Appraisal of the cardiovascular risks of azithromycin: an observational analysis

Association Between the Use of Antibiotics, Antivirals, and Hospitalizations Among Patients With Laboratory-confirmed Influenza

BACKGROUND

Clinicians may prescribe antibiotics to influenza patients at high risk for bacterial complications. We explored the association between antibiotics, antivirals, and hospitalization among people with influenza.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients with confirmed influenza with encounters during January 2011-January 2019 was conducted using data from the Veterans Affairs Informatics and Computing Infrastructure (VINCI). We compared inpatient hospitalizations (all-cause and respiratory) within 30 days of influenza diagnosis between 4 patient cohorts: (1) no treatment (n = 4228); (2) antibiotic only (n = 671); (3) antiviral only (n = 6492); and (4) antibiotic plus antiviral (n = 1415). We estimated relative risk for hospitalization using Poisson generalized linear model and robust standard errors.

RESULTS

Among 12 806 influenza cases, most were white men (mean age, 57-60 years). Those with antivirals only, antibiotic plus antiviral, and antibiotics only all had a statistically significant lower risk of all-cause and respiratory hospitalization compared to those without treatment. Comparing the antibiotic plus antiviral cohort to those who were prescribed an antiviral alone, there was a 47% lower risk for respiratory hospitalization (relative risk, 0.53 [95% confidence interval, .31-.94]), and no other statistical differences were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Those prescribed an antiviral, antibiotic, or both had a lower risk of hospitalization within 30 days compared to those without therapy. Furthermore, intervention with both an antibiotic and antiviral had a lower risk of respiratory hospitalization within 30 days compared to those with an antiviral alone. Importantly, the absolute magnitude of decreased risk with antibiotic plus antiviral therapy is small and must be interpreted within the context of the overall risk of antibiotic usage.

Clarithromycin use and the risk of mortality and cardiovascular events: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Although studies reported increased cardiovascular (CV) risks in patients treated with macrolides, the risks remain controversial among clarithromycin (CLR) users. We aimed to summarize the association between CLR use and the risks of mortality and CV events.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies with population exposed to CLR published until December 31^st, 2018. These studies reported either all-cause mortality (primary outcome) or CV adverse events (secondary outcomes) based on multivariate models. Effect measures were synthesized by study design and follow-up duration (long-term, ≥ 1 year; short-term, ≤ 3 months; and immediate, ≤ 2 weeks). This study has been registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42018089605).

Results

This meta-analysis included 13 studies (3 RCTs and 10 observational studies) and 8,351,815 subjects (1,124,672 cases and 7,227,143 controls). Overall, CLR use was not associated with increased long-term all-cause mortality (pooled rate ratio RR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.91–1.32), either among patients with or without comorbidities of cardiovascular diseases. Comparing CLR users to placebo, there is no additional risks of cardiac mortality (pooled RR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.53–2.01), acute myocardial infarction (pooled RR = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.98–1.68), and arrhythmia (pooled RR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.62–1.32).

Conclusions

Our findings suggested no significant association between CLR use and subsequent long-term all-cause mortality, regardless having comorbidity of cardiovascular diseases or not. Further RCTs investigating the short-term CV risks of CLR use compared to alternative antibiotics are warranted, particularly in high-risk populations.

Ocular Chlamydia trachomatis infection: elimination with mass drug administration

INTRODUCTION

Ocular Chlamydia trachomatis infection, the causative agent for trachoma, is responsible for 1.9 million cases of visual loss worldwide. Mass Drug Administration (MDA) with azithromycin to entire trachoma-endemic districts is part of the World Health Organization's public health strategy for trachoma elimination. Areas covered: Background on C. trachomatis and the epidemiology of trachoma are presented, followed by a review of the antibiotics for treatment and the need for a public health approach to trachoma elimination. The effectiveness of mass drug administration is presented, concluding with challenges to trachoma elimination in the future. Expert opinion: MDA using azithromycin is a key component of the public health strategy for trachoma elimination. With high coverage in children, there is good evidence that MDA drops the community pool of infection. There are challenges to trachoma elimination by the year 2020, and the drug donation program for country MDAs will be integral to ongoing efforts.

Azithromycin or erythromycin? Macrolides for non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis in adults: A systematic review and adjusted indirect treatment comparison

Non-cystic fibrosis (non-CF) bronchiectasis is a condition characterized by an airway inflammatory response to bacterial pathogens. Frequent exacerbations have a major influence on the quality of life. Macrolide antibiotics have not only antibacterial but also immune-regulation effects. It is proved that macrolides have a benefit in preventing exacerbations. However, it is still uncertain whether azithromycin or erythromycin is more effective and safe. The purpose of this study was to answer the following question: Which kind of macrolide antibiotic is more effective and safe in preventing non-CF bronchiectasis exacerbation? We conducted a systematic review to identify randomized clinical trials published up to May 2017 that reported on macrolides for non-CF bronchiectasis and an adjusted indirect treatment comparison (AITC) between macrolides to evaluate their efficacy and safety. The direct comparison meta-analysis found that macrolides decreased the rate of exacerbation of non-CF bronchiectasis (risk ratio (RR) = 0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36-0.55) with heterogeneity ( I2 = 63.7%, p = 0.064). The AITC showed that azithromycin had a significantly lower bronchiectasis exacerbation rate than erythromycin (RR = 0.35; 95% CI: 0.403-0.947). Azithromycin increased the risk of diarrhea and abnormal pain. This meta-analysis suggested that long-term treatment with macrolides significantly reduced the incidence of non-CF bronchiectasis exacerbation. Moreover, azithromycin is more efficient than roxithromycin and erythromycin in preventing exacerbation.