Utilization of salivary concentrations of ciprofloxacin in subjects with cystic fibrosis

Interventions for the eradication of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Cystic fibrosis is an inherited recessive disorder of chloride transport that is characterised by recurrent and persistent pulmonary infections from resistant organisms that result in lung function deterioration and early mortality in sufferers. Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged not only as an important infection in people who are hospitalised, but also as a potentially harmful pathogen in cystic fibrosis. Chronic pulmonary infection with MRSA is thought to confer on people with cystic fibrosis a worse clinical outcome and result in an increased rate of lung function decline. Clear guidance for MRSA eradication in cystic fibrosis, supported by robust evidence, is urgently needed. This is an update of a previous review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment regimens designed to eradicate MRSA and to determine whether the eradication of MRSA confers better clinical and microbiological outcomes for people with cystic fibrosis. To ascertain whether attempts at eradicating MRSA can lead to increased acquisition of other resistant organisms (including Pseudomonas aeruginosa), increased adverse effects from drugs, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials by searching the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders (CFGD) Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, PubMed, MEDLINE and three clinical trials registries; by handsearching article reference lists; and through contact with experts in the field. We last searched the CFGD Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register on 4 October 2021, and the ongoing trials registries on 31 January 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs of any combinations of topical, inhaled, oral or intravenous antimicrobials primarily aimed at eradicating MRSA compared with placebo, standard treatment or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and used the GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

The review includes three RCTs with 135 participants with MRSA infection. Two trials compared active treatment versus observation only and one trial compared active treatment with placebo.  Active treatment versus observation In both trials (106 participants), active treatment consisted of oral trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole combined with rifampicin. One trial administered this combination for two weeks alongside nasal, skin and oral decontamination and a three-week environmental decontamination, while the second trial administered this drug combination for 21 days with five days intranasal mupirocin. Both trials reported successful eradication of MRSA in people with cystic fibrosis, but they used different definitions of eradication. One trial (45 participants) defined MRSA eradication as negative MRSA respiratory cultures at day 28, and reported that oral trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole combined with rifampicin may lead to a higher proportion of negative cultures compared to control (odds ratio (OR) 12.6 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.84 to 55.84; low-certainty evidence). However, by day 168 of follow-up, there was no difference between groups in the proportion of participants who remained MRSA-negative (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.31 to 4.42; low-certainty evidence). The second trial defined successful eradication as the absence of MRSA following treatment in at least three cultures over a period of six months. We are uncertain if the intervention led to results favouring the treatment group as the certainty of the evidence was very low (OR 2.74, 95% CI 0.64 to 11.75). There were no differences between groups in the remaining outcomes for this comparison: quality of life, frequency of exacerbations or adverse effects (all low-certainty evidence) or the change from baseline in lung function or weight (both very low-certainty evidence). The time until next positive MRSA isolate was not reported. The included trials found no differences between groups in terms of nasal colonisation with MRSA. While not a specific outcome of this review, investigators from one study reported that the rate of hospitalisation from screening through day 168 was lower with oral trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole combined with rifampicin compared to control (rate ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.72; P = 0.01). Nebulised vancomycin with oral antibiotics versus nebulised placebo with oral antibiotics The third trial (29 participants) defined eradication as a negative respiratory sample for MRSA at one month following completion of treatment. No differences were reported in MRSA eradication between treatment arms (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 7.39; low-certainty evidence). No differences between groups were seen in lung function or adverse effects (low-certainty evidence), in quality of life (very low-certainty evidence) or nasal colonisation with MRSA. The trial did not report on the change in weight or frequency of exacerbations.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Early eradication of MRSA is possible in people with cystic fibrosis, with one trial demonstrating superiority of active MRSA treatment compared with observation only in terms of the proportion of MRSA-negative respiratory cultures at day 28. However, follow-up at three or six months showed no difference between treatment and control in the proportion of participants remaining MRSA-negative. Moreover, the longer-term clinical consequences - in terms of lung function, mortality and cost of care - remain unclear. Using GRADE methodology, we judged the certainty of the evidence provided by this review to be very low to low, due to potential biases from the open-label design, high rates of attrition and small sample sizes. Based on the available evidence, we believe that whilst early eradication of respiratory MRSA in people with cystic fibrosis is possible, there is not currently enough evidence regarding the clinical outcomes of eradication to support the use of the interventions studied.

Eradication therapy for Burkholderia cepacia complex in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Chronic infection with Burkholderia cepacia complex species remains a significant problem for clinicians treating people with cystic fibrosis. Colonisation with Burkholderia cepacia complex species is linked to a more rapid decline in lung function and increases morbidity and mortality. There remain no objective guidelines for strategies to eradicate Burkholderia cepacia complex in cystic fibrosis lung disease, as these are inherently resistant to the majority of antibiotics and there has been very little research in this area. This review aims to examine the current treatment options for people with cystic fibrosis with acute infection with Burkholderia cepacia complex and to identify an evidence-based strategy that is both safe and effective. This is an updated version of the review.

OBJECTIVES

To identify whether treatment of Burkholderia cepacia complex infections can achieve eradication, or if treatment can prevent or delay the onset of chronic infection. To establish whether following eradication, clinical outcomes are improved and if there are any adverse effects.

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 the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews.Last search: 12 March 2019.We also searched electronic clinical trials registers for the USA and Europe.Date of last search: 12 March 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised studies in people with cystic fibrosis of antibiotics or alternative therapeutic agents used alone or in combination, using any method of delivery and any treatment duration, to eradicate Burkholderia cepacia complex infections compared to another antibiotic, placebo or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed for inclusion in the review the eligibility of 52 studies (79 references) identified by the search of the Group's Trial Register and the other electronic searches.

MAIN RESULTS

No studies looking at the eradication of Burkholderia cepacia complex species were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The authors have concluded that there was an extreme lack of evidence in this area of treatment management for people with cystic fibrosis. Without further comprehensive studies, it is difficult to draw conclusions about a safe and effective management strategy for Burkholderia cepacia complex eradication in cystic fibrosis. Thus, while the review could not offer clinicians evidence of an effective eradication protocol for Burkholderia cepacia complex, it has highlighted an urgent need for exploration and research in this area, specifically the need for well-designed multi-centre randomised controlled studies of a variety of (novel) antibiotic agents.

Treatment for chronic methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus pulmonary infection in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Cystic fibrosis is an inherited life-threatening multisystem disorder with lung disease characterized by abnormally thick airway secretions and persistent bacterial infection. Chronic, progressive lung disease is the most important cause of morbidity and mortality in the condition and is therefore the main focus of clinical care and research. Staphylococcus aureus is a major cause of chest infection in people with cystic fibrosis. Early onset, as well as chronic, lung infection with this organism in young children and adults results in worsening lung function, poorer nutrition and increases the airway inflammatory response, thus leading to a poor overall clinical outcome. There are currently no evidence-based guidelines for chronic suppressive therapy for Staphylococcus aureus infection in cystic fibrosis such as those used for Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection. This is an update of a previously published review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence regarding the effectiveness of long-term antibiotic treatment regimens for chronic infection with methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infection in people with cystic fibrosis and to determine whether this leads to improved clinical and microbiological outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

Trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, MEDLINE, Embase, handsearching article reference lists and through contact with local and international experts in the field. Date of the last search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 09 February 2018.We also searched ongoing trials databases. Date of latest search: 20 May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any combinations of topical, inhaled, oral or intravenous antimicrobials used as suppressive therapy for chronic infection with methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus compared with placebo or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The authors independently assessed all search results for eligibility. No eligible trials were identified.

MAIN RESULTS

The searches identified 58 trials, but none were eligible for inclusion in the current version of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No randomised controlled trials were identified which met the inclusion criteria for this review. Although methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus is an important and common cause of lung infection in people with cystic fibrosis, there is no agreement on how best to treat long-term infection. The review highlights the need to organise well-designed trials that can provide evidence to support the best management strategy for chronic methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus infection in people with cystic fibrosis.

Interventions for the eradication of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Cystic fibrosis is an inherited recessive disorder of chloride transport that is characterised by recurrent and persistent pulmonary infections from resistant organisms that result in lung function deterioration and early mortality in sufferers.Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged as, not only an important infection in people who are hospitalised, but also as a potentially harmful pathogen in cystic fibrosis. Chronic pulmonary infection with MRSA is thought to confer people with cystic fibrosis with a worse clinical outcome and result in an increased rate of lung function decline. Clear guidance for MRSA eradication in cystic fibrosis, supported by robust evidence, is urgently needed. This is an update of a previous review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment regimens designed to eradicate MRSA and to determine whether the eradication of MRSA confers better clinical and microbiological outcomes for people with cystic fibrosis. To ascertain whether attempts at eradicating MRSA can lead to increased acquisition of other resistant organisms (including P aeruginosa) or increased adverse effects from drugs, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, PubMed, MEDLINE, clinical trial registries (Clinicaltrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, ISRCTN Registry), handsearching article reference lists and through contact with experts in the field.Date of the last search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 27 July 2017.Ongoing trials registries were last searched: 07 August 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any combinations of topical, inhaled, oral or intravenous antimicrobials with the primary aim of eradicating MRSA compared with placebo, standard treatment or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The authors independently assessed all search results for eligibility. They used the GRADE methodology to assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

The review includes two trials with a total of 106 participants with MRSA infection. In both trials the active treatment was oral trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole combined with rifampicin; however, one trial administered this combination for two weeks alongside nasal, skin and oral decontamination and a three-week environmental decontamination, while the second trial administered this drug combination for 21 days with five days intranasal mupirocin. In both trials the control arm was observation only.Both trials reported successful eradication of MRSA in people with CF as an outcome; however, the definition used for MRSA eradication differed. The first trial (n = 45) defined MRSA eradication as negative MRSA respiratory cultures at day 28, and reported that, when compared to control, oral trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole combined with rifampicin may lead to a higher proportion of negative cultures, odds ratio (OR) 12.6 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.84 to 55.84; low-certainty evidence); however, by day 168 of follow-up there was no difference in the proportion of participants who remained MRSA-negative in either treatment arm, OR 1.17 (95% CI 0.31 to 4.42) (low-quality evidence). In the second trial, successful eradication was defined as the absence of MRSA following treatment (oral co-trimoxazole and rifampicin with intranasal mupirocin or observation) in at least three cultures over a period of six months. At the time of reporting, 40 out of 61 participants had completed follow-up, but results showed no difference between groups. Eradication was achieved in 12 out 29 participants (41%) receiving active treatment, and in 9 out of 32 participants (28%) on the observation arm, OR 1.80 (95% CI 0.62 to 5.25) (very low-quality evidence).With regards to this review's secondary outcomes, these were reported in the first trial only. The trial reports that no differences were observed between the two arms in terms of pulmonary exacerbations (from screening to day 28), nasal colonisation, lung function, weight or participant-reported outcomes. While not a specific outcome of this review, investigators reported that the rate of hospitalisation from screening through day 168 was lower with oral trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole combined with rifampicin compared to control, rate ratio 0.22 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.72) (P = 0.0102).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Early eradication of MRSA is possible in people with cystic fibrosis, with one trial demonstrating superiority of active MRSA treatment compared with observation only in terms of the proportion of MRSA-negative respiratory cultures at day 28. However, by six months, the proportion of participants who remained MRSA-negative did not differ between treatment arms in either trial. Moreover, the longer-term clinical consequences in terms of lung function, mortality and cost of care, remain unclear.Using GRADE methodology, we judged the quality of the evidence provided by this review to be very low to low, due to potential biases from the open-label design and unclear detail reported in one trial. Based on the available evidence, it is the opinion of the authors that whilst early eradication of respiratory MRSA in people with cystic fibrosis is possible, there is not currently enough evidence regarding the clinical outcomes of eradication to support the use of the interventions studied.

Eradication therapy for Burkholderia cepacia complex in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Chronic infection with Burkholderia cepacia complex species remains a significant problem for clinicians treating people with cystic fibrosis. Colonisation with Burkholderia cepacia complex species is linked to a more rapid decline in lung function and increases morbidity and mortality. There remain no objective guidelines for strategies to eradicate Burkholderia cepacia complex in cystic fibrosis lung disease, as these are inherently resistant to the majority of antibiotics and there has been very little research in this area. This review aims to examine the current treatment options for people with cystic fibrosis with acute of Burkholderia cepacia complex and to identify an evidence-based strategy that is both safe and effective. This is an updated version of the review.

OBJECTIVES

To identify whether treatment of Burkholderia cepacia complex infections can achieve eradication, or if treatment can prevent or delay the onset of chronic infection. To establish whether following eradication, clinical outcomes are improved and if there are any adverse effects.

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 the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews.Last search: 14 July 2016.We also searched electronic clinical trials registers for the USA and Europe.Date of last search: 14 July 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised studies in people with cystic fibrosis of antibiotics or alternative therapeutic agents used alone or in combination, using any method of delivery and any treatment duration, to eradicate Burkholderia cepacia complex infections compared to another antibiotic, placebo or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed for inclusion in the review the eligibility of 50 studies (70 references) identified by the search of the Group's Trial Register and the other electronic searches.

MAIN RESULTS

No studies looking at the eradication of Burkholderia cepacia complex species were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The authors have concluded that there was an extreme lack of evidence in this area of treatment management for people with cystic fibrosis. Without further comprehensive studies, it is difficult to draw conclusions about a safe and effective management strategy for Burkholderia cepacia complex eradication in cystic fibrosis. Thus, while the review could not offer clinicians evidence of an effective eradication protocol for Burkholderia cepacia complex, it has highlighted an urgent need for exploration and research in this area, specifically the need for well-designed multi-centre randomised controlled studies of a variety of (novel) antibiotic agents.

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.

Treatment for chronic methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus pulmonary infection in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Cystic fibrosis is an inherited life-threatening multisystem disorder with lung disease characterized by abnormally thick airway secretions and persistent bacterial infection. Chronic, progressive lung disease is the most important cause of morbidity and mortality in the condition and is therefore the main focus of clinical care and research. Staphylococcus aureus is a major cause of chest infection in people with cystic fibrosis. Early onset, as well as chronic, lung infection with this organism in young children and adults results in worsening lung function, poorer nutrition and increases the airway inflammatory response, thus leading to a poor overall clinical outcome. There are currently no evidence-based guidelines for chronic suppressive therapy for Staphylococcus aureus infection in cystic fibrosis such as those used for Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence regarding the effectiveness of long-term antibiotic treatment regimens for chronic infection with methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infection in people with cystic fibrosis and to determine whether this leads to improved clinical and microbiological outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

Trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, MEDLINE, Embase, handsearching article reference lists and through contact with local and international experts in the field. We also searched ongoing trials databases.Date of the last search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 03 March 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any combinations of topical, inhaled, oral or intravenous antimicrobials used as suppressive therapy for chronic infection with methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus compared with placebo or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The authors independently assessed all search results for eligibility. No eligible trials were identified.

MAIN RESULTS

The searches identified 55 trials, but none were eligible for inclusion in the current version of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No randomised controlled trials were identified which met the inclusion criteria for this review. Although methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus is an important and common cause of lung infection in people with cystic fibrosis, there is no agreement on how best to treat long-term infection. The review highlights the need to organise well-designed trials that can provide evidence to support the best management strategy for chronic methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus infection in people with cystic fibrosis.

Interventions for the eradication of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Cystic fibrosis is an inherited recessive disorder of chloride transport that is characterised by recurrent and persistent pulmonary infections from resistant organisms that result in lung function deterioration and early mortality in sufferers.Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged as, not only an important infection in long-term hospitalised patients, but also as a potentially harmful pathogen in cystic fibrosis, and has been increasing steadily in prevalence internationally. Chronic pulmonary infection with MRSA is thought to confer cystic fibrosis patients with a worse overall clinical outcome and, in particular, result in an increased rate of decline in lung function. Clear guidance for the eradication of MRSA in cystic fibrosis, supported by robust evidence from good quality trials, is urgently needed.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment regimens designed to eradicate MRSA and to determine whether the eradication of MRSA confers better clinical and microbiological outcomes for people with cystic fibrosis.

SEARCH METHODS

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, PUBMED, MEDLINE, Embase, handsearching article reference lists and through contact with local and international experts in the field.Date of the last search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 04 September 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any combinations of topical, inhaled, oral or intravenous antimicrobials with the primary aim of eradicating MRSA compared with placebo, standard treatment or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The authors independently assessed all search results for eligibility. No eligible trials were identified for inclusion.

MAIN RESULTS

No current published eligible trials were identified, although three ongoing clinical trials are likely to be eligible for inclusion in future updates of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not identify any randomised trials which would allow us to make any evidence-based recommendations. Although the results of several non-randomised studies would suggest that, once isolated, the eradication of MRSA is possible; whether this has a significant impact on clinical outcome is still unclear. Further research is required to guide clinical decision making in the management of MRSA infection in cystic fibrosis.

Eradication therapy for Burkholderia cepacia complex in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Chronic infection with Burkholderia cepacia complex species remains a significant problem for clinicians treating people with cystic fibrosis. Colonisation with Burkholderia cepacia complex species is linked to a more rapid decline in lung function and increases morbidity and mortality. There remain no objective guidelines for strategies to eradicate Burkholderia cepacia complex in cystic fibrosis lung disease, as these are inherently resistant to the majority of antibiotics and there has been very little research in this area. This review aims to examine the current treatment options for people with cystic fibrosis with acute of Burkholderia cepacia complex and to identify an evidence-based strategy that is both safe and effective.

OBJECTIVES

To identify whether treatment of Burkholderia cepacia complex infections can achieve eradication, or if treatment can prevent or delay the onset of chronic infection. To establish whether following eradication, clinical outcomes are improved and if there are any adverse effects.

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 the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews.Last search: 13 January 2014.We also searched electronic clinical trials registers for the USA and Europe.Date of last search: 28 November 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised studies in people with cystic fibrosis of antibiotics used alone or in combination, using any method of delivery and any treatment duration, to eradicate Burkholderia cepacia complex infections compared to another antibiotic, placebo or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed for inclusion in the review the eligibility of 43 studies (61 references) identified by the search of the Group's Trial Register and the other electronic searches.

MAIN RESULTS

No studies looking at the eradication of Burkholderia cepacia complex species were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The authors have concluded that there was an extreme lack of evidence in this area of treatment management for people with cystic fibrosis. Without further comprehensive studies, it is difficult to draw conclusions about a safe and effective management strategy for Burkholderia cepacia complex eradication in cystic fibrosis. Thus, while the review could not offer clinicians evidence of an effective eradication protocol for Burkholderia cepacia complex, it has highlighted an urgent need for exploration and research in this area, specifically the need for well-designed multi-centre randomised controlled studies of a variety of (novel) antibiotic agents.

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.

Interventions for the eradication of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Cystic fibrosis is an inherited recessive disorder of chloride transport that is characterised by recurrent and persistent pulmonary infections from resistant organisms that result in lung function deterioration and early mortality in sufferers.Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged as, not only an important infection in long-term hospitalised patients, but also as a potentially harmful pathogen in cystic fibrosis, and has been increasing steadily in prevalence internationally. Chronic pulmonary infection with MRSA is thought to confer cystic fibrosis patients with a worse overall clinical outcome and, in particular, result in an increased rate of decline in lung function. Clear guidance for the eradication of MRSA in cystic fibrosis, supported by robust evidence from good quality trials, is urgently needed.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment regimens designed to eradicate MRSA and to determine whether the eradication of MRSA confers better clinical and microbiological outcomes for people with cystic fibrosis.

SEARCH METHODS

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, handsearching article reference lists and through contact with local and international experts in the field.Date of the last search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 24 January 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any combinations of topical, inhaled, oral or intravenous antimicrobials with the primary aim of eradicating MRSA compared with placebo, standard treatment or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The authors independently assessed all search results for eligibility. No eligible trials were identified.

MAIN RESULTS

No current published eligible trials were identified, although two ongoing clinical trials are likely to be eligible for inclusion in future updates of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not identify any randomised trials which would allow us to make any evidence-based recommendations. Although the results of several non-randomised studies would suggest that, once isolated, the eradication of MRSA is possible; whether this has a significant impact on clinical outcome is still unclear. Further research is required to guide clinical decision making in the management of MRSA infection in cystic fibrosis.

Oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics for cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the most common bacterial pathogen causing infection in the lungs of people with CF and appropriate antibiotic therapy is vital. Antibiotics for 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 the quality of life of 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 an exacerbation of respiratory tract infection; and (2) long-term treatment in chronic infection.

SEARCH STRATEGY

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 for information on relevant trials and checked reference lists of identified trials. Most recent search: March 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any dose of oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics, with other combinations of inhaled, oral or intravenous antibiotics, or with placebo or usual treatment for exacerbations and long-term treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected the trials, extracted data and assessed quality. We contacted trialists to obtain missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four trials examining exacerbations (197 participants) and two trials examining long-term therapy (85 participants). We regarded the most important outcomes as quality of life and lung function. In our analysis, we were unable to identify any statistically significant difference between oral anti-pseudomonal antibiotics and other treatments for these outcome measures for either exacerbations or long-term treatment. One of the included trials reported significantly better lung function when treating an 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.

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 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 known effectiveness against local strains and upon individual preference.

Population pharmacokinetics of ciprofloxacin in pediatric and adolescent patients with acute infections

The aim of the present study was to characterize the population pharmacokinetics of ciprofloxacin in patients with and without cystic fibrosis ranging in age from 1 day to 24 years and to propose a limited sampling strategy to estimate individual pharmacokinetic parameters. Patients were divided into four groups according to the treatment schedule. They received ciprofloxacin by intravenous infusion (30 min) or by the oral route. The number of samples collected from each patient ranged from 1 to 12. The population parameters were computed for an initial group of 37 patients. The data were analyzed by nonlinear mixed-effect modeling by use of a two-compartment structural model. The interindividual variability in clearance (CL) was partially explained by a dependence on age and the patient's clinical status. In addition, a significant relationship was found between weight and the initial volume of distribution. Eighteen additional patients were used for model validation and evaluation of limited sampling strategies. When ciprofloxacin was administered intravenously, sampling at a single point (12 h after the start of infusion) allowed the precise and accurate estimation of CL and the elimination half-life, as well as the ciprofloxacin concentration at the end of the infusion. It should be noted that to take into account the presence of a lag time after oral administration, a schedule based on two sampling times of 1 and 12 h is needed. The results of this study combine relationships between ciprofloxacin pharmacokinetic parameters and patient covariates that may be useful for dose adjustment and a convenient sampling procedure that can be used for further studies.

Structural and functional changes by Ciprofloxacin of rat submandibular gland

In the present study, the effects of Ciprofloxacin (Cipro), a fluoroquinolone antibiotic, on rat submandibular gland structure and function were examined in an acute experiment. Cipro was administered intraperitoneally at various doses (20, 40 and 80 mg/kg). Pure submandibular saliva was collected intraorally by micropolyethylene tubes under anaesthesia using a dissecting microscope. After collection of saliva, submandibular glands were removed and weighed. Flow rate, amylase activity, total protein and electrolyte concentrations were measured in saliva. Concentrations of DNA and protein were measured in the gland. All doses of Cipro (20, 40, 80 mg/kg) reduced salivary flow rate. Concentrations of salivary total protein and calcium and gland DNA were reduced by all doses of Cipro. Treatment by Cipro (80 mg/kg) induced an increase in salivary sodium and potassium concentrations. Histopathological examination of glands revealed that Cipro at doses of 40 mg/kg and 80 mg/kg induces morphological changes in the glands including irregular shape of the cerous and mucous bobbles, lack of nucleus in some cells, damage of the cytoplasmic and cell walls and presence of oncocytes in secretory ducts. It is concluded that Cipro inhibits rat submandibular gland functions consistent with structural damages to the gland that might be observed as a side effect in humans. Properties of fluoroquinolones to alter intracellular cAMP and their ability to suppress DNA and protein synthesis of acinar cells might be possible reasons for observed changes.

Target site concentrations of ciprofloxacin after single intravenous and oral doses

To characterize the potential of ciprofloxacin penetration into human soft tissues following intravenous (i.v.) and oral (p.o.) administration, we measured the free ciprofloxacin concentrations in interstitial space fluid of skeletal muscle and subcutaneous adipose tissue by microdialysis. In addition, ciprofloxacin concentrations were measured in cantharis-induced skin blisters, saliva, and capillary plasma and were compared to the total concentrations in venous plasma. Furthermore, a pharmacodynamic in vitro model was used to simulate in vivo pharmacokinetics in bacterial culture. Eight healthy volunteers received ciprofloxacin in an open randomized crossover fashion either as a single i.v. infusion of 400 mg over 60 min or as a single p.o. dose of 500 mg. For both tissues the mean areas under the concentration-time curves (AUCs) for interstitial space fluid (AUC(interstitial fluid)s) were significantly lower than the corresponding AUC(plasma)s, with AUC(interstitial fluid)/AUC(plasma) ratios ranging from 0.38 to 0.68. For skeletal muscle, the AUC(interstitial fluid) was significantly higher after administration of 400 mg i.v. than after administration of 500 mg p.o., with a ratio of the AUC after p.o. administration/AUC after i.v. administration of 0.64. The ratio of the concentration in skeletal muscle/concentration in plasma increased over the entire observation period, implying that ciprofloxacin concentrations were not at steady state. The ratio of the concentration in skin blister fluid/concentration in plasma reached values above 4, indicating a preferential penetration of ciprofloxacin into inflamed lesions. The concentrations in saliva and capillary blood were similar to the corresponding total levels in plasma. In vitro both in vivo ciprofloxacin concentration-time profiles were equally effective against select bacterial strains. In conclusion, single-dose administration of two bioequivalent dosage forms of ciprofloxacin might lead to differences in target site pharmacokinetics. These differences, however, are not related to a difference in target site pharmacodynamics.

Fluoroquinolones in pediatrics and their nephrotoxicity in adults: minireview

In recent years there is increasing pressure to use fluoroquinolones in pediatric patients but relatively few data have been published in the literature. Therefore this paper reviews the available information about the pharmacokinetics of fluoroquinolones in children and their use in pediatric urinary tract infections, taking into account their potential as nephrotoxic agents. From the available data it seems reasonable to suggest that there is no risk of quinolone-induced nephrotoxicity and that this class of antibiotics may therefore be considered as potential candidates in urinary tract infections in children. Nevertheless adequate pharmacokinetic investigations and further studies on long-term monitoring for potential toxicity need to be conducted in pediatric populations.

Pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of ascending single doses of moxifloxacin, a new 8-methoxy quinolone, administered to healthy subjects

The pharmacokinetics of moxifloxacin were investigated in six studies after oral administration of 50, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 800 mg. Eight healthy male volunteers were included in each study. With doses of up to 200 mg the study was performed as a double-blind, randomized group comparison (n = 6 verum and n = 2 matched placebo); with the higher doses the study was conducted with a double-blind, randomized, crossover design. Safety and tolerability were assessed by evaluation of vital signs, electrocardiograms, electroencephalograms, clinical chemistry parameters, results of urinalysis, and adverse events. The drug was well tolerated. The concentrations of moxifloxacin in plasma, urine, and saliva were determined by a validated high-pressure liquid chromatography assay with fluorescence detection. In addition, plasma and urine samples were analyzed by a bioassay. A good correlation between both methods was seen, indicating an absence of major active metabolites. The mean maximum concentrations of moxifloxacin in plasma (Cmax) ranged from 0.29 mg/liter (50-mg dose) to 4.73 mg/liter (800-mg dose) and were reached 0.5 to 4 h following drug administration. After reaching the Cmax, plasma moxifloxacin concentrations declined in a biphasic manner. Within 4 to 5 h they fell to about 30 to 55% of the Cmax, and thereafter a terminal half-life of 11 to 14 h accounted for the major part of the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC). During the absorption phase concentrations in saliva were even higher than those in plasma, whereas in the terminal phase a constant ratio of the concentration in saliva/concentration in plasma of between 0.5 and 1 was observed, indicating a correlation between unbound concentrations in plasma and levels in saliva (protein binding level, approximately 48%). AUC and Cmax increased proportionally to the dose over the whole range of doses investigated. Urinary excretion amounted to approximately 20% of the dose. Data on renal clearance (40 to 51 ml/min/1.73 m2) indicated partial tubular reabsorption of the drug. The pharmacokinetic parameters derived from compartmental and noncompartmental analyses were in good agreement. The kinetics could be described best by fitting the data to a two-compartment body model.

Single-dose and steady-state pharmacokinetics of a new oral suspension of ciprofloxacin in children

OBJECTIVE

Quinolones are used ever increasingly in pediatrics, although officially they are still contraindicated. Lack of evidence of arthropathic effects in human offspring favors their use, but little is known about the pharmacokinetics of oral or parenteral ciprofloxacin in children, especially those without cystic fibrosis.

DESIGN

We studied 16 non-cystic fibrosis patients ranging in age from 0.3 to 7.1 years to whom the new suspension formulation of ciprofloxacin (10 mg/kg body weight) was given orally three times daily. Single-dose and steady-state pharmacokinetic parameters were elucidated.

RESULTS

Ciprofloxacin was rapidly absorbed. The maximum plasma concentrations, with the means varying from 1.7 to 3.6 mg/L, were reached within 1 hour, almost regardless of whether single-dose administration or steady state. The mean oral clearance was lower in children <6 years of age than in those >/=6 years. Terminal half-life values, with the means varying only between 4.2 and 5.1, suggest that dosing recommendations based on body weight are pertinent, although caution should be exercised in small infants. No arthropathic or other adverse events attributable to ciprofloxacin suspension were observed.

CONCLUSION

A dose of the suspension form of ciprofloxacin of 10 mg/kg body weight given orally three times daily seems appropriate in children, provided the drug is clearly indicated.