Clinical trial for uniform multidrug therapy for leprosy patients in Brazil (U-MDT/CT-BR): adverse effects approach

Epidemiological characteristics of leprosy from 2000 to 2019 in a state with low endemicity in southern Brazil

BACKGROUND

Leprosy is an infectious and contagious disease caused by Mycobacterium leprae and is mainly characterized by lesions in the skin and peripheral nerves. In Brazil, it is a public health problem due to its high endemicity. However, the state of Rio Grande do Sul presents low endemicity of this disease.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the epidemiological profile of leprosy in the state of Rio Grande do Sul from 2000 to 2019.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study. Epidemiological data were collected from the Notifiable Diseases Information System (SINAN, Sistema de Informação de Agravos de Notificação).

RESULTS

Among the 497 municipalities in the state, 357 (71.8%) registered cases of leprosy in the assessed period, with an average of 212 (81.5%) new cases per year. The average detection rate was 1.61 new cases per 100,000 inhabitants. The male sex was predominant (51.9%) and the mean age was 50.4 years. Regarding the epidemiological clinical profile; 79.0% of the patients were multibacillary; 37.5% presented the borderline clinical form; 16% had grade 2 physical disability at diagnosis and bacilloscopy was positive in 35.4% of cases. As for treatment, 73.8% of the cases were treated with the standard multibacillary therapeutic regimen.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

There were missing/inconsistent data in the database available.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings observed in this study indicate that the state presents a low endemicity profile of the disease and these results can support adequate health policies relevant to the reality of Rio Grande do Sul, inserted in a national scenario of highly endemic leprosy.

Effectiveness and safety of multidrug therapy containing clofazimine for paucibacillary leprosy and clarithromycin for rifampicin-resistant leprosy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

The present study aimed to evaluate leprosy cure and relapse rates as primary outcomes related to two additional strategies for leprosy treatment: clofazimine for paucibacillary (PB) leprosy patients and clarithromycin for patients with rifampicin-resistant leprosy.

Methods

We conducted two systematic reviews (protocols CRD42022308272 and CRD42022308260). We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS, Virtual Health Library and Cochrane Library databases, registers of clinical trial databases and gray literature. We included clinical trials evaluating the addition of clofazimine to PB leprosy treatment and the use of clarithromycin for treating patients with rifampicin-resistant leprosy. Risk of bias (RoB) in randomized clinical trials was assessed by the RoB 2 tool and that in non-randomized clinical trials was assessed by the ROBINS-I tool; and the certainty of the evidence was assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. A meta-analysis of dichotomous outcomes was performed.

Results

For clofazimine, four studies were included. Cure and relapse rates were not different with the addition of clofazimine to PB leprosy treatment and demonstrated very low certainty of evidence. For clarithromycin, six studies were included. Considerable heterogeneity resulted from the difference between comparators, and studies showed no difference in the assessed outcomes with the addition of clarithromycin to rifampicin-resistant leprosy treatment. Mild adverse events were reported for both drugs but did not significantly impact treatment.

Discussion

The effectiveness of both drugs still needs to be determined. Adding clofazimine to PB leprosy treatment may reduce the repercussions of an incorrect operational classification with no apparent relevant side effects.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022308272; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022308260, identifier: CRD42022308272; CRD42022308260.

Safety of Antimicrobials for Postexposure Prophylaxis and Treatment of Anthrax: A Review

BACKGROUND

Bacillus anthracis, the causative agent for anthrax, poses a potential bioterrorism threat and is capable of causing mass morbidity and mortality. Antimicrobials are the mainstay of postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) and treatment of anthrax. We conducted this safety review of 24 select antimicrobials to identify any new or emerging serious or severe adverse events (AEs) to help inform their risk-benefit evaluation for anthrax.

METHODS

Twenty-four antimicrobials were included in this review. Tertiary data sources (e.g. Lactmed, Micromedex, REPROTOX) were reviewed for safety information and summarized to evaluate the known risks of these antimicrobials. PubMed was also searched for published safety information on serious or severe AEs with these antimicrobials; AEs that met inclusion criteria were abstracted and reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 1316 articles were reviewed. No consistent observations or patterns were observed among the abstracted AEs for a given antimicrobial; therefore, the literature review did not reveal evidence of new or emerging AEs that would add to the risk-benefit profiles already known from tertiary data sources.

CONCLUSIONS

The reviewed antimicrobials have known and/or potential serious or severe risks that may influence selection when recommending an antimicrobial for PEP or treatment of anthrax. Given the high fatality rate of anthrax, the risk-benefit evaluation favors use of these antimicrobials for anthrax. The potential risks of antimicrobials should not preclude these reviewed antimicrobials from clinical consideration for anthrax but rather guide appropriate antimicrobial selection and prioritization across different patient populations with risk mitigation measures as warranted.