic fibrosis. The included trials were not sufficiently powered to achieve their goals. Hence, we are unable to demonstrate whether one treatment was superior to the other or not. Further research is needed to establish whether inhaled tobramycin may be used as an alternative to intravenous tobramycin for some pulmonary exacerbations.

Omega-3 fatty acids for cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Studies suggest that a diet rich in omega-3 essential fatty acids may have beneficial anti-inflammatory effects for chronic conditions such as cystic fibrosis. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there is evidence that omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation reduces morbidity and mortality and to identify any adverse events associated with supplementation. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Authors and persons interested in the subject of the review were contacted.Date of last search: 10 March 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in people with cystic fibrosis comparing omega-3 fatty acid supplements with placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the studies. MAIN RESULTS: The searches identified 13 studies; four studies with 91 participants were included. Two studies compared omega-3 fatty acids to olive oil for six weeks. One study compared a liquid dietary supplement containing omega-3 fatty acids to one without for six months. One study compared omega-3 fatty acids and omega-6 fatty acids to a control (capsules with customised fatty acid blends) for three months. Only one short-term study (19 participants) comparing omega-3 to placebo reported a significant improvement in lung function and Shwachman score and a reduction in sputum volume in the omega-3 group. Another study (43 participants) demonstrated a significant increase in serum phospholipid essential fatty acid content and a significant drop in the n-6/n-3 fatty acid ratio following omega-3 fatty acid supplementation compared to control. The longer-term study (17 participants) demonstrated a significant increase in essential fatty acid content in neutrophil membranes and a significant decrease in the leukotriene B4 to leukotriene B5 ratio in participants taking omega-3 supplements compared to placebo. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found that regular omega-3 supplements may provide some benefits for people with cystic fibrosis with relatively few adverse effects, although evidence is insufficient to draw firm conclusions or recommend routine use of these supplements in people with cystic fibrosis. This review has highlighted the lack of data for many outcomes meaningful to people with or making treatment decisions about cystic fibrosis. A large, long-term, multicentre, randomised controlled study is needed to determine any significant therapeutic effect and to assess the influence of disease severity, dosage and duration of treatment. Future researchers should note the need for additional pancreatic enzymes.

Newborn screening for homocystinuria.

BACKGROUND: Homocystinuria is a rare inherited disorder due to a deficiency in cystathionine beta synthase. Individuals with this condition appear normal at birth but develop serious complications in childhood. Diagnosis and treatment started sufficiently early in life can effectively prevent or reduce the severity of these complications. OBJECTIVES: To determine if newborn population screening for the diagnosis of homocystinuria due to cystathionine beta synthase deficiency leads to clinical benefit compared to later clinical diagnosis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Inborn Errors of Metabolism Trials Register.Date of the most recent search of the Inborn Errors of Metabolism Register: 27 June 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials assessing the use of any neonatal screening test to diagnose infants with homocystinuria before the condition becomes clinically evident. Eligible studies compare a screened population versus a non-screened population. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: No studies were identified for inclusion in the review. MAIN RESULTS: No studies were identified for inclusion in the review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to identify eligible studies for inclusion in this review and hence it is not possible to draw any conclusions based on controlled studies; however, we are aware of uncontrolled case-series which support the efficacy of newborn screening for homocystinuria and its early treatment. Any future randomised controlled trial would need to be both multicentre and long term in order to provide robust evidence for or against screening and to allow a cost effectiveness analysis to be undertaken.