Macrolide antibiotics (including azithromycin) for cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a life-limiting genetic condition, affecting over 90,000 people worldwide. CF affects several organs in the body, but airway damage has the most profound impact on quality of life (QoL) and survival. Causes of lower airway infection in people with CF are, most notably, Staphylococcus aureus in the early course of the disease and Pseudomonas aeruginosa at a later stage. Macrolide antibiotics, e.g. azithromycin and clarithromycin, are usually taken orally, have a broad spectrum of action against gram-positive (e.g. S aureus) and some gram-negative bacteria (e.g. Haemophilus influenzae), and may have a modifying role in diseases involving airway infection and inflammation such as CF. They are well-tolerated and relatively inexpensive, but widespread use has resulted in the emergence of resistant bacteria. This is an updated review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the potential effects of macrolide antibiotics on clinical status in terms of benefit and harm in people with CF. If benefit was demonstrated, we aimed to assess the optimal type, dose and duration of macrolide therapy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals, and abstract books of conference proceedings. We last searched the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register on 2 November 2022. We last searched the trial registries WHO ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov on 9 November 2022. We contacted investigators known to work in the field, previous authors and pharmaceutical companies manufacturing macrolide antibiotics for unpublished or follow-up data, where possible. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials of macrolide antibiotics in adults and children with CF. We compared them to: placebo; another class of antibiotic; another macrolide antibiotic; or the same macrolide antibiotic at a different dose or type of administration. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 studies (1467 participants) lasting 28 days to 36 months. All the studies assessed azithromycin: 11 compared oral azithromycin to placebo (1167 participants); one compared a high dose to a low dose (47 participants); one compared nebulised to oral azithromycin (45 participants); and one looked at weekly versus daily dose (208 participants). Oral azithromycin versus placebo There is a slight improvement in forced expiratory volume (FEV1 % predicted) in one second in the azithromycin group at up to six months compared to placebo (mean difference (MD) 3.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.74 to 6.19; high-certainty evidence), although there is probably no difference at three months, (MD 2.70%, 95% CI -0.12 to 5.52), or 12 months (MD -0.13, 95% CI -4.96 to 4.70). Participants in the azithromycin group are probably at a decreased risk of pulmonary exacerbation with a longer time to exacerbation (hazard ratio (HR) 0.61, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.75; moderate-certainty evidence). Mild side effects were common, but there was no difference between groups (moderate-certainty evidence). There is no difference in hospital admissions at six months (odds ratio (OR) 0.61, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.04; high-certainty evidence), or in new acquisition of P aeruginosa at 12 months (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.55; moderate-certainty evidence). High-dose versus low-dose azithromycin We are uncertain whether there is any difference in FEV1 % predicted at six months between the two groups (no data available) or in the rate of exacerbations per child per month (MD -0.05 (95% CI -0.20 to 0.10)); very low-certainty evidence for both outcomes. Only children were included in the study and the study did not report on any of our other clinically important outcomes. Nebulised azithromycin versus oral azithromycin We were unable to include any of the data into our analyses and have reported findings directly from the paper; we graded all evidence as being of very low certainty. The authors reported that there was a greater mean change in FEV1 % predicted at one month in the nebulised azithromycin group (P < 0.001). We are uncertain whether there was a change in P aeruginosa count. Weekly azithromycin versus daily azithromycin There is probably a lower mean change in FEV1 % predicted at six months in the weekly group compared to the daily group (MD -0.70, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.45) and probably also a longer period of time until first exacerbation in the weekly group (MD 17.30 days, 95% CI 4.32 days to 30.28 days). Gastrointestinal side effects are probably more common in the weekly group and there is likely no difference in admissions to hospital or QoL. We graded all evidence as moderate certainty. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Azithromycin therapy is associated with a small but consistent improvement in respiratory function, a decreased risk of exacerbation and longer time to exacerbation at six months; but evidence for treatment efficacy beyond six months remains limited. Azithromycin appears to have a good safety profile (although a weekly dose was associated with more gastrointestinal side effects, which makes it less acceptable for long-term therapy), with a relatively minimal treatment burden for people with CF, and it is inexpensive. A wider concern may be the emergence of macrolide resistance reported in the most recent study which, combined with the lack of long-term data, means we do not feel that the current evidence is strong enough to support azithromycin therapy for all people with CF. Future research should report over longer time frames using validated tools and consistent reporting, to allow for easier synthesis of data. In particular, future trials should report important adverse events such as hearing impairment or liver disease. More data on the effects of azithromycin given in different ways and reporting on our primary outcomes would benefit decision-making on whether and how to give macrolide antibiotics. Finally, it is important to assess azithromycin therapy for people with CF who are established on the relatively new cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator therapies which correct the underlying molecular defect associated with CF (none of the trials included in the review are relevant to this population).

Azithromycin Treatment for Acne Vulgaris: A Case Report on the Risk of Clostridioides difficile Infection.

BACKGROUND Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) is a gram-positive, anaerobic, spore-forming bacillus. It can lead to pseudomembranous colitis characterized by electrolyte disturbances, toxic megacolon, and septic shock. The risk of C. difficile infection is higher with use of certain classes of antibiotics, or when an antibiotic used for a long time. Azithromycin is a macrolide antibiotic known to be safe, with few adverse effects such as diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. Azithromycin is currently used for the treatment of acne, with different dosing regimens for patients who cannot receive traditional treatment based on practice guidelines. CASE REPORT A 41-year-old woman was treated with a course of azithromycin 500 mg by mouth 3 times weekly for 6 weeks for acne vulgaris. This was her second antibiotic course of acne treatment within 10 months. A few days after completion of the second azithromycin course, she presented to the clinic with worsening abdominal pain and frequent soft bloody stool. A complete blood count test, C. difficile toxin test, stool culture, and colonoscopy were ordered. She was diagnosed with C. difficile infection confirmed by C. difficile toxin and symptoms. CONCLUSIONS Despite the safety profile of azithromycin, our patient was predisposed to a non-severe case of C. difficile-associated diarrhea, most likely due to the repeated course of the azithromycin regimen that was used to treat her acne vulgaris. This report highlights the importance of managing patients with acne vulgaris according to current practice guidelines, and to report a link between the use of azithromycin as an acne treatment and the occurrence of C. difficile colitis.

The possible effect of topically applied azithromycin and moxifloxacin on the alleviation of uveitis.

PURPOSE: To investigate the inhibitory effect of topically administered azithromycin (AZM), and moxifloxacin (MXF) against tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) production in a rat model of endotoxin-induced uveitis (EIU). METHODS: Thirty-six Wistar albino rats were divided into 6 equal groups. Groups 1, 2 and 3 were determined as sham, control group for topical AZM application and control group for topical MXF application, respectively. Sterile saline, topical AZM 1.5%, and topical MXF 0.5% were instilled 5 times daily for totally 6 days on both eyes of the rats in Group 4, Group 5, and Group 6, before and after inducing EIU by intravitreal injections of lipopolysaccharide, respectively. At 24 h after intravitreal injections, aqueous humor was collected from both eyes of each rat for the assessment of TNF-α concentration. Also, density of nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) in ciliary body, and the number of cells infiltrating the posterior segment of EIU rat eyes was assessed in one eye of each rat. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in mean aqueous humor concentration of TNF-α in EIU rats pretreated with topical AZM in comparison with those pretreated with sterile saline (139 ± 38.6 in Group 4 vs. 72 ± 12.6 in Group 5, p = 0.006). There was also a marked decrease in mean aqueous humor concentration of TNF-α in EIU rats pretreated with topical MXF (139 ± 38.6 in Group 4 vs.86.1 ± 35.5 in Group 6, p = 0.025). Also, evident suppressions were determined in mean density of NF-κB, and in mean number of cells in EIU rats pretreated either with topical AZM, or topical MXF. CONCLUSIONS: Topically applied AZM or MXF may be beneficial in the suppression of TNF-α production in aqueous humor.

Pharmacovigilance follow-up of patients in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: In the context of COVID-19 pandemic, a national pharmacovigilance survey was set up in March 2020. The purpose of this survey was to ensure continuous monitoring of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in patients with COVID-19, not only related to the drugs used in this indication but also related to all drugs administered to these patients or suspected of having promoted the infection. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This descriptive study was based on data extracted from the French Pharmacovigilance Database from 1 January 2020 to 30 September 2021. Misuse was also analysed through the MESANGE project. The ADRs were classified according to three groups: "drugs used to treat COVID-19", "other drugs administered to COVID-19 positive patients" and "drugs suspected of having promoted COVID-19". The data were also presented according to 2 periods (period one was from January to June 2020 and period two from July 2020 onwards). RESULTS: Among 2189 included cases, 67.1% were serious. Cases were mainly related to "other drugs administrated to COVID-19 positive patients" (58.5%) followed by "drugs used to treat COVID-19" (33.7%) and "drugs suspected of having promoted COVID-19" (7.8%). Drugs used to treat COVID-19 and their main safety profile were different depending on the period: mostly hydroxychloroquine (51%) with heart injury and lopinavir/ritonavir (42%) with liver injury for the first period, and dexamethasone (46%) with hyperglycemia and tocilizumab (28%) with liver injury for the second period. The drugs suspected of worsening COVID-19 differed in both periods especially for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs mainly reported in period 1 (41.5% versus 8.2% in period 2). Other immunosuppressive drugs were in the majority in the second period (85.7%), with mainly methotrexate (15.3%), anti-CD20 (15.3%) and anti-TNF alpha (10.5%). No confirmed safety signal was identified among other drugs administered to patients with COVID-19. The profile of ADRs and suspected drugs was similar between the 2 periods. The study of misuse in outpatient settings identified in both periods mainly hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, ivermectin and zinc±vitamin C. DISCUSSION: This survey, based on real-time pharmacological and medical assessment of ADRs and weekly meetings in a specific national committee, made it possible to identify relevant safety signals which contribute to patient care with no delay. The main safety signal highlighted was serious cardiac damage under hydroxychloroquine, alone or combined with azithromycin and also with lopinavir/ritonavir. This signal has contributed to the evolution of the recommendations for these 2 drugs. The methodology of this survey has been taken over and is still going on for the pharmacovigilance monitoring of vaccines against COVID-19, for monoclonal antibodies used against COVID-19 and also for Paxlovid® (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) which benefit from dedicated surveys.

Testing the effects of mass drug administration of azithromycin on mortality and other outcomes among 1-11-month-old infants in Mali (LAKANA): study protocol for a cluster-randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, parallel-group, three-arm clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Mass drug administration (MDA) of azithromycin (AZI) has been shown to reduce under-5 mortality in some but not all sub-Saharan African settings. A large-scale cluster-randomized trial conducted in Malawi, Niger, and Tanzania suggested that the effect differs by country, may be stronger in infants, and may be concentrated within the first 3 months after treatment. Another study found no effect when azithromycin was given concomitantly with seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC). Given the observed heterogeneity and possible effect modification by other co-interventions, further trials are needed to determine the efficacy in additional settings and to determine the most effective treatment regimen. METHODS: LAKANA stands for Large-scale Assessment of the Key health-promoting Activities of two New mass drug administration regimens with Azithromycin. The LAKANA trial is designed to address the mortality and health impacts of 4 or 2 annual rounds of azithromycin MDA delivered to 1-11-month-old (29-364 days) infants, in a high-mortality and malaria holoendemic Malian setting where there is a national SMC program. Participating villages (clusters) are randomly allocated in a ratio of 3:2:4 to three groups: placebo (control):4-dose AZI:2-dose AZI. The primary outcome measured is mortality. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) will be monitored closely before, during, and after the intervention and both among those receiving and those not receiving MDA with the study drugs. Other outcomes, from a subset of villages, comprise efficacy outcomes related to morbidity, growth and nutritional status, outcomes related to the mechanism of azithromycin activity through measures of malaria parasitemia and inflammation, safety outcomes (AMR, adverse and serious adverse events), and outcomes related to the implementation of the intervention documenting feasibility, acceptability, and economic aspects. The enrolment commenced in October 2020 and is planned to be completed by the end of 2022. The expected date of study completion is December 2024. DISCUSSION: If LAKANA provides evidence in support of a positive mortality benefit resulting from azithromycin MDA, it will significantly contribute to the options for successfully promoting child survival in Mali, and elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04424511. Registered on 11 June 2020.

Efficacy and safety of azithromycin versus placebo to treat lower respiratory tract infections associated with low procalcitonin: a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Lower respiratory tract infections are frequently treated with antibiotics, despite a viral cause in many cases. It remains unknown whether low procalcitonin concentrations can identify patients with lower respiratory tract infection who are unlikely to benefit from antibiotics. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of azithromycin versus placebo to treat lower respiratory tract infections in patients with low procalcitonin. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, non-inferiority trial at five health centres in the USA. Adults aged 18 years or older with clinically suspected non-pneumonia lower respiratory tract infection and symptom duration from 24 h to 28 days were eligible for enrolment. Participants with a procalcitonin concentration of 0·25 ng/mL or less were randomly assigned (1:1), in blocks of four with stratification by site, to receive over-encapsulated oral azithromycin 250 mg or matching placebo (two capsules on day 1 followed by one capsule daily for 4 days). Participants, non-study clinical providers, investigators, and study coordinators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was efficacy of azithromycin versus placebo in terms of clinical improvement at day 5 in the intention-to-treat population. The non-inferiority margin was -12·5%. Solicited adverse events (abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhoea, allergic reaction, or yeast infections) were recorded as a secondary outcome. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03341273. FINDINGS: Between Dec 8, 2017, and March 9, 2020, 691 patients were assessed for eligibility and 499 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive azithromycin (n=249) or placebo (n=250). Clinical improvement at day 5 was observed in 148 (63%, 95% CI 54 to 71) of 238 participants with full data in the placebo group and 155 (69%, 61 to 77) of 227 participants with full data in the azithromycin group in the intention-to-treat analysis (between-group difference -6%, 95% CI -15 to 2). The 95% CI for the difference did not meet the non-inferiority margin. Solicited adverse events and the severity of solicited adverse events were not significantly different between groups at day 5, except for increased abdominal pain associated with azithromycin (47 [23%, 95% CI 18 to 29] of 204 participants) compared with placebo (35 [16%, 12 to 21] of 221; between-group difference -7% [95% CI -15 to 0]; p=0·066). INTERPRETATION: Placebo was not non-inferior to azithromycin in terms of clinical improvement at day 5 in adults with lower respiratory tract infection and a low procalcitonin concentration. After accounting for both the rates of clinical improvement and solicited adverse events at day 5, it is unclear whether antibiotics are indicated for patients with lower respiratory tract infection and a low procalcitonin concentration. FUNDING: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, bioMérieux.

Follow-up study of infants recruited to the randomised, placebo-controlled trial of azithromycin for the prevention of chronic lung disease of prematurity in preterm infants-study protocol for the AZTEC-FU study.

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth, especially at less than 30 weeks' gestation, is significantly associated with respiratory, neurodevelopmental and growth abnormalities. The AZTEC study has recruited 799 infants born at < 30 weeks' gestation to determine if a ten-day intravenous treatment with azithromycin improves survival without development of chronic lung disease of prematurity (CLD) at 36 weeks' post menstrual age (PMA) when compared to placebo. The follow-up studies will compare respiratory, neurodevelopmental and growth outcomes up to 2 years of corrected age between infants who received azithromycin and those who received placebo in the early neonatal period. METHODS: Survivors at 36 weeks' PMA from the main Azithromycin Therapy for Chronic Lung Disease of Prematurity (AZTEC) study with parental consent will continue to be followed up to discharge from the neonatal unit and to 2 years of corrected age. Length of stay, rates of home oxygen, length of supplemental oxygen requirement, hospital admissions, drug usage, respiratory illness, neurodevelopmental disability and death rates will be reported. Data is being collected via parentally completed respiratory and neurodevelopmental questionnaires at 1 and 2 years of corrected age respectively. Additional information is being obtained from various sources including hospital discharge and clinical letters from general practitioners and hospitals as well as from national databases including the National Neonatal Research Database and NHS Digital. DISCUSSION: The AZTEC-FU study will assess mortality and important neonatal morbidities including respiratory, neurodevelopmental and growth outcomes. Important safety data will also be collected, including the incidence of potential consequences of early macrolide use, primarily pyloric stenosis. This study may have implications on future neonatal care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was retrospectively registered on ISRCTN (ISRCTN47442783).

AZTEC-azithromycin therapy for prevention of chronic lung disease of prematurity: a statistical analysis plan for clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The AZTEC trial is a multi-centre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial of azithromycin to improve survival without development of chronic lung disease of prematurity (CLD) in preterm infants. The statistical analysis plan for the clinical outcomes of the AZTEC trial is described. METHODS AND DESIGN: A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial of a 10-day course of intravenous azithromycin (20 mg/kg for 3 days; 10 mg/kg for 7 days) administered to preterm infants born at < 30 weeks' gestational age across UK tertiary neonatal units. Following parental consent, infants are randomly allocated to azithromycin or placebo, with allocated treatment starting within 72 h of birth. The primary outcome is survival without moderate/severe CLD at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age (PMA). Serial respiratory fluid and stool samples are being collected up to 21 days of life. The target sample size is 796 infants, which is based on detecting a 12% absolute difference in survival without moderate/severe CLD at 36 weeks' PMA (90% power, two-sided alpha of 0.05) and includes 10% loss to follow-up. RESULTS: Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics will be summarised by treatment arm and in total. Categorical data will be summarised by numbers and percentages. Continuous data will be summarised by mean, standard deviation, if data are normal, or median, interquartile range, if data are skewed. Tests of statistical significance will not be undertaken for baseline characteristics. The primary analysis, on the intention to treat (ITT) population, will be analysed using multilevel logistic regression, within a multiple imputation framework. Adjusted odds ratios, 95% confidence intervals, and p-values will be presented. For all other analyses, the analysis population will be based on the complete case population, which is a modified ITT population. All analyses will be adjusted for gestational age and treatment arm and account for any clustering by centre and/or multiple births as a random effect. CONCLUSION: We describe the statistical analysis plan for the AZTEC trial, including the analysis principles, definitions of the key clinical outcomes, methods for primary analysis, pre-specified subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and secondary analysis. The plan has been finalised prior to the completion of recruitment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN11650227. Registered on 31 July 2018.

Efficacy and safety of reduning injection combined with azithromycin in the treatment of mycoplasma pneumonia among children: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Reduning (RDN) injection is a well-known traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) preparation that can be used as an alternative to antibiotics with synergistic and toxicity-reducing effects. In China, RDN is widely used in the combined treatment of infectious diseases. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of RDN combined with azithromycin (AZM) for the treatment of mycoplasma pneumonia (MP) among children and to determine its safety, providing an evidence-based reference for clinical treatment. METHODS: Eight databases were searched, including 4 English databases, namely, PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, and 4 Chinese databases, namely, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, China Science and Technology Journal Database (CQVIP), and Sino-Med. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in which RDN was combined with AZM for the treatment of MP pediatric patients. A comprehensive search was performed from the inception of each database until April 25, 2022. RESULTS: A total of 20 studies covering 1628 children were included. Meta-analysis showed that the clinical effectiveness rate (RR = 1.20, 95% CI [1.15, 1.26], I2 = 0%), time elapsed until disappearance of cough (MD = -2.04, 95% CI [-2.67, -1.41], I2 = 91%), time elapsed until disappearance of lung rales (MD = -2.55, 95% CI [-3.12, -1.98], I2 = 95%), time elapsed until reduction of fever (MD = -1.93, 95% CI [-2.37, -1.49], I2 = 92%), TNF-α level after treatment (SMD = -1.17, 95% CI [-1.96, -0.39], I2 = 97%), and IL-6 levels after treatment (SMD = -2.65, 95% CI [-3.51, -1.78], I2 = 97%) of the combined treatment of MPP were superior to those of other methods, and incidence of adverse reactions (RR = 0.75, 95% CI [0.56, 1.00], I2 = 0%) showed statistically significant differences. CONCLUSION: RDN combined with AZM for the treatment of MP among children results in increased clinical efficacy with high safety.

Patterns of azithromycin use in obstructive airway diseases: a real-world observational study.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose long-term azithromycin is recommended in clinical practice guidelines for obstructive airway diseases (OAD); however, an optimal therapeutic regimen is not yet established. AIM: To understand the patterns of azithromycin use in OAD, characterise the patients who received it and evaluate its safety and efficacy using real-world data. METHODS: We audited 91 patients who had received azithromycin for at least 4 weeks for the management of asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis. RESULTS: The mean age was 65 ± 18 years, 60% were female and 48% were ex-smokers. The majority had asthma (75%), either alone (50%) or in combination with COPD (12%) or bronchiectasis (13%). Most (64%) reported cough or sputum at baseline. The most common treatment regimen was azithromycin 250 mg daily (73%) for more than 1 year (57%), with only seven adverse events. There was a significant reduction in the proportions of patients requiring emergency department visits (48% vs 32%; P < 0.001) and hospital admissions (35% vs 31%; P < 0.001) after starting azithromycin. In 88% of cases, physicians favoured the use of azithromycin. CONCLUSION: Physicians are currently using low-dose azithromycin for a long duration of more than 1 year for the management of OAD. The typical case definition is an older non-smoking adult with persistent asthma, often in combination with another OAD and presenting with bothersome cough or sputum. Azithromycin was well tolerated and led to reduced healthcare utilisation. Further research is required to establish an optimal dosage regimen of azithromycin in OAD.

A short focus, azithromycin in the treatment of respiratory viral infection COVID-19: efficacy or inefficacy?

Azithromycin is a macrolide antibiotic. Recent evidence has demonstrated in vitro activity against a wide variety of respiratory tract viruses, including SARS-CoV-2 responsible for the current global pandemic COVID-19. A mechanism of action acting on different phases of the viral cycle is assumed. In addition to its in vitro antiviral properties, some evidence also suggests immunomodulatory and antifibrotic activity. These properties of azithromycin could be useful in the treatment of viral respiratory tract infections such as COVID-19. However, clinical data on the antiviral efficacy of azithromycin in the treatment of respiratory tract infections are inconsistent, both when used as monotherapy and in polypharmacological combination. In addition, cases of azithromycin-induced QT long and malignant arrhythmias are reported. In this short review, we attempt to determine the role of azithromycin in the treatment of viral respiratory tract infections such as COVID-19, therapeutic efficacy, or inefficacy?

Azithromycin oral suspension in prevention and management of oral mucositis in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the effects of azithromycin suspension on oral mucositis in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). METHODS AND MATERIAL: The study was designed as a single-blind randomized controlled trial in Taleghani medical center affiliated to Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences Tehran Iran. Patients undergoing HSCT were randomly assigned to intervention or control groups. Azithromycin suspension was administered twice daily by gargling for 30 s and swallowing, on the first day of chemotherapy for patients in the intervention group. Graded oral mucositis (OM) occurrence based on National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) scale (grade 0 to 5) was considered the main outcome, and the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS:0-10) measured the severity of OM symptoms. RESULTS: In a duration of 15 months, 88 patients were randomly assigned and finally 70 patients were evaluable for study outcomes (randomized 1:1 to azithromycin versus no-azithromycin). The incidence and duration of the mucositis significantly improved in the intervention group compared to the control. Azithromycin use was consistent with a lower rate of dryness (P < 0.001), dysphagia (P < 0.001), and loss of sense of taste (P < 0.001). Also, in the intervention group, lower intensity of pain due to mucositis (P = 0.01) and lower duration of mucositis were observed (p = 0.045). No significant adverse drug reaction was observed in patients receiving azithromycin. CONCLUSION: Based on the result from this study, azithromycin suspension is an effective option in the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced OM. Further study is needed to assess the effect of azithromycin and comparison with other therapeutic options. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials: IRCT201603093210N13.

Sales of "COVID kit" drugs and adverse drug reactions reported by the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency / Vendas de "kit-COVID" e reações adversas a esses medicamentos relatadas pela Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária / Ventas de medicamentos del "kit-COVID" y reacciones adversas a los medicamentos notificadas por la Agencia Nacional de Vigilancia Sanitaria

Off-label use of azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, and ivermectin (the "COVID kit") has been suggested for COVID-19 treatment in Brazil without clinical or scientific evidence of efficacy. These drugs have known adverse drug reactions (ADR). This study aimed to analyze if the sales of drugs in the "COVID kit" are correlated to the reported number of ADR after the COVID-19 pandemic began. Data was obtained from the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (Anvisa) website on reported sales and ADRs for azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, and ivermectin for all Brazilian states. The period from March 2019 to February 2020 (before the pandemic) was compared to that from March 2020 to February 2021 (during the pandemic). Trend adjustment was performed for time series data and cross-correlation analysis to investigate correlation between sales and ADR within the same month (lag 0) and in the following months (lag 1 and lag 2). Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to assess the magnitude of the correlations. After the pandemic onset, sales of all investigated drugs increased significantly (69.75% for azithromycin, 10,856,481.39% for hydroxychloroquine, and 12,291,129.32% for ivermectin). ADR levels of all medications but azithromycin were zero before the pandemic, but increased after its onset. Cross-correlation analysis was significant in lag 1 for all drugs nationwide. Spearman's correlation was moderate for azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine but absent for ivermectin. Data must be interpreted cautiously since no active search for ADR was performed. Our results show that the increased and indiscriminate use of "COVID kit" during the pandemic correlates to an increased occurrence of ADRs.

No Brasil, o uso off label de azitromicina, hidroxicloroquina e ivermectina (o "kit-COVID") foi sugerido para tratar COVID-19 sem que tivéssemos evidências clínicas ou científicas de sua eficácia. Estas drogas têm causado reações adversas (RA) em quem as tomam. Este estudo almejou analisar se a venda dos medicamentos que compõem o "kit-COVID" correlaciona-se com o número relatado de RAs após o início da pandemia da COVID-19. Os dados sobre vendas e RA associados a azitromicina, hidroxicloroquina e ivermectina foram obtidos no site da Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (Anvisa) para todos os estados brasileiros. Comparamos o período entre março de 2019 e fevereiro de 2020 (antes da pandemia) ao de março de 2020 a fevereiro de 2021 (durante a pandemia). Ajustamos tendências para os dados de séries temporais e as análises de correlação cruzada para investigar a correlação entre vendas e RA em um mesmo mês (lag 0) e nos seguintes (lag 1 e 2). O coeficiente de correlação de Spearman foi utilizado para avaliar a magnitude das correlações. Após o início da pandemia, as vendas de todos os medicamentos investigados aumentaram significativamente (69,75% para azitromicina, 10.856.481,39% para hidroxicloroquina e 12.291.129,32% para ivermectina). Os níveis de RAs de todos os medicamentos (com exceção de azitromicina) eram zero antes da pandemia mas aumentaram após seu início. A análise de correlação cruzada foi significativa no lag 1 para todas as drogas em todo o país. A correlação de Spearman foi moderada para azitromicina e hidroxicloroquina, mas ausente para ivermectina. Os dados devem ser interpretados com cautela, uma vez que não realizamos uma busca ativa por RA. Nossos resultados mostram que o uso aumentado e indiscriminado do "kit-COVID" durante a pandemia se correlaciona com uma ocorrência aumentada de RAs.

Se ha sugerido el uso fuera de lo establecido de azitromicina, hidroxicloroquina e ivermectina (el "kit-COVID") para el tratamiento de la COVID-19 en Brasil sin evidencia clínica o científica de su eficacia. Estos medicamentos tienen reacciones adversas (RAM) conocidas. Este estudio pretendía analizar si las ventas de medicamentos del "kit-COVID" están correlacionadas con el número de reacciones adversas notificadas tras el inicio de la pandemia de COVID-19. Los datos se obtuvieron del sitio web de la Agencia Nacional de Vigilancia Sanitaria (Anvisa) sobre las ventas y las RAM notificadas para la azitromicina, la hidroxicloroquina y la ivermectina para todos los estados brasileños. Se comparó el periodo de marzo de 2019 a febrero de 2020 (antes de la pandemia) con el de marzo de 2020 a febrero de 2021 (durante la pandemia). Se realizó un ajuste de tendencia para los datos de las series de tiempo y un análisis de correlación cruzada para investigar la correlación entre las ventas y la RAM dentro del mismo mes (lag 0) y en los meses siguientes (lag 1 y lag 2). Se utilizó el coeficiente de correlación de Spearman para evaluar la magnitud de las correlaciones. Tras el inicio de la pandemia, las ventas de todos los medicamentos investigados aumentaron significativamente (69,75% para la azitromicina, 10.856.481,39% para la hidroxicloroquina y 12.291.129,32% para la ivermectina). Los niveles de RAM de todos los medicamentos, excepto la azitromicina, eran nulos antes de la pandemia, pero aumentaron tras su inicio. El análisis de correlación cruzada fue significativo en el lag 1 para todos los medicamentos a nivel nacional. La correlación de Spearman fue moderada para la azitromicina y la hidroxicloroquina, pero no para la ivermectina. Los datos deben interpretarse con cautela, ya que no se realizó una búsqueda activa de RAM. Nuestros resultados muestran que el uso creciente e indiscriminado del "kit-COVID" durante la pandemia se correlaciona con una mayor aparición de las RAM.

Treatment of rosacea during pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Exacerbation of rosacea may occur during pregnancy and there are multiple associated cases of rosacea fulminans (RF). Treatment during pregnancy poses a significant challenge as many rosacea treatments are contraindicated or have limited evidence regarding potential adverse fetal effects. OBJECTIVE: Review the pregnancy categories of various treatments and develop algorithms for treating pregnant patients with rosacea and RF. METHODS: Rosacea treatments showing efficacy in randomized controlled trials were searched through DailyMed to review pregnancy labelling. Searching the PubMed/MEDLINE database for English articles using keywords "rosacea fulminans AND pregnancy" without publishing-time restrictions yielded 8 articles. We summarized treatments used in cases of RF during pregnancy. RESULTS: Topical ivermectin was more effective than metronidazole, but has a more concerning pregnancy category. Three pregnant women with RF were treated successfully with topical metronidazole in combination with other therapies. Azithromycin is the only oral rosacea therapy that is considered safe for pregnant patients and it has been used to treat RF. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the challenging aspects of treating pregnant patients with rosacea, as there is limited pregnancy-related treatment efficacy and safety data. The pregnancy categories of therapeutic options are summarized. Further studies are needed to learn which therapies are effective and safe for use during pregnancy.

The impact of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin on the corrected qt interval in patients with the novel Coronavirus disease 2019

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: With the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continuing to spread all over the world, although there is no specific treatment until now, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin have been reported to be effective in recent studies. Although long-term use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin has been reported to cause QT prolongation and malign arrhythmia, there is not enough data about the effect of short-term use on arrhythmia. Therefore, this study aims to assess the effect of hydroxychloroquine alone and hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin on corrected QT (QTc). METHODS: A baseline electrocardiogram and on-treatment baseline electrocardiogram were retrospectively collected in COVID-19 patients who received hydroxychloroquine and/or azithromycin. The QTc interval was calculated, and the baseline and peak QTc intervals were compared. In addition, the peak QTc intervals of monotherapy and combination therapy were compared. RESULTS: Of the 155 patients included, 102 (65.8%) patients were using hydroxychloroquine, and 53 (34.2%) patients were using hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin combination. The use of both hydroxychloroquine alone and hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin combined therapy significantly prolonged the QTc, and the QTc interval was significantly longer in patients receiving combination therapy. QTc prolongation caused early termination in both groups, 5 (4.9%) patients in the monotherapy group and 6 (11.3%) patients in the combination therapy group. CONCLUSION: In this study, patients who received hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 were at high risk of QTc prolongation, and concurrent treatment with azithromycin was associated with greater changes in QTc.

The long-term safety of chronic azithromycin use in adult patients with cystic fibrosis, evaluating biomarkers for renal function, hepatic function and electrical properties of the heart.

Background: Azithromycin maintenance therapy is widely used in cystic fibrosis (CF), but little is known about its long-term safety. We investigated whether chronic azithromycin use is safe regarding renal function, hepatic cell toxicity and QTc-interval prolongation.Methods: Adult CF patients (72 patients using azithromycin for a cumulative period of 364.8 years and 19 controls, 108.8 years) from two CF-centers in the Netherlands with azithromycin (non)-use for at least three uninterrupted years were studied retrospectively.Results: There was no difference in mean decline of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), nor in occurrence of eGFR-events. No drug-induced liver injury could be attributed to azithromycin. Of the 39 azithromycin users of whom an ECG was available, 4/39 (10.3%) had borderline and 4/39 (10.3%) prolonged QTc-intervals, with 7/8 patients using other QTc-prolonging medication. Of the control patients 1/6 (16.7%) had a borderline QTc-interval, without using other QTc-prolonging medication. No cardiac arrhythmias were observed.Conclusion: We observed no renal or hepatic toxicity, nor cardiac arrythmias during azithromycin use in CF patients for a mean study duration of more than 5 years. One should be aware of possible QTc-interval prolongation, in particular in patients using other QTc-interval prolonging medication.

Favorable Response to Long-Term Azithromycin Therapy in Bronchiectasis Patients with Chronic Airflow Obstruction Compared to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients without Bronchiectasis.

PURPOSE: Long-term macrolide treatment is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with frequent exacerbations. Bronchiectasis is a common comorbid condition in patients with COPD, for which long-term azithromycin is effective in preventing exacerbation. This study aimed to compare the effect of long-term azithromycin between bronchiectasis patients with chronic airflow obstruction (CAO) and COPD patients without bronchiectasis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with CAO who received azithromycin for more than 12 weeks were retrospectively identified at a single referral hospital. CAO was defined as a post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) <0.7, and bronchiectasis was determined using computed tomography. The development of exacerbation and symptom improvement were compared between bronchiectasis patients with CAO and COPD patients without bronchiectasis. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients (43 in bronchiectasis with CAO group vs 16 in COPD without bronchiectasis group) were included in this study. Compared to COPD patients without bronchiectasis, those in bronchiectasis with CAO group were younger, more likely to be female, and never smokers. There was no difference in the previous exacerbation history or FEV1 between the two groups. The median duration of azithromycin treatment was 15 months (interquartile range, 8-25 months). At the 12-month follow-up, the development of ≥2 moderate or ≥1 severe exacerbations was significantly lower in bronchiectasis with CAO group than in COPD without bronchiectasis group (46.5% vs 87.5%, P = 0.005). The proportion of patients with symptom improvement determined by the COPD assessment test score was also significantly higher in bronchiectasis with CAO group than COPD without bronchiectasis group at the 12-month follow-up (68.2% vs 16.7%, P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Bronchiectasis patients with CAO could benefit more from long-term azithromycin treatment than COPD patients without bronchiectasis.

Effects of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine on the Cardiovascular System - Limitations for Use in the Treatment of COVID-19

Abstract Chloroquine (CQ) and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) are antimalarial drugs, with anti-inflammatory properties that justify their use in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatic diseases. A pandemic caused by the new coronavirus led the entire world's scientific community to look for drugs already available on the market, capable of exercising beneficial actions in the fight against the disease. Preliminary studies in patients, as well as in vitro studies, suggested possible therapeutic effects associated with the use of HCQ and CQ in the treatment of COVID-19. Despite controversies over the effects of these drugs in combating the "cytokine storm" associated with COVID and the dismal of results in different clinical trials in Brazil, their use has been encouraged and several ongoing investigative studies are underway. In addition to the possible beneficial effects on the prognosis of patients with SARS-CoV-2, such drugs include varied effects on the cardiovascular system, ranging from positive developments related to their vasodilator properties to potential negative effects, such as cardiotoxicity. This work presents the main effects exerted by these drugs on the cardiovascular system, in order to contribute to a scientific discussion about the repurposing of these drugs in the context of COVID-19.