Comparative efficacy and safety of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia prophylaxis regimens for people living with HIV: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PCP) is a common opportunistic infection among people living with HIV (PWH), particularly among new and untreated cases. Several regimens are available for the prophylaxis of PCP, including trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), dapsone-based regimens (DBRs), aerosolized pentamidine (AP), and atovaquone. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of PCP prophylaxis regimens in PWH by network meta-analysis. METHODS: DATA SOURCES: Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL from inception to June 21, 2023. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Comparative randomized controlled trials (RCTs). PARTICIPANTS: PWH. INTERVENTIONS: Regimens for PCP prophylaxis either compared head-to-head or versus no treatment/placebo. ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS: Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs 2. METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Title or abstract and full-text screening and data extraction were performed in duplicate by two independent reviewers. Data on PCP incidence, all-cause mortality, and discontinuation due to toxicity were pooled and ranked by network meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses of primary versus secondary prophylaxis, by year, and by dosage were performed. RESULTS: A total of 26 RCTs, comprising 55 treatment arms involving 7516 PWH were included. For the prevention of PCP, TMP-SMX was ranked the most favourable agent and was superior to DBRs (risk ratio [RR] = 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.83) and AP (RR = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36-0.77). TMP-SMX was also the only agent with a mortality benefit compared with no treatment/placebo (RR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98). However, TMP-SMX was also ranked as the most toxic agent with a greater risk of discontinuation than DBRs (RR = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.54) and AP (7.20; 95% CI, 5.37-9.66). No significant differences in PCP prevention or mortality were detected among the other regimens. The findings remained consistent within subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: TMP-SMX is the most effective agent for PCP prophylaxis in PWH and the only agent to confer a mortality benefit; consequently, it should continue to be recommended as the first-line agent. Further studies are necessary to determine the optimal dosing of TMP-SMX to maximize efficacy and minimize toxicity.

Awareness and Candidacy for Endocrine Prevention and Risk Reducing Mastectomy in Unaffected High-Risk Women Referred for Breast Cancer Risk Assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Primary prevention of breast cancer in women at elevated risk includes several strategies such as endocrine prevention and risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM). The objective of this study was to evaluate awareness of different preventive strategies across high-risk subgroups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women referred for high risk evaluation between 2020 and 2023 completed an initial risk-assessment questionnaire that included questions around perceived lifetime risk and consideration of preventive strategies. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and chi-squared tests were used to compare differences across different high-risk subgroups. RESULTS: 482 women with a median age of 43 years (20-79 years) met inclusion criteria; 183 (38.0%) germline pathogenic variant carriers (GPV), 90 (18.7%) with high-risk lesions (HRL) on breast biopsy, and 209 (43.4%) with strong family history (FH) without a known genetic predisposition. Most high-risk women reported that they had considered increased screening and surveillance (83.7%) and lifestyle strategies (80.6%), while fewer patients had considered RRM (39.8%) and endocrine prevention (27.0%). Prior to initial consultation, RRM was more commonly considered in GPV carriers (59.4%) relative to those with HRL (33.3%) or strong FH (26.3%, p < 0.001). Based on current guidelines, 206 (43%) patients were deemed eligible for endocrine prevention, including 80.5% with HRL and 39.0% with strong FH. Prior consideration of endocrine prevention was highest in patients with HRL and significantly lower in those with strong FH (47.2% HRL versus 31.1% GPV versus 18.7% FH, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Endocrine prevention is the least considered preventive option for high-risk women, despite eligibility in a significant proportion of those presenting with HRL or strong FH.