Cyclamen europaeum extract for acute sinusitis.

BACKGROUND: Acute sinusitis is a common reason for primary care encounters. It causes significant symptoms including facial pain, congested nose, headache, thick nasal mucus, fever, and cough and often results in time off work or school. Sinusitis treatment focuses on eliminating causative factors and controlling the inflammatory and infectious components. The frozen, dried, natural fluid extract of the Cyclamen europaeum plant delivered intranasally is thought to have beneficial effects in relieving congestion by facilitating nasal drainage, and has an anti-inflammatory effect. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of topical intranasal Cyclamen europaeum extract on clinical response in adults and children with acute sinusitis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov; WHO ICTRP) in January 2018. We also searched the reference lists of included studies and review literature for further relevant studies and contacted trial authors for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing Cyclamen europaeum extract administered intranasally to placebo, antibiotics, intranasal corticosteroids, or no treatment in adults or children, or both, with acute sinusitis. Acute sinusitis was defined by clinical diagnosis and confirmed by nasal endoscopy or by radiological evidence. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included two randomised controlled trials that involved a total of 147 adult outpatients with acute sinusitis confirmed by radiology or nasal endoscopy who were assigned to Cyclamen europaeum nasal spray or placebo study arms for up to 15 days. The risk of selection and detection bias was unclear, as allocation concealment and blinding of outcome assessors were not reported in either study. Attrition was high (60%) in one study, although dropouts were balanced between study arms.Neither study reported our two primary outcomes: proportion of participants whose symptoms resolved or improved at 14 days and 30 days. No serious adverse events or complications related to treatment were reported; however, more mild adverse events such as nasal and throat irritation, mild epistaxis, and sneezing occurred in Cyclamen europaeum group participants (50%) compared to placebo group participants (24%) (risk ratio 2.11, 95% confidence interval 1.35 to 3.29); moderate-quality evidence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of Cyclamen europaeum for people with acute sinusitis is unknown. Although no serious side effects were observed, 50% of participants who received Cyclamen europaeum reported adverse events compared with 24% of those who received placebo.

Influenza vaccines in immunosuppressed adults with cancer.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of the Cochrane review published in 2013, Issue 10.Immunosuppressed cancer patients are at increased risk of serious influenza-related complications. Guidelines, therefore, recommend influenza vaccination for these patients. However, data on vaccine effectiveness in this population are lacking, and the value of vaccination in this population remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of influenza vaccine in immunosuppressed adults with malignancies. The primary review outcome is all-cause mortality, preferably at the end of the influenza season. Influenza-like illness (ILI, a clinical definition), confirmed influenza, pneumonia, any hospitalisations, influenza-related mortality and immunogenicity were defined as secondary outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS databases up to May 2017. We searched the following conference proceedings: ICAAC, ECCMID, IDSA (infectious disease conferences), ASH, ASBMT, EBMT (haematological), and ASCO (oncological) between the years 2006 to 2017. In addition, we scanned the references of all identified studies and pertinent reviews. We searched the websites of the manufacturers of influenza vaccine. Finally, we searched for ongoing or unpublished trials in clinical trial registry databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies and case-control studies were considered, comparing inactivated influenza vaccines versus placebo, no vaccination or a different vaccine, in adults (16 years and over) with cancer. We considered solid malignancies treated with chemotherapy, haematological cancer patients treated or not treated with chemotherapy, cancer patients post-autologous (up to six months after transplantation) or allogeneic (at any time) haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data from included studies adhering to Cochrane methodology. Meta-analysis could not be performed because of different outcome and denominator definitions in the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We identified six studies with a total of 2275 participants: five studies comparing vaccination with no vaccination, and one comparing adjuvanted vaccine with non-adjuvanted vaccine. Three studies were RCTs, one was a prospective observational cohort study and two were retrospective cohort studies.For the comparison of vaccination with no vaccination we included two RCTs and three observational studies, including 2202 participants. One study reported results in person-years while the others reported results per person. The five studies were performed between 1993 and 2015 and included adults with haematological diseases (three studies), patients following bone marrow transplantation (BMT) (two studies) and solid malignancies (three studies).One RCT and two observational studies reported all-cause mortality; the RCT showed similar mortality rates in both arms (odds ratio (OR) 1.25 (95% CI 0.43 to 3.62; 1 study, 78 participants, low-certainty evidence)); and the observational studies demonstrated a significant association between vaccine receipt and lower risk of death, adjusted hazard ratio 0.88 (95% CI 0.78 to 1; 1 study, 1577 participants, very low-certainty evidence) in one study and OR 0.42 (95% CI 0.24 to 0.75; 1 study, 806 participants, very low-certainty evidence) in the other. One RCT reported a reduction in ILI with vaccination, while no difference was observed in one observational study. Confirmed influenza rates were lower with vaccination in one RCT and the three observational studies, the difference reaching statistical significance in one. Pneumonia was observed significantly less frequently with vaccination in one observational study, but no difference was detected in another or in the RCT. One RCT showed a reduction in hospitalisations following vaccination, while an observational study found no difference. No life-threatening or persistent adverse effects from vaccination were reported. The strength of evidence was limited by the low number of included studies and by their low methodological quality and the certainty of the evidence for the mortality outcome according to GRADE was low to very low.For the comparison of adjuvanted vaccine with non-adjuvanted vaccine, we identified one RCT, including 73 patients. No differences were found for the primary and all secondary outcomes assessed. Mortality risk ratio was 0.54 (95% CI 0.05 to 5.73; low-certainty evidence) in the adjuvanted vaccine group. The quality of evidence was low due to the small sample size and the large confidence intervals for all outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Observational data suggest lower mortality and infection-related outcomes with influenza vaccination. The strength of evidence is limited by the small number of studies and low grade of evidence. It seems that the evidence, although weak, shows that the benefits overweigh the potential risks when vaccinating adults with cancer against influenza. However, additional placebo or no-treatment controlled RCTs of influenza vaccination among adults with cancer is ethically questionable.There is no conclusive evidence regarding the use of adjuvanted versus non-adjuvanted influenza vaccine in this population.

Antibiotics for asymptomatic bacteriuria.

BACKGROUND: Asymptomatic bacteriuria is commonly detected in women aged up to 60 years, patients with diabetes, and the elderly. The benefit of antibiotic treatment for this condition is controversial. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of antibiotics treatment for asymptomatic bacteriuria in adults. Specific objectives were to assess 1) the effectiveness of antibiotics for preventing development of symptomatic UTI, UTI-related complications, overall mortality, UTI-related mortality, and resolution of bacteriuria; 2) the development of resistance to antibiotic treatment by comparing resistance of grown bacteria in urine before and after therapy; and 3) the frequency of adverse events. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register up to 24 February 2015 through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing antibiotics to placebo or no treatment for asymptomatic bacteriuria in adults were included. The outcomes of interest were the development of symptomatic urinary tract infection (UTI), complications, death, any adverse event, development of antibiotic resistance, bacteriological cure, and decline in kidney function. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed study quality. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and the results expressed as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included nine studies (1614 participants) in this review. Symptomatic UTI (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.43), complications (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0. 35 to 1.74), and death (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.41) were similar between the antibiotic and placebo or no treatment arms. Antibiotics were more effective for bacteriological cure (RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.11 to 4.83) but also more adverse events developed in this group (RR 3.77, 95% CI 1.40 to 10.15). No decline in the kidney function was observed across the studies; minimal data were available on the emergence of resistant strains after antimicrobial treatment.The included studies were of medium and high quality, used different treatments for different durations of treatment and follow-up, different populations, but this did not appear to influence the results of review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No differences were observed between antibiotics versus no treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria for the development of symptomatic UTI, complications or death. Antibiotics were superior to no treatment for the bacteriological cure but with significantly more adverse events. There was no clinical benefit from treating asymptomatic bacteriuria in the studies included in this review.

Intranasal steroids for acute sinusitis.

BACKGROUND: Acute sinusitis is a common reason for primary care visits. It causes significant symptoms and often results in time off work and school. OBJECTIVES: We examined whether intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) are effective in relieving symptoms of acute sinusitis in adults and children. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 4, MEDLINE (January 1966 to May week 2, 2013), EMBASE (1990 to May 2013) and bibliographies of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing INCS treatment to placebo or no intervention in adults and children with acute sinusitis. Acute sinusitis was defined by clinical diagnosis and confirmed by radiological evidence or by nasal endoscopy. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with either resolution or improvement of symptoms. Secondary outcomes were any adverse events that required discontinuation of treatment, drop-outs before the end of the study, rates of relapse, complications and return to school or work. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data, assessed trial quality and resolved discrepancies by consensus. MAIN RESULTS: No new trials were found for inclusion in this update. Four studies involving 1943 participants with acute sinusitis met our inclusion criteria. The trials were well-designed and double-blind and studied INCS versus placebo or no intervention for 15 or 21 days. The rates of loss to follow-up were 7%, 11%, 41% and 10%. When we combined the results from the three trials included in the meta-analysis, participants receiving INCS were more likely to experience resolution or improvement in symptoms than those receiving placebo (73% versus 66.4%; risk ratio (RR) 1.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 1.18). Higher doses of INCS had a stronger effect on improvement of symptoms or complete relief: for mometasone furoate 400 µg versus 200 µg (RR 1.10; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.18 versus RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.11). No significant adverse events were reported and there was no significant difference in the drop-out and recurrence rates for the two treatment groups and for groups receiving higher doses of INCS. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence is limited for acute sinusitis confirmed by radiology or nasal endoscopy but supports the use of INCS as a monotherapy or as an adjuvant therapy to antibiotics. Clinicians should weigh the modest but clinically important benefits against possible minor adverse events when prescribing therapy.

Influenza vaccines in immunosuppressed adults with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Immunosuppressed cancer patients are at increased risk of serious influenza-related complications. Guidelines, therefore, recommend influenza vaccination for these patients. However, data on vaccine effectiveness in this population is lacking, and the value of vaccination in this population remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of influenza vaccine in immunosuppressed adults with malignancies. The primary review outcome is all-cause mortality, preferably at the end of the influenza season. Influenza-like illness (ILI, a clinical definition), confirmed influenza, pneumonia, any hospitalization and influenza-related mortality were defined as secondary outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS databases up to August 2013. We searched the following conference proceedings: ICAAC, ECCMID, IDSA (infectious disease conferences), ASH, ASBMT, EBMT (hematological), and ASCO (oncological) between the years 2006 to 2010. In addition, we scanned the references of all identified studies and pertinent reviews. We searched the websites of the manufacturers of influenza vaccine. Finally, we searched for ongoing or unpublished trials in clinical trial registry databases using the website. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies and case-control studies were considered, comparing inactivated influenza vaccines versus placebo, no vaccination or a different vaccine, in adults (16 years and over) with cancer. We considered solid malignancies treated with chemotherapy, haematological cancer patients treated or not treated with chemotherapy, cancer patients post-autologous (up to six months after transplantation) or allogeneic (at any time) hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data from included studies adhering to Cochrane methodology. Meta-analysis could not be performed because of different outcome and denominator definitions in the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We identified four studies: one RCT and three observational studies, including 2124 participants. One study reported results in person-years while the other three reported per person. The studies were performed between 1993 and 2012 and included adults with haematological diseases (two studies), patients following bone marrow transplantation (one study) and solid malignancies (three studies). Only two observational studies reported all-cause mortality; one showing an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.88 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.99) for death with vaccination and the other reporting an odds ratio (OR) of 0.43 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.71). The RCT reported a statistically significant reduction in ILI with vaccination, while no difference was observed in one observational study. Confirmed influenza rates were lower with vaccination in the three observational studies, the difference reaching statistical significance in one. Pneumonia was observed significantly less frequently with vaccination in one observational study, but no difference was detected in another or in the RCT. The RCT showed a reduction in hospitalizations following vaccination, while an observational study found no difference. No life-threatening or persistent adverse effects from vaccination were reported. The strength of evidence is limited by the low number of included studies and by their low methodological quality (high risk of bias). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Observational data suggests a lower mortality with influenza vaccination. Infection-related outcomes were lower or similar with influenza vaccination. The strength of evidence is limited by the small number of studies and by the fact that only one was a RCT. Influenza vaccination is safe and the evidence, although weak, is in favour of vaccinating adults with cancer receiving chemotherapy.

Antibiotics for preventing meningococcal infections.

BACKGROUND: Meningococcal disease is a contagious bacterial infection caused by Neisseria meningitidis (N. meningitidis). Household contacts have the highest risk of contracting the disease during the first week of a case being detected. Prophylaxis is considered for close contacts of people with a meningococcal infection and populations with known high carriage rates. OBJECTIVES: To study the effectiveness, adverse events and development of drug resistance of different antibiotics as prophylactic treatment regimens for meningococcal infection. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 6, MEDLINE (January 1966 to June week 1, 2013), EMBASE (1980 to June 2013) and LILACS (1982 to June 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs addressing the effectiveness of different antibiotics for: (a) prophylaxis against meningococcal disease; (b) eradication of N. meningitidis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently appraised the quality and extracted data from the included trials. We analysed dichotomous data by calculating the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each trial. MAIN RESULTS: No new trials were found for inclusion in this update. We included 24 studies; 19 including 2531 randomised participants and five including 4354 cluster-randomised participants. There were no cases of meningococcal disease during follow-up in the trials, thus effectiveness regarding prevention of future disease cannot be directly assessed.Mortality that was reported in one study was not related to meningococcal disease or treatment. Ciprofloxacin (RR 0.04; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.12), rifampin (rifampicin) (RR 0.17; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.24), minocycline (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.37) and penicillin (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.94) proved effective at eradicating N. meningitidis one week after treatment when compared with placebo. Rifampin (RR 0.20; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.29), ciprofloxacin (RR 0.03; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.42) and penicillin (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51 to 0.79) still proved effective at one to two weeks. Rifampin was effective compared to placebo up to four weeks after treatment but resistant isolates were seen following prophylactic treatment. No trials evaluated ceftriaxone against placebo but rifampin was less effective than ceftriaxone after one to two weeks of follow-up (RR 5.93; 95% CI 1.22 to 28.68). Mild adverse events associated with treatment were observed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Using rifampin during an outbreak may lead to the circulation of resistant isolates. Use of ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone or penicillin should be considered. All four agents were effective for up to two weeks follow-up, though more trials comparing the effectiveness of these agents for eradicating N. meningitidis would provide important insights.

Antibiotics for preventing meningococcal infections.

BACKGROUND: Meningococcal disease is a contagious bacterial infection caused by Neisseria meningitidis (N. meningitidis). Household contacts have the highest risk of contracting the disease during the first week of a case being detected. Prophylaxis is considered for close contacts of people with a meningococcal infection and populations with known high carriage rates. OBJECTIVES: To study the effectiveness of different prophylactic treatment regimens. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2011, Issue 2) which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE (January 1966 to May Week 3, 2011), EMBASE (1980 to May 2011) and LILACS (1982 to May 2011). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs addressing the effectiveness of different antibiotics for: (a) prophylaxis against meningococcal disease; (b) eradication of N. meningitidis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently appraised the quality and extracted data from the included trials. We analysed dichotomous data by calculating the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each trial. MAIN RESULTS: We included 24 studies; 19 including 2531 randomised participants and five including 4354 cluster-randomised participants. There were no cases of meningococcal disease during follow up in the trials, thus effectiveness regarding prevention of future disease cannot be directly assessed.Ciprofloxacin (RR 0.04; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.12), rifampin (rifampicin) (RR 0.17; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.24), minocycline (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.37) and penicillin (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.94) proved effective at eradicating N. meningitidis one week after treatment when compared with placebo. Rifampin (RR 0.20; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.29), ciprofloxacin (RR 0.03; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.42) and penicillin (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51 to 0.79) still proved effective at one to two weeks. Rifampin was effective compared to placebo up to four weeks after treatment but resistant isolates were seen following prophylactic treatment. No trials evaluated ceftriaxone against placebo but ceftriaxone was more effective than rifampin after one to two weeks of follow up (RR 5.93; 95% CI 1.22 to 28.68). Mild adverse events associated with treatment were observed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Using rifampin during an outbreak may lead to the circulation of resistant isolates. Use of ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone or penicillin should be considered. All four agents were effective for up to two weeks follow up, though more trials comparing the effectiveness of these agents for eradicating N. meningitidis would provide important insights.

Antimicrobial agents for treating uncomplicated urinary tract infection in women.

BACKGROUND: Acute uncomplicated lower urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the most common problems for which young women seek medical attention. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy, resistance development and safety of different antimicrobial treatments for acute uncomplicated lower UTI. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE and bibliographies of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different classes of antimicrobials for acute uncomplicated UTI in women were included. The outcomes of interest were symptomatic and bacteriological cure at short and long-term follow-up, resistance development, number of days to symptom resolution, days of work loss, adverse events and complications. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed study quality. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and the results expressed as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) was as effective as fluoroquinolones in achieving short-term (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.03) and long-term (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05) symptomatic cure. Beta-lactam drugs were as effective as TMP-SMX for short-term (RR 0.95' 95% CI 0.81 to 1.12) and long-term (RR 1.06' 95% CI 0.93 to 1.21) symptomatic cure. Short-term cure for nitrofurantoin was similar to that of TMP-SMX (RR 0.99' 95% CI 0.95 to 1.04) as was long-term symptomatic cure (RR 1.01' 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09).Fluoroquinolones were more effective than beta-lactams (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.31) for short-term bacteriological cure. Rashes were more frequent in patients treated with TMP-SMX than with nitrofurantoin or fluoroquinolones and in patients treated with beta-lactam drugs compared to fluoroquinolones. Minimal data were available on the emergence of resistant strains during or after antimicrobial treatment. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No differences were observed between the classes of antimicrobials included in this review for the symptomatic cure of acute uncomplicated UTI. Fluoroquinolones proved more effective than beta-lactams for the short-term bacteriological outcome, probably with little clinical significance. Individualised treatment should take into consideration the predictable susceptibility of urinary pathogens in local areas, possible adverse events and resistance development, and patient preference.