Truenat MTB assays for pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (diagnostic). The objectives are as follows:

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of Truenat assays (MTB, MTB Plus, and MTB RIF Dx) for detecting pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults with presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis.

Anthelmintic drugs for treating ascariasis

BACKGROUND

Ascaris lumbricoides is a common infection, and mainly affects children living in low-income areas. Water and sanitation improvement, health education, and drug treatment may help break the cycle of transmission, and effective drugs will reduce morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of anthelmintic drugs (albendazole, mebendazole, ivermectin) for treating people with Ascaris infection.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, three other databases, and reference lists of included studies, without language restrictions, up to 4 July 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) that compared albendazole, mebendazole, and ivermectin in children and adults with confirmed Ascaris infection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data from the included trials. A third review author checked the quality of data extraction. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' assessment tool to determine the risk of bias in included trials. We used risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to compare dichotomous outcomes in treatment and control groups. We used the fixed-effect model for studies with low heterogeneity and the random-effects model for studies with moderate to high heterogeneity. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the control rate average to provide illustrative cure rates in the comparison groups.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 30 parallel-group RCTs, which enrolled 6442 participants from 17 countries across Africa, Asia, Central America and the Caribbean, and South America. Participants were from 28 days to 82 years of age, recruited from school, communities, and health facilities. Twenty studies were funded or co-funded by manufacturers, while 10 studies were independent of manufacturer funding. Twenty-two trials had a high risk of bias for one or two domains (blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting). Single dose of albendazole (four trials), mebendazole (three trials) or ivermectin (one trial) was compared to placebo. Parasitological cure at 14 to 60 days was high in all the studies (illustrative cure of 93.0% in the anthelmintic group and 16.1% in the placebo group; RR 6.29, 95% CI 3.91 to 10.12; 8 trials, 1578 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Single dose of albendazole is as effective as multiple doses of albendazole (illustrative cure of 93.2% with single dose, 94.3% with multiple doses; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.05; 3 trials, 307 participants; high-certainty evidence); or as single dose of mebendazole (illustrative cure of 98.0% with albendazole, 96.9% with mebendazole; RR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.02; 6 trials, 2131 participants; high-certainty evidence). Studies did not detect a difference between a single dose of albendazole and a single dose of ivermectin (cure rates of 87.8% with albendazole, 90.2% with ivermectin; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.08; 3 trials, 519 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Across all the studies, failure after single dose of albendazole ranged from 0.0% to 30.3%, mebendazole from 0.0% to 22.2%, and ivermectin from 0.0% to 21.6%. The egg reduction rate (ERR) measured up to 60 days after the treatment was high in all treated groups, regardless of the anthelmintic used (range 96% to 100%). It was not possible to evaluate parasitological cure by classes of infection intensity. No included trials reported complication or serious adverse events. Other adverse events were apparently similar among the compared anthelmintic groups (moderate- to low-certainty evidence). The most commonly reported other adverse events were nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhoea, headache, and fever.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Single-dose of albendazole, mebendazole, and ivermectin all appeared effective against Ascaris lumbricoides infection, yielding high parasitological cure and large reductions in eggs excreted, with no differences detected between them. The drugs appear to be safe to treat children and adults with confirmed Ascaris infection. There is little to choose between drugs and regimens in terms of cure or adverse events.

Racecadotril for acute diarrhoea in children

BACKGROUND

Acute diarrhoea is a leading cause of death for children under five years of age. Most deaths are caused by excessive fluid and electrolyte losses. Racecadotril is an anti-secretory drug that has been used for acute diarrhoea in children as an adjunct to oral rehydration therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of racecadotril for treating acute diarrhoea in children under five years of age.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, published in the Cochrane Library Issue 3, March 2019); MEDLINE; Embase; LILACS; ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), up to 4 March 2019, for clinical trials regardless of publication language or status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared racecadotril to placebo or no intervention in addition to standard care (oral rehydration therapy) in children under five with acute diarrhoea. The primary outcomes were failure of oral rehydration, duration of diarrhoea, and number of stools. The secondary outcomes were stool output, length of the hospital stay, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility, extracted the data and assessed risk of bias. We presented dichotomous data with risk ratios (RR) and continuous data with mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD). Where appropriate, we combined trials with meta-analysis and used a random-effects model if there was significant heterogeneity (I² ≥ 50%). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven RCTs with a total of 1140 participants met the inclusion criteria. The trials were carried out on children aged three months to five years, in outpatient and inpatient facilities from France, Spain, Peru, India, Kenya, and Ecuador. The efficacy and safety of racecadotril were compared to placebo or no treatment. Racecadotril may reduce the risk of rehydration failure (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.23; 2 RCTs, 192 participants; low-certainty evidence). Data on duration of diarrhoea, number of stools in the first 48 hours are insufficient to reach a conclusion; stool output in the first 48 hours appears to be lower in the two trials measuring this, although the data is not combinable. Length of hospital stay was similar in two studies measuring this, and overall there was no evidence that racecadotril increased overall rate of adverse events (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.22; 5 RCTs, 688 participants; low-certainty evidence). Most adverse events in the racecadotril group were mild or moderate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Racecadotril seems to be a safe drug but has little benefit in improving acute diarrhoea in children under five years of age. Current evidence does not support routine use of racecadotril in management of acute diarrhoea in children under five outside of the context of placebo controlled RCTs. 18 December 2019 Up to date All studies incorporated from most recent search All studies identified during the most recent search (4 Mar, 2019) have been incorporated in the review, and no ongoing studies identified.

Shortened treatment regimens versus the standard regimen for drug-sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis

BACKGROUND

Tuberculosis causes more deaths than any other infectious disease worldwide, with pulmonary tuberculosis being the most common form. Standard first-line treatment for drug-sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis for six months comprises isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (HRZE) for two months, followed by HRE (in areas of high TB drug resistance) or HR, given over a four-month continuation phase. Many people do not complete this full course. Shortened treatment regimens that are equally effective and safe could improve treatment success.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of shortened treatment regimens versus the standard six-month treatment regimen for individuals with drug-sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 10 July 2019: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (PubMed); Embase; the Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS); Science Citation Index-Expanded; Indian Medlars Center; and the South Asian Database of Controlled Clinical Trials. We also searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Clinical Trials Unit of the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, the UK Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, and the Clinical Trials Registry India for ongoing trials. We checked the reference lists of identified articles to find additional relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs that compared shorter-duration regimens (less than six months) versus the standard six-month regimen for people of all ages, irrespective of HIV status, who were newly diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis by positive sputum culture or GeneXpert, and with presumed or proven drug-sensitive tuberculosis. The primary outcome of interest was relapse within two years of completion of anti-tuberculosis treatment (ATT).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias for the included trials. For dichotomous outcomes, we used risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). When appropriate, we pooled data from the included trials in meta-analyses. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five randomized trials that compared fluoroquinolone-containing four-month ATT regimens versus standard six-month ATT regimens and recruited 5825 adults with newly diagnosed drug-sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis from 14 countries with high tuberculosis transmission in Asia, Africa, and Latin Ameria. Three were multi-country trials that included a total of 572 HIV-positive people. These trials excluded children, pregnant or lactating women, people with serious comorbid conditions, and those with diabetes mellitus. Four trials had multiple treatment arms. Moxifloxacin replaced ethambutol in standard four-month, daily or thrice-weekly ATT regimens in two trials; moxifloxacin replaced isoniazid in four-month ATT regimens in two trials, was given daily in one trial, and was given with rifapentine instead of rifampicin daily for two months and twice weekly for two months in one trial. Moxifloxacin was added to standard ATT drugs for three to four months in one ongoing trial that reported interim results. Gatifloxacin replaced ethambutol in standard ATT regimens given daily or thrice weekly for four months in two trials. Follow-up ranged from 12 months to 24 months after treatment completion for the majority of participants. Moxifloxacin-containing four-month ATT regimens Moxifloxacin-containing four-month ATT regimens that replaced ethambutol or isoniazid probably increased the proportions who experienced relapse after successful treatment compared to standard ATT regimens (RR 3.56, 95% CI 2.37 to 5.37; 2265 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). For death from any cause, there was probably little or no difference between the two regimens (2760 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Treatment failure was rare, and there was probably little or no difference in proportions with treatment failure between ATT regimens (2282 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). None of the participants given moxifloxacin-containing regimens developed resistance to rifampicin, and these regimens may not increase the risk of acquired resistance (2282 participants, 3 trials; low-certainty evidence). Severe adverse events were probably little or no different with moxifloxacin-containing four-month regimens that replaced ethambutol or isoniazid, and with three- to four-month regimens that augmented standard ATT with moxifloxacin, when compared to standard six-month ATT regimens (3548 participants, 4 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Gatifloxacin-containing four-month ATT regimens Gatifloxacin-containing four-month ATT regimens that replaced ethambutol probably increased relapse compared to standard six-month ATT regimens in adults with drug-sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.84; 1633 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). The four-month regimen probably made little or no difference in death compared to the six-month regimen (1886 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Treatment failure was uncommon and was probably little or no different between the four-month and six-month regimens (1657 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Acquired resistance to isoniazid or rifampicin was not detected in those given the gatifloxacin-containing shortened ATT regimen, but we are uncertain whether acquired drug resistance is any different in the four- and six-month regimens (429 participants, 1 trial; very low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events were probably no different with either regimen (1993 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence to date does not support the use of shortened ATT regimens in adults with newly diagnosed drug-sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis. Four-month ATT regimens that replace ethambutol with moxifloxacin or gatifloxacin, or isoniazid with moxifloxacin, increase relapse substantially compared to standard six-month ATT regimens, although treatment success and serious adverse events are little or no different. The results of six large ongoing trials will help inform decisions on whether shortened ATT regimens can replace standard six-month ATT regimens. 9 December 2019 Up to date All studies incorporated from most recent search All eligible published studies found in the last search (10 Jul, 2019) were included.

Intermittent preventive treatment for malaria in infants

BACKGROUND

Intermittent preventive treatment could help prevent malaria in infants (IPTi) living in areas of moderate to high malaria transmission in sub-Saharan Africa. The World Health Organization (WHO) policy recommended IPTi in 2010, but its adoption in countries has been limited.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) with antimalarial drugs to prevent malaria in infants living in malaria-endemic areas.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources up to 3 December 2018: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (OVID), LILACS (Bireme), and reference lists of articles. We also searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) portal for ongoing trials up to 3 December 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared IPT to placebo or no intervention in infants (defined as young children aged between 1 to 12 months) in malaria-endemic areas.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was clinical malaria (fever plus asexual parasitaemia). Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, evaluated the risk of bias, and extracted data. We summarized dichotomous outcomes and count data using risk ratios (RR) and rate ratios respectively, and presented all measures with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We extracted protective efficacy values and their 95% CIs; when an included trial did not report this data, we calculated these values from the RR or rate ratio with its 95% CI. Where appropriate, we combined data in meta-analyses and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 trials that enrolled 19,098 infants; all were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa. Three trials were cluster-RCTs. IPTi with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) was evaluated in 10 trials from 1999 to 2013 (n = 15,256). Trials evaluating ACTs included dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (1 trial, 147 participants; year 2013), amodiaquine-artesunate (1 study, 684 participants; year 2008), and SP-artesunate (1 trial, 676 participants; year 2008). The earlier studies evaluated IPTi with SP, and were conducted in Tanzania (in 1999 and 2006), Mozambique (2004), Ghana (2004 to 2005), Gabon (2005), Kenya (2008), and Mali (2009). One trial evaluated IPTi with amodiaquine in Tanzania (2000). Later studies included three conducted in Kenya (2008), Tanzania (2008), and Uganda (2013), evaluating IPTi in multiple trial arms that included artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT). Although the effect size varied over time and between drugs, overall IPTi impacts on the incidence of clinical malaria overall, with a 27% reduction (rate ratio 0.73, 0.65 to 0.82; 10 studies, 10,602 participants). The effect of SP appeared to attenuate over time, with trials conducted after 2009 showing little or no effect of the intervention. IPTi with SP probably resulted in fewer episodes of clinical malaria (rate ratio 0.79, 0.74 to 0.85; 8 trials, 8774 participants, moderate-certainty evidence), anaemia (rate ratio 0.82, 0.68 to 0.98; 6 trials, 7438 participants, moderate-certainty evidence), parasitaemia (rate ratio 0.66, 0.56 to 0.79; 1 trial, 1200 participants, moderate-certainty evidence), and fewer hospital admissions (rate ratio 0.85, 0.78 to 0.93; 7 trials, 7486 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). IPTi with SP probably made little or no difference to all-cause mortality (risk ratio 0.93, 0.74 to 1.15; 9 trials, 14,588 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). Since 2009, IPTi trials have evaluated ACTs and indicate impact on clinical malaria and parasitaemia. A small trial of DHAP in 2013 shows substantive effects on clinical malaria (RR 0.42, 0.33 to 0.54; 1 trial, 147 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) and parasitaemia (moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In areas of sub-Saharan Africa, giving antimalarial drugs known to be effective against the malaria parasite at the time to infants as IPT probably reduces the risk of clinical malaria, anaemia, and hospital admission. Evidence from SP studies over a 19-year period shows declining efficacy, which may be due to increasing drug resistance. Combinations with ACTs appear promising as suitable alternatives for IPTi. 2 December 2019 Up to date All studies incorporated from most recent search All eligible published studies found in the last search (3 Dec, 2018) were included.

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus results in more diarrhoea-related deaths in children under five years than any other single agent in countries with high childhood mortality. It is also a common cause of diarrhoea-related hospital admissions in countries with low childhood mortality. Rotavirus vaccines that have been prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include a monovalent vaccine (RV1; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline), a pentavalent vaccine (RV5; RotaTeq, Merck), and, more recently, another monovalent vaccine (Rotavac, Bharat Biotech).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO (RV1, RV5, and Rotavac) for their efficacy and safety in children.

SEARCH METHODS

On 4 April 2018 we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, and BIOSIS. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in children comparing rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO versus placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risks of bias. One review author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analysis by country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 216,480 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed RV1, 15 trials (88,934 participants) RV5, and four trials (8432 participants) Rotavac. RV1 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 84% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.26; 43,779 participants, 7 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 41% of cases of severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.74; 28,051 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 63% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60; 6114 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.95; 5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.23; 36,002 participants, 9 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 37% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 39,091 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries RV1 probably prevents 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83; 13,768 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96; 2764 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.88 95% CI 0.83 to 0.93; high-certainty evidence). There were 30 cases of intussusception reported in 53,032 children after RV1 vaccination and 28 cases in 44,214 children after placebo or no intervention (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.05; low-certainty evidence). RV5 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV5 probably prevents 92% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.22; 4132 participants, 5 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.62; 5916 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.11; 1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.39; 7318 participants, 4 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 41% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; 5885 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98; 5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01; moderate to high-certainty evidence). There were 16 cases of intussusception in 43,629 children after RV5 vaccination and 20 cases in 41,866 children after placebo (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.45; low-certainty evidence). Rotavac Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low child mortality. In India, a high-mortality country, Rotavac probably prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.60; 6799 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); the trial did not report on severe all-cause diarrhoea at one-year follow-up. Children vaccinated and followed up for two years Rotavac probably prevents 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases in India (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60; 6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; 6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02; moderate-certainty evidence). There were eight cases of intussusception in 5764 children after Rotavac vaccination and three cases in 2818 children after placebo (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.35 to 5.02; very low-certainty evidence). There was insufficient evidence of an effect on mortality from any rotavirus vaccine (198,381 participants, 44 trials; low- to very low-certainty evidence), as the trials were not powered to detect an effect at this endpoint.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

RV1, RV5, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. Whilst the relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, there is a greater number of episodes prevented in these settings as the baseline risk is much higher. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events. 21 October 2019 Up to date All studies incorporated from most recent search All published trials found in the last search (4 Apr, 2018) were included and 15 ongoing studies are currently awaiting completion (see 'Characteristics of ongoing studies').

Lateral flow urine lipoarabinomannan assay for detecting active tuberculosis in people living with HIV

BACKGROUND

The lateral flow urine lipoarabinomannan (LF-LAM) assay Alere Determine™ TB LAM Ag is recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) to help detect active tuberculosis in HIV-positive people with severe HIV disease. This review update asks the question, "does new evidence justify the use of LF-LAM in a broader group of people?", and is part of the WHO process for updating guidance on the use of LF-LAM.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the accuracy of LF-LAM for the diagnosis of active tuberculosis among HIV-positive adults with signs and symptoms of tuberculosis (symptomatic participants) and among HIV-positive adults irrespective of signs and symptoms of tuberculosis (unselected participants not assessed for tuberculosis signs and symptoms).The proposed role for LF-LAM is as an add on to clinical judgement and with other tests to assist in diagnosing tuberculosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, Web of Science, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Scopus, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Registry, and ProQuest, without language restriction to 11 May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials, cross-sectional, and observational cohort studies that evaluated LF-LAM for active tuberculosis (pulmonary and extrapulmonary) in HIV-positive adults. We included studies that used the manufacturer's recommended threshold for test positivity, either the updated reference card with four bands (grade 1 of 4) or the corresponding prior reference card grade with five bands (grade 2 of 5). The reference standard was culture or nucleic acid amplification test from any body site (microbiological). We considered a higher quality reference standard to be one in which two or more specimen types were evaluated for tuberculosis diagnosis and a lower quality reference standard to be one in which only one specimen type was evaluated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data using a standardized form and REDCap electronic data capture tools. We appraised the quality of studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool and performed meta-analyses to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity using a bivariate random-effects model and a Bayesian approach. We analyzed studies enrolling strictly symptomatic participants separately from those enrolling unselected participants. We investigated pre-defined sources of heterogeneity including the influence of CD4 count and clinical setting on the accuracy estimates. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 unique studies (nine new studies and six studies from the original review that met the inclusion criteria): eight studies among symptomatic adults and seven studies among unselected adults. All studies were conducted in low- or middle-income countries. Risk of bias was high in the patient selection and reference standard domains, mainly because studies excluded participants unable to produce sputum and used a lower quality reference standard.Participants with tuberculosis symptomsLF-LAM pooled sensitivity (95% credible interval (CrI) ) was 42% (31% to 55%) (moderate-certainty evidence) and pooled specificity was 91% (85% to 95%) (very low-certainty evidence), (8 studies, 3449 participants, 37% with tuberculosis).For a population of 1000 people where 300 have microbiologically-confirmed tuberculosis, the utilization of LF-LAM would result in: 189 to be LF-LAM positive: of these, 63 (33%) would not have tuberculosis (false-positives); and 811 to be LF-LAM negative: of these, 174 (21%) would have tuberculosis (false-negatives).By clinical setting, pooled sensitivity was 52% (40% to 64%) among inpatients versus 29% (17% to 47%) among outpatients; and pooled specificity was 87% (78% to 93%) among inpatients versus 96% (91% to 99%) among outpatients. Stratified by CD4 cell count, pooled sensitivity increased, and specificity decreased with lower CD4 cell count.Unselected participants not assessed for signs and symptoms of tuberculosisLF-LAM pooled sensitivity was 35% (22% to 50%), (moderate-certainty evidence) and pooled specificity was 95% (89% to 96%), (low-certainty evidence), (7 studies, 3365 participants, 13% with tuberculosis).For a population of 1000 people where 100 have microbiologically-confirmed tuberculosis, the utilization of LF-LAM would result in: 80 to be LF-LAM positive: of these, 45 (56%) would not have tuberculosis (false-positives); and 920 to be LF-LAM negative: of these, 65 (7%) would have tuberculosis (false-negatives).By clinical setting, pooled sensitivity was 62% (41% to 83%) among inpatients versus 31% (18% to 47%) among outpatients; pooled specificity was 84% (48% to 96%) among inpatients versus 95% (87% to 99%) among outpatients. Stratified by CD4 cell count, pooled sensitivity increased, and specificity decreased with lower CD4 cell count.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that LF-LAM has a sensitivity of 42% to diagnose tuberculosis in HIV-positive individuals with tuberculosis symptoms and 35% in HIV-positive individuals not assessed for tuberculosis symptoms, consistent with findings reported previously. Regardless of how people are enrolled, sensitivity is higher in inpatients and those with lower CD4 cell, but a concomitant lower specificity. As a simple point-of-care test that does not depend upon sputum evaluation, LF-LAM may assist with the diagnosis of tuberculosis, particularly when a sputum specimen cannot be produced.

Abdominal ultrasound for diagnosing abdominal tuberculosis or disseminated tuberculosis with abdominal involvement in HIV-positive individuals

BACKGROUND

Accurate diagnosis of tuberculosis in people living with HIV is difficult. HIV-positive individuals have higher rates of extrapulmonary tuberculosis and the diagnosis of tuberculosis is often limited to imaging results. Ultrasound is such an imaging test that is widely used as a diagnostic tool (including point-of-care) in people suspected of having abdominal tuberculosis or disseminated tuberculosis with abdominal involvement.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of abdominal ultrasound for detecting abdominal tuberculosis or disseminated tuberculosis with abdominal involvement in HIV-positive individuals.To investigate potential sources of heterogeneity in test accuracy, including clinical setting, ultrasound training level, and type of reference standard.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for publications in any language up to 4 April 2019 in the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Conference Proceedings Citation Index- Science (CPCI-S), and also ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to identify ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included cross-sectional, cohort, and diagnostic case-control studies (prospective and retrospective) that compared the result of the index test (abdominal ultrasound) with one of the reference standards. We only included studies that allowed for extraction of numbers of true positives (TPs), true negatives (TNs), false positives (FPs), and false negatives (FNs). Participants were HIV-positive individuals aged 15 years and older. A higher-quality reference standard was the bacteriological confirmation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from any clinical specimen, and a lower-quality reference standard was a clinical diagnosis of tuberculosis without microbiological confirmation. We excluded genitourinary tuberculosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For each study, two review authors independently extracted data using a standardized form. We assessed the quality of studies using a tailored Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. We used the bivariate model to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity. When studies were few we simplified the bivariate model to separate univariate random-effects logistic regression models for sensitivity and specificity. We explored the influence of the type of reference standard on the accuracy estimates by conducting separate analyses for each type of reference standard. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies. The risks of bias and concern about applicability were often high or unclear in all domains. We included six studies in the main analyses of any abnormal finding on abdominal ultrasound; five studies reported only individual lesions.The six studies of any abnormal finding were cross-sectional or cohort studies. Five of these (83%) were conducted in low- or middle-income countries, and one in a high-income country. The proportion of participants on antiretroviral therapy was none (1 study), fewer then 50% (4 studies), more than 50% (1 study), and not reported (5 studies). The first main analysis, studies using a higher-quality reference standard (bacteriological confirmation), had a pooled sensitivity of 63% (95% confidence interval (CI) 43% to 79%; 5 studies, 368 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and a pooled specificity of 68% (95% CI 42% to 87%; 5 studies, 511 participants; very low-certainty evidence). If the results were to be applied to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 people with HIV where 200 (20%) have tuberculosis then:- About 382 individuals would have an ultrasound result indicating tuberculosis; of these, 256 (67%) would be incorrectly classified as having tuberculosis (false positives).- Of the 618 individuals with a result indicating that tuberculosis is not present, 74 (12%) would be incorrectly classified as not having tuberculosis (false negatives).In the second main analysis involving studies using a lower-quality reference standard (clinical diagnosis), the pooled sensitivity was 68% (95% CI 45% to 85%; 4 studies, 195 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and the pooled specificity was 73% (95% CI 41% to 91%; 4 studies, 202 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In HIV-positive individuals thought to have abdominal tuberculosis or disseminated tuberculosis with abdominal involvement, abdominal ultrasound appears to have 63% sensitivity and 68% specificity when tuberculosis was bacteriologically confirmed. These estimates are based on data that is limited, varied, and low-certainty.The low sensitivity of abdominal ultrasound means clinicians should not use a negative test result to rule out the disease, but rather consider the result in combination with other diagnostic strategies (including clinical signs, chest x-ray, lateral flow urine lipoarabinomannan assay (LF-LAM), and Xpert MTB/RIF). Research incorporating the test into tuberculosis diagnostic algorithms will help in delineating more precisely its value in diagnosing abdominal tuberculosis or disseminated tuberculosis with abdominal involvement.

Interventions to improve disposal of child faeces for preventing diarrhoea and soil-transmitted helminth infection

BACKGROUND

Diarrhoea and soil-transmitted helminth (STH) infections represent a large disease burden worldwide, particularly in low-income countries. As the aetiological agents associated with diarrhoea and STHs are transmitted through faeces, the safe containment and management of human excreta has the potential to reduce exposure and disease. Child faeces may be an important source of exposure even among households with improved sanitation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions to improve the disposal of child faeces for preventing diarrhoea and STH infections.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and 10 other databases. We also searched relevant conference proceedings, contacted researchers, searched websites for organizations, and checked references from identified studies. The date of last search was 27 September 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled studies (NRS) that compared interventions aiming to improve the disposal of faeces of children aged below five years in order to decrease direct or indirect human contact with such faeces with no intervention or a different intervention in children and adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors selected eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We used meta-analyses to estimate pooled measures of effect where appropriate, or described the study results narratively. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-three studies covering more than 222,800 participants met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two studies were cluster RCTs, four were controlled before-and-after studies (CBA), and 37 were NRS (27 case-control studies (one that included seven study sites), three controlled cohort studies, and seven controlled cross-sectional studies). Most study sites (56/69) were in low- or lower middle-income settings. Among studies using experimental study designs, most interventions included child faeces disposal messages along with other health education messages or other water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) hardware and software components. Among observational studies, the main risk factors relevant to this review were safe disposal of faeces in the latrine or defecation of children under five years of age in a latrine.Education and hygiene promotion interventions, including child faeces disposal messages (no hardware provision)Four RCTs found that diarrhoea incidence was lower, reducing the risk by an estimated 30% in children under six years old (rate ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 0.86; 2 trials, low-certainty evidence). Diarrhoea prevalence measured in two other RCTs in children under five years of age was lower, but evidence was low-certainty (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; low-certainty evidence).Two controlled cohort studies that evaluated such an intervention in Bangladesh did not detect a difference on diarrhoea prevalence (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.28; very low-certainty evidence). Two controlled cross-sectional studies that evaluated the Health Extension Package in Ethiopia were associated with a lower two-week diarrhoea prevalence in 'model' households than in 'non-model households' (odds ratio (OR) 0.26, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.42; very low-certainty evidence).Programmes to end open defecation by all (termed community-led total sanitation (CLTS) interventions plus adaptations)Four RCTs measured diarrhoea prevalence and did not detect an effect in children under five years of age (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.07; moderate-certainty evidence). The analysis of two trials did not demonstrate an effect of the interventions on STH infection prevalence in children (pooled RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.65; low-certainty evidence).One controlled cross-sectional study compared the prevalence of STH infection in open defecation-free (ODF) villages that had received a CLTS intervention with control villages and reported a higher level of STH infection in the intervention villages (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.74 to 3.62; very low-certainty evidence).Sanitation hardware and behaviour change interventions, that included child faeces disposal hardware and messagingTwo RCTs had mixed results, with no overall effect on diarrhoea prevalence demonstrated in the pooled analysis (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.26; very low-certainty evidence).WASH hardware and education/behaviour change interventionsOne RCT did not demonstrate an effect on diarrhoea prevalence (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.41; very low-certainty evidence).Two CBAs reported that the intervention reduced diarrhoea incidence by about a quarter in children under five years of age, but evidence was very low-certainty (rate ratio 0.77, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.84). Another CBA reported that the intervention reduced the prevalence of STH in an intervention village compared to a control village, again with GRADE assessed at very low-certainty (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.73).Case-control studiesPooled results from case-control studies that presented data for child faeces disposal indicated that disposal of faeces in the latrine was associated with lower odds of diarrhoea among all ages (OR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.85; 23 comparisons; very low-certainty evidence). Pooled results from case-control studies that presented data for children defecating in the latrine indicated that children using the latrine was associated with lower odds of diarrhoea in all ages (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.90; 7 studies; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that the safe disposal of child faeces may be effective in preventing diarrhoea. However, the evidence is limited and of low certainty. The limited research on STH infections provides only low and very-low certainty evidence around effects, which means there is currently no reliable evidence that interventions to improve safe disposal of child faeces are effective in preventing such STH infections.While child faeces may represent a source of exposure to young children, interventions generally only address it as part of a broader sanitation initiative. There is a need for RCTs and other rigorous studies to assess the effectiveness and sustainability of different hardware and software interventions to improve the safe disposal of faeces of children of different age groups.

Public health deworming programmes for soil-transmitted helminths in children living in endemic areas

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends treating all school children at regular intervals with deworming drugs in areas where helminth infection is common. Global advocacy organizations claim routine deworming has substantive health and societal effects beyond the removal of worms. In this update of the 2015 edition we included six new trials, additional data from included trials, and addressed comments and criticisms.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the effects of public health programmes to regularly treat all children with deworming drugs on child growth, haemoglobin, cognition, school attendance, school performance, physical fitness, and mortality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; Embase; LILACS; the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT); reference lists; and registers of ongoing and completed trials up to 19 September 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared deworming drugs for soil-transmitted helminths (STHs) with placebo or no treatment in children aged 16 years or less, reporting on weight, height, haemoglobin, and formal tests of cognition. We also sought data on other measures of growth, school attendance, school performance, physical fitness, and mortality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion, risk of bias, and extracted data. We analysed continuous data using the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Where data were missing, we contacted trial authors. We stratified the analysis based on the background burden of STH infection. We used outcomes at time of longest follow-up. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 51 trials, including 10 cluster-RCTs, that met the inclusion criteria. One trial evaluating mortality included over one million children, and the remaining 50 trials included a total of 84,336 participants. Twenty-four trials were in populations categorized as high burden, including nine trials in children selected because they were helminth-stool positive; 18 with intermediate burden; and nine as low burden.First or single dose of deworming drugsFourteen trials reported on weight after a single dose of deworming drugs (4970 participants, 14 RCTs). The effects were variable. There was little or no effect in studies conducted in low and intermediate worm burden groups. In the high-burden group, there was little or no effect in most studies, except for a large effect detected from one study area in Kenya reported in two trials carried out over 30 years ago. These trials result in qualitative heterogeneity and uncertainty in the meta-analysis across all studies (I² statistic = 90%), with GRADE assessment assessed as very low-certainty, which means we do not know if a first dose or single dose of deworming impacts on weight.For height, most studies showed little or no effect after a single dose, with one of the two trials in Kenya from 30 years ago showing a large average difference (2621 participants, 10 trials, low-certainty evidence). Single dose probably had no effect on average haemoglobin (MD 0.10 g/dL, 95% CI 0.03 lower to 0.22 higher; 1252 participants, five trials, moderate-certainty evidence), or on average cognition (1596 participants, five trials, low-certainty evidence). The data are insufficient to know if there is an effect on school attendance and performance (304 participants, one trial, low-certainty evidence), or on physical fitness (280 participants, three trials, very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported on mortality.Multiple doses of deworming drugsThe effect of regularly treating children with deworming drugs given every three to six months on weight was reported in 18 trials, with follow-up times of between six months and three years; there was little or no effect on average weight in all but two trials, irrespective of worm prevalence-intensity. The two trials with large average weight gain included one in the high burden area in Kenya carried out over 30 years ago, and one study from India in a low prevalence area where subsequent studies in the same area did not show an effect. This heterogeneity causes uncertainty in any meta-analysis (I² = 78%). Post-hoc analysis excluding trials published prior to 2000 gave an estimate of average difference in weight gain of 0.02 kg (95%CI from 0.04 kg loss to 0.08 gain, I² = 0%). Thus we conclude that we do not know if repeated doses of deworming drugs impact on average weight, with a fewer older studies showing large gains, and studies since 2000 showing little or no average gain.Regular treatment probably had little or no effect on the following parameters: average height (MD 0.02 cm higher, 95% CI 0.09 lower to 0.13 cm higher; 13,700 participants, 13 trials, moderate-certainty evidence); average haemoglobin (MD 0.01 g/dL lower; 95% CI 0.05 g/dL lower to 0.07 g/dL higher; 5498 participants, nine trials, moderate-certainty evidence); formal tests of cognition (35,394 participants, 8 trials, moderate-certainty evidence); school performance (34,967 participants, four trials, moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence assessing an effect on school attendance is inconsistent, and at risk of bias (mean attendance 2% higher, 95% CI 5% lower to 8% higher; 20,650 participants, three trials, very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported on physical fitness. No effect was shown on mortality (1,005,135 participants, three trials, low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Public health programmes to regularly treat all children with deworming drugs do not appear to improve height, haemoglobin, cognition, school performance, or mortality. We do not know if there is an effect on school attendance, since the evidence is inconsistent and at risk of bias, and there is insufficient data on physical fitness. Studies conducted in two settings over 20 years ago showed large effects on weight gain, but this is not a finding in more recent, larger studies. We would caution against selecting only the evidence from these older studies as a rationale for contemporary mass treatment programmes as this ignores the recent studies that have not shown benefit.The conclusions of the 2015 edition have not changed in this update.

Contact tracing strategies in household and congregate environments to identify cases of tuberculosis in low- and moderate-incidence populations

BACKGROUND

Tuberculosis is an infectious bacterial disease that is spread via respiratory droplets from infected individuals to susceptible contacts. To eliminate this disease from low- and medium-incidence settings, people who are most likely to be infected (contacts) must be identified. Recently, study authors have examined alternate approaches to contact tracing methods that demonstrate improved detection and prioritization of contacts. The comparative benefit of these methods has not been established.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of novel methods of contact tracing versus current standard of care to identify latent and active cases in low- to moderate-incidence settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Web of Science, and CINAHL up to 15 July 2019. We also searched for clinical trials and examined reference lists and conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs of contact tracing strategies that included alternate approaches (other than standard practice).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed identified articles for eligibility and quality using prespecified criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

No trials met the inclusion criteria of this review. Several study authors described an alternate method for examining contacts and performing social network analysis but did not compare this with the current contact tracing approach.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This Cochrane Review highlights the lack of research in support of the current contact tracing method and the need for RCTs to compare new methods such as social network analysis to improve contact tracing processes.

Larviciding to prevent malaria transmission

BACKGROUND

Larviciding refers to the regular application of chemical or microbial insecticides to water bodies or water containers to kill the aquatic immature forms of the mosquito (the larvae and pupae).

OBJECTIVES

To summarize research evidence evaluating whether larviciding with chemical or microbial insecticides prevents malaria transmission.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; CAB Abstracts; LILACS; the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP); ClinicalTrials.gov; and the ISRCTN registry up to 6 June 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs), interrupted time series (ITS), randomized cross-over studies, non-randomized cross-over studies, and controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) that compared larviciding with no larviciding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently assessed trials for eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies (one cRCT, two CBAs, and one non-randomized cross-over design) met the inclusion criteria. All used ground application of larvicides (people hand-delivering larvicides); one evaluated chemical and three evaluated microbial agents. Studies were carried out in The Gambia, Tanzania, Kenya, and Sri Lanka. Three studies were conducted in areas where mosquito aquatic habitats were less extensive (< 1 km²), and one where habitats were more extensive (> 1 km²; a cross-over study from The Gambia).For aquatic habitats of less than 1 km², one cRCT randomized eight villages in Sri Lanka to evaluate chemical larviciding using insect growth regulator; and two CBA studies undertaken in Kenya and Tanzania evaluated microbial larvicides. In the cRCT, larviciding across all villages was associated with lower malaria incidence (rate ratio 0.24, 4649 participants, low-certainty evidence) and parasite prevalence (risk ratio (RR) 0.26, 5897 participants, low-certainty evidence) compared to no larviciding. The two CBA studies reported lower malaria prevalence during the intervention period (parasite prevalence RR 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 0.89; 70,902 participants; low-certainty evidence). The Kenyan study also reported a reduction in the incidence of new malaria cases (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.01; 720 participants; very low-certainty evidence).For aquatic habitats of more than 1 km², the non-randomized cross-over trial using microbial larvicides did not detect an effect for malaria incidence (RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.65; 4226 participants), or parasite prevalence (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.41 to 3.20; 3547 participants); both were very low-certainty evidence. The Gambia trial also reported the mean haemoglobin level, and there was no difference across the four comparisons (mean difference -0.13, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.13; 3586 participants).We were unable to summarize or pool entomological outcomes due to unreported and missing data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most controlled studies on larviciding have been performed with microbial agents. Ground larviciding for non-extensive larval habitats may have an effect on malaria transmission, and we do not know if there is an effect in large-scale aquatic habitats. We found no studies using larviciding application techniques that could cover large aquatic habitats, such as aerial spraying using aircraft.

Primaquine at alternative dosing schedules for preventing relapse in people with Plasmodium vivax malaria

BACKGROUND

Malaria caused by Plasmodium vivax requires treatment of the blood-stage infection and treatment of the hypnozoites that develop in the liver. This is a challenge to effective case management of P vivax malaria, as well as being a more general substantial impediment to malaria control. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a 14-day drug course with primaquine, an 8-aminoquinoline, at 0.25 mg/kg/day in most of the world (standard course), or 0.5 mg/kg/day in East Asia and Oceania (high-standard course). This long treatment course can be difficult to complete, and primaquine can cause dangerous haemolysis in individuals with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency, meaning that physicians may be reluctant to prescribe in areas where G6PD testing is not available. This Cochrane Review evaluated whether more patient-friendly alternative regimens are as efficacious as the standard regimen for radical cure ofP vivax malaria.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of alternative primaquine regimens for radical cure of P vivax malaria compared to the standard or high-standard 14 days of primaquine (0.25 or 0.5 mg/kg/day), as well as comparison of these two WHO-recommended regimens.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group (CIDG) Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE (PubMed); Embase (Ovid); and LILACS (BIREME) up to 17 December 2018. We also searched the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov, and checked the reference lists of all studies identified by the above methods.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adults and children with P vivax malaria using any regimen of either chloroquine or an artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) plus primaquine with either higher daily doses for 14 days, shorter regimens with the same total dose, or using weekly dosing regimens; compared with the usual standard regimens recommended by the WHO (0.25 or 0.5 mg/kg/day for 14 days), or a comparison of these two WHO-recommended regimens.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and quality, and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous data. We grouped efficacy data according to length of follow-up. We analysed safety data where this information was included.

MAIN RESULTS

High-standard 14-day course versus standard 14-day courseTwo RCTs compared the high-standard 14-day regimen with the standard 14-day regimen. People with G6PD deficiency and pregnant or lactating women were excluded. We do not know if there is any difference in P vivax recurrences at 6 months with 0.5 mg/kg/day primaquine therapy for 14 days compared to 0.25 mg/kg/day primaquine therapy for 14 days (with chloroquine: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.43, 639 participants, very low-certainty evidence; with chloroquine or an ACT: RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.17 to 7.09, 38 participants, very low-certainty evidence). No serious adverse events were reported. We do not know whether there is a difference in adverse events with the higher dosage (very low-certainty evidence).0.5 mg/kg/day primaquine for 7 days versus standard 14-day courseFive RCTs compared 0.5 mg/kg/day primaquine for 7 days with the standard 14-day course. There may be little or no difference in P vivax recurrences at 6 to 7 months when using the same total dose (0.5 mg/kg/day to 210 mg) over 7 days as compared to 14 days (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.39; 1211 participants; low-certainty evidence). No serious adverse events were reported. There may be little or no difference in the number of adverse events known to occur with primaquine between the primaquine shorter regimen as compared to the longer regimen (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.76; 1154 participants; low-certainty evidence). We do not know whether there is any difference in the frequency of anaemia or discontinuation of treatment between groups (very low-certainty evidence). Three trials excluded people with G6PD deficiency, and two did not provide this information. Pregnant and lactating women were either excluded or no details were provided regarding their inclusion or exclusion.0.75 mg/kg primaquine/week for 8 weeks versus high-standard course One RCT compared weekly primaquine with the high-standard 14-day course. G6PD-deficient patients were not randomized but were included in the weekly primaquine group. Only one G6PD-deficient participant was detected during the trial. We do not know whether weekly primaquine increases or decreases recurrences of P vivax compared to the 14-day regimen at 11 months' follow-up (RR 3.18, 95% CI 0.37 to 27.6; 122 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No serious adverse events and no episodes of anaemia were reported.Three other RCTs evaluated different alternative regimens and doses of primaquine, but one of these RCTs did not have results available, and two used regimens that have not been widely used and the evidence was of very low certainty.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although limited data were available, the analysis did not detect a difference in recurrence between the 7-day regimen and the standard 14-day regimen of 0.5 mg/kg/day primaquine, and no serious adverse events were reported in G6PD-normal participants taking 0.5 mg/kg/day of primaquine. This shorter regimen may be useful in G6PD-normal patients if there are treatment adherence concerns. Further large high-quality RCTs are needed, such as the IMPROV trial, with more standardised comparison regimens and longer follow-up to help resolve uncertainties.

Artemether for severe malaria

BACKGROUND

In 2011 the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended parenteral artesunate in preference to quinine as first-line treatment for people with severe malaria. Prior to this recommendation many countries, particularly in Africa, had begun to use artemether, an alternative artemisinin derivative. This Cochrane Review evaluates intramuscular artemether compared with both quinine and artesunate.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of intramuscular artemether versus any other parenteral medication in the treatment of severe malaria in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS, ISI Web of Science, conference proceedings, and reference lists of articles. We also searched the WHO International Clinical Trial Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) for ongoing trials up to 7 September 2018. We checked the reference lists of all studies identified by the search. We examined references listed in review articles and previously compiled bibliographies to look for eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intramuscular artemether with intravenous/intramuscular quinine or artesunate for treating severe malaria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was all-cause death. Two review authors independently screened each article by title and abstract, and examined potentially relevant studies for inclusion using an eligibility form. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. We summarized dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RRs) and continuous outcomes using mean differences (MDs), and have presented both measures with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Where appropriate, we combined data in meta-analyses and used the GRADE approach to summarize the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs, enrolling 2874 adults and children with severe malaria, carried out in Africa (12 trials) and in Asia (7 trials).Artemether versus quinineFor children, there is probably little or no difference in the risk of death between intramuscular artemether and quinine (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.21; 13 trials, 1659 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). Coma resolution time may be about five hours shorter with artemether (MD -5.45, 95% CI -7.90 to -3.00; six trials, 358 participants, low-certainty evidence). Artemether may make little difference to neurological sequelae (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.07; seven trials, 968 participants, low-certainty evidence). Compared to quinine, artemether probably shortens the parasite clearance time by about nine hours (MD -9.03, 95% CI -11.43 to -6.63; seven trials, 420 participants, moderate-certainty evidence), and may shorten the fever clearance time by about three hours (MD -3.73, 95% CI -6.55 to -0.92; eight trials, 457 participants, low-certainty evidence).For adults, treatment with intramuscular artemether probably results in fewer deaths than treatment with quinine (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.83; four trials, 716 participants, moderate-certainty evidence).Artemether versus artesunateArtemether and artesunate have not been directly compared in randomized trials in children.For adults, mortality is probably higher with intramuscular artemether (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.97; two trials, 494 participants, moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Artemether appears to be more effective than quinine in children and adults. Artemether compared to artesunate has not been extensively studied, but in adults it appears inferior. These findings are consistent with the WHO recommendations that artesunate is the drug of choice, but artemether is acceptable when artesunate is not available.

Indoor residual spraying for preventing malaria in communities using insecticide-treated nets

BACKGROUND

Insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) are used to control malaria vectors. Both strategies use insecticides to kill mosquitoes that bite and rest indoors. For ITNs, the World Health Organization (WHO) only recommended pyrethroids until 2018, but mosquito vectors are becoming resistant to this insecticide. For IRS, a range of insecticides are recommended. Adding IRS to ITNs may improve control, simply because two interventions may be better than one; it may improve malaria control where ITNs are failing due to pyrethroid resistance; and it may slow the emergence and spread of pyrethroid resistance.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the effect on malaria of additionally implementing IRS, using non-pyrethroid-like or pyrethroid-like insecticides, in communities currently using ITNs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; Embase; LILACS; the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform; ClinicalTrials.gov; and the ISRCTN registry up to 18 March 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs), interrupted time series (ITS), or controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) comparing IRS plus ITNs with ITNs alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility, analyzed risk of bias, and extracted data. We used risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We stratified by type of insecticide: 'non-pyrethroid-like', as this could improve malaria control better than adding IRS insecticides that have the same way of working as the insecticide on ITNs ('pyrethroid-like'). We used subgroup analysis of ITN usage in the trials to explore heterogeneity. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Six cRCTs (eight comparisons) met our inclusion criteria conducted since 2008 in sub-Saharan Africa. Malaria transmission in all sites was from mosquitoes belonging to the Anopheles gambiae s.l. complex species; two trials in Benin and Tanzania also reported the vector Anopheles funestus. Three trials used insecticide with targets different to pyrethroids (two used bendiocarb and one used pirimiphos-methyl); two trials used dichloro-diphenyl-trichlorethane (DDT), an insecticide with the same target as pyrethroids; and one trial used both types of insecticide (pyrethroid deltamethrin in the first year, switching to bendiocarb for the second-year). ITN usage was greater than 50% in three trials, and less than 50% in the remainder.Indoor residual spraying using 'non-pyrethroid-like' insecticides Adding IRS with a non-pyrethroid-like insecticide had mixed results. Overall, we do not know if the addition of IRS impacted on malaria incidence (rate ratio 0.93, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.86; 2 cRCTs, 566 child-years; very low-certainty evidence); it may have reduced malaria parasite prevalence (0.67, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.28; 5 comparisons from 4 cRCTs, 10,440 participants; low-certainty evidence); and it may have reduced the prevalence of anaemia (RR CI 0.46, 95% 0.18 to 1.20; 3 comparisons from 2 cRCTs, 2026 participants; low-certainty evidence). Three trials reported the impact on EIR, with variable results; overall, we do not know if IRS had any effect on the EIR in communities using ITNs (very low-certainty evidence). Trials also reported the adult mosquito density and the sporozoite rate, but we could not summarize or pool these entomological outcomes due to unreported data. ITN usage did not explain the variation in malaria outcomes between different studies. One trial reported no effect on malaria incidence or parasite prevalence in the first year, when the insecticide used for IRS had the same target as pyrethroids, but showed an effect on both outcomes in the second year, when the insecticide was replaced by one with a different target.Two trials measured the prevalence of pyrethroid resistance before and after IRS being introduced: no difference was detected, but these data are limited.Indoor residual spraying using 'pyrethroid-like' insecticidesAdding IRS using a pyrethroid-like insecticide did not appear to markedly alter malaria incidence (rate ratio 1.07, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.43; 2 cRCTs, 15,717 child-years; moderate-certainty evidence), parasite prevalence (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.44; 3 cRCTs, 10,820 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), or anaemia prevalence (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.40; 1 cRCT, 4186 participants; low-certainty evidence). Data on the entomological inoculation rate (EIR) were limited, and therefore we do not know if IRS had any effect on the EIR in communities using ITNs (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Four trials have evaluated adding IRS using 'non-pyrethroid-like' insecticides in communities using ITNs. Some of these trials showed effects, and others did not. Three trials have evaluated adding IRS using 'pyrethroid-like' insecticides in communities using ITNs, and these studies did not detect an additional effect of the IRS. Given the wide geographical variety of malaria endemicities, transmission patterns, and insecticide resistance, we need to be cautious with inferences to policy from the limited number of trials conducted to date, and to develop relevant further research to inform decisions.

MVA85A vaccine to enhance BCG for preventing tuberculosis

BACKGROUND

Tuberculosis causes more deaths than any other infectious disease globally. Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is the only available vaccine, but protection is incomplete and variable. The modified Vaccinia Ankara virus expressing antigen 85A (MVA85A) is a viral vector vaccine produced to prevent tuberculosis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess and summarize the effects of the MVA85A vaccine boosting BCG in humans.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE (PubMed); Embase (Ovid); and four other databases. We searched the WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov. All searches were run up to 10 May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We evaluated randomized controlled trials of MVA85A vaccine given with BCG in people regardless of age or HIV status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of trials, and extracted and analyzed data. The primary outcome was active tuberculosis disease. We summarized dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RR) and risk differences (RD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where appropriate, we combined data in meta-analyses. Where meta-analysis was inappropriate, we summarized results narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

The search identified six studies relating to four Phase 2 randomized controlled trials enrolling 3838 participants. Funding was by government bodies, charities, and philanthropic donors. Five studies included infants, one of them infants born to HIV-positive mothers. One study included adults living with HIV. All trials included authors from Oxford University who led the laboratory development of the vaccine. Participants received intradermal MVA85A after BCG in some studies, and before selective deferred BCG in HIV-exposed infants.The largest trial in 2797 African children was well conducted with low risk of bias for most parameters. Risk of bias was uncertain for selective reporting because there were no precise case definition endpoints for active tuberculosis published prior to the trial analysis.MVA85A added to BCG compared to BCG alone probably has no effect on the risk of developing microbiologically confirmed tuberculosis (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.62; 3439 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence), or the risk of starting on tuberculosis treatment (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.33; 3687 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). MVA85A probably has no effect on the risk of developing latent tuberculosis (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.21; 3831 participants, 4 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Vaccinating people with MVA85A in addition to BCG did not cause life-threatening serious adverse effects (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.00; 3692 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence). Vaccination with MVA85A is probably associated with an increased risk of local skin adverse effects (3187 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence), but not systemic adverse effect related to vaccination (144 participants, 1 trial; low-certainty evidence). This safety profile is consistent with Phase 1 studies which outlined a transient, superficial reaction local to the injection site and mild short-lived symptoms such as malaise and fever.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

MVA85A delivered by intradermal injection in addition to BCG is safe but not effective in reducing the risk of developing tuberculosis.

Linezolid for drug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis

BACKGROUND

Linezolid was recently re-classified as a Group A drug by the World Health Organization (WHO) for treatment of multi-drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB), suggesting that it should be included in the regimen for all patients unless contraindicated. Linezolid use carries a considerable risk of toxicity, with the optimal dose and duration remaining unclear. Current guidelines are mainly based on evidence from observational non-comparative studies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of linezolid when used as part of a second-line regimen for treating people with MDR and XDR pulmonary tuberculosis, and to assess the prevalence and severity of adverse events associated with linezolid use in this patient group.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Specialized Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; and LILACS up to 13 July 2018. We also checked article reference lists and contacted researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies in which some participants received linezolid, and others did not. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of linezolid for MDR and XDR pulmonary tuberculosis to evaluate efficacy outcomes. We added non-randomized cohort studies to evaluate adverse events.Primary outcomes were all-cause and tuberculosis-associated death, treatment failure, and cure. Secondary outcomes were treatment interrupted, treatment completed, and time to sputum culture conversion. We recorded frequency of all and serious adverse events, adverse events leading to drug discontinuation or dose reduction, and adverse events attributed to linezolid, particularly neuropathy, anaemia, and thrombocytopenia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (BS and DC) independently assessed the search results for eligibility and extracted data from included studies. All review authors assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies. We contacted study authors for clarification and additional data when necessary.We were unable to perform a meta-analysis as one of the RCTs adopted a study design where participants in the study group received linezolid immediately and participants in the control group received linezolid after two months, and therefore there were no comparable data from this trial. We deemed meta-analysis of non-randomized study data inappropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified three RCTs for inclusion. One of these studies had serious problems with allocation of the study drug and placebo, so we could not analyse data for intervention effect from it. The remaining two RCTs recruited 104 participants. One randomized 65 participants to receive linezolid or not, in addition to a background regimen; the other randomized 39 participants to addition of linezolid to a background regimen immediately, or after a delay of two months. We included 14 non-randomized cohort studies (two prospective, 12 retrospective), with a total of 1678 participants.Settings varied in terms of income and tuberculosis burden. One RCT and 7 out of 14 non-randomized studies commenced recruitment in or after 2009. All RCT participants and 38.7% of non-randomized participants were reported to have XDR-TB.Dosing and duration of linezolid in studies were variable and reported inconsistently. Daily doses ranged from 300 mg to 1200 mg; some studies had planned dose reduction for all participants after a set time, others had incompletely reported dose reductions for some participants, and most did not report numbers of participants receiving each dose. Mean or median duration of linezolid therapy was longer than 90 days in eight of the 14 non-randomized cohorts that reported this information.Duration of participant follow-up varied between RCTs. Only five out of 14 non-randomized studies reported follow-up duration.Both RCTs were at low risk of reporting bias and unclear risk of selection bias. One RCT was at high risk of performance and detection bias, and low risk for attrition bias, for all outcomes. The other RCT was at low risk of detection and attrition bias for the primary outcome, with unclear risk of detection and attrition bias for non-primary outcomes, and unclear risk of performance bias for all outcomes. Overall risk of bias for the non-randomized studies was critical for three studies, and serious for the remaining 11.One RCT reported higher cure (risk ratio (RR) 2.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13 to 4.90, very low-certainty evidence), lower failure (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.70, very low-certainty evidence), and higher sputum culture conversion at 24 months (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.30 to 3.40, very low-certainty evidence), amongst the linezolid-treated group than controls, with no differences in other primary and secondary outcomes. This study also found more anaemia (17/33 versus 2/32), nausea and vomiting, and neuropathy (14/33 versus 1/32) events amongst linezolid-receiving participants. Linezolid was discontinued early and permanently in two of 33 (6.1%) participants who received it.The other RCT reported higher sputum culture conversion four months after randomization (RR 2.26, 95% CI 1.19 to 4.28), amongst the group who received linezolid immediately compared to the group who had linezolid initiation delayed by two months. Linezolid was discontinued early and permanently in seven of 39 (17.9%) participants who received it.Linezolid discontinuation occurred in 22.6% (141/624; 11 studies), of participants in the non-randomized studies. Total, serious, and linezolid-attributed adverse events could not be summarized quantitatively or comparatively, due to incompleteness of data on duration of follow-up and numbers of participants experiencing events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found some evidence of efficacy of linezolid for drug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis from RCTs in participants with XDR-TB but adverse events and discontinuation of linezolid were common. Overall, there is a lack of comparative data on efficacy and safety. Serious risk of bias and heterogeneity in conducting and reporting non-randomized studies makes the existing, mostly retrospective, data difficult to interpret. Further prospective cohort studies or RCTs in high tuberculosis burden low-income and lower-middle-income countries would be useful to inform policymakers and clinicians of the efficacy and safety of linezolid as a component of drug-resistant TB treatment regimens.

Antiamoebic drugs for treating amoebic colitis

BACKGROUND

Infection with the protozoan Entamoeba histolytica is common in low- and middle-income countries, and up to 100,000 people with severe disease die every year. Adequate therapy for amoebic colitis is necessary to reduce illness, prevent development of complicated disease and extraintestinal spread, and decrease transmission.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate antiamoebic drugs for treating amoebic colitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the available literature up to 22 March 2018. We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, mRCT, and conference proceedings. We contacted individual researchers, organizations, and pharmaceutical companies, and we checked reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials of antiamoebic drugs given alone or in combination, compared with placebo or another antiamoebic drug, for treating adults and children with a diagnosis of amoebic colitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of trials and extracted and analysed the data. We calculated clinical and parasitological failure rates and rates of relapse and adverse events as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using a random-effects model. We determined statistical heterogeneity and explored possible sources of heterogeneity using subgroup analyses. We carried out sensitivity analysis by using trial quality to assess the robustness of reported results.

MAIN RESULTS

In total, 41 trials (4999 participants) met the inclusion criteria of this review. In this update, we added four trials to the 37 trials included in the first published review version. Thirty trials were published over 20 years ago. Only one trial used adequate methods of randomization and allocation concealment, was blinded, and analysed all randomized participants. Only one trial used an E histolytica stool antigen test, and two trials used amoebic culture.Tinidazole may be more effective than metronidazole for reducing clinical failure (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.51; 477 participants, eight trials; low-certainty evidence) and is probably associated with fewer adverse events (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.92; 477 participants, 8 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared with metronidazole, combination therapy may result in fewer parasitological failures (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.86; 720 participants, 3 trials; low-certainty evidence), but we are uncertain which combination is more effective than another. Evidence is insufficient to allow conclusions regarding the efficacy of other antiamoebic drugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with metronidazole, tinidazole may be more effective in reducing clinical failure and may be associated with fewer adverse events. Combination drug therapy may be more effective for reducing parasitological failure compared with metronidazole alone. However, these results are based mostly on small trials conducted over 20 years ago with a variety of poorly defined outcomes. Tests that detect E histolytica more accurately are needed, particularly in countries where concomitant infection with other bacteria and parasites is common.

Pyronaridine-artesunate for treating uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) to treat uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum (P falciparum) malaria. Concerns about artemisinin resistance have led to global initiatives to develop new partner drugs to protect artemisinin derivatives in ACT. Pyronaridine-artesunate is a novel ACT.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of pyronaridine-artesunate compared to alternative ACTs for treating people with uncomplicated P falciparum malaria, and to evaluate the safety of pyronaridine-artesunate and other pyronaridine treatments compared to alternative treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; and LILACS. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal, and the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry for ongoing or recently completed trials. The date of the last search was 8 May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Efficacy analysis: randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pyronaridine-artesunate for treating uncomplicated P falciparum malaria.Safety analysis: RCTs of pyronaridine-artesunate or pyronaridine for treating P falciparum or P vivax malaria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, two review authors independently re-extracted all data and assessed certainty of evidence. We meta-analysed data to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for treatment failures between comparisons, and for safety outcomes between and across comparisons.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 relevant studies. Seven studies were co-funded by Shin Poong Pharmaceuticals which manufactures the drug. Three studies were funded by government agencies.For efficacy analysis we identified five RCTs with 5711 participants. This included 4465 participants from 13 sites in Africa, and 1246 participants from five sites in Asia. It included 541 children aged less than five years.For polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-adjusted failures at day 28, pyronaridine-artesunate may have fewer failures compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.31; 4 RCTs, 3068 participants, low-certainty evidence), artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.77; 1 RCT, 1245 participants, low-certainty evidence), and mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.05; 1 RCT, 1117 participants, low-certainty evidence).For unadjusted failures at day 28, pyronaridine-artesunate may have fewer failures compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.58; 4 RCTs, 3149 participants, low-certainty evidence), and probably has fewer failures compared to artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.81; 1 RCT, 1257 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) and mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.78; 1 RCT, 1120 participants, moderate-certainty evidence).For PCR-adjusted failures at day 42, pyronaridine-artesunate may make little or no difference compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.51; 4 RCTs, 2575 participants, low-certainty evidence) and artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.20 to 4.83; 1 RCT, 1091 participants, low-certainty evidence), but may have higher failures than mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.57; 1 RCT, 1037 participants, low-certainty evidence). Overall, pyronaridine-artesunate had a PCR-adjusted treatment failure rate of less than 5%.For unadjusted failures at day 42, pyronaridine-artesunate may have fewer failures compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.82; 4 RCTs, 3080 participants, low-certainty evidence), may make little or no difference compared to mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.31; 1 RCT, 1059 participants, low-certainty evidence), and probably makes little or no difference compared to artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.23; 1 RCT, 1235 participants, moderate-certainty evidence).For the safety analysis of severe adverse events and liver function, we identified eight RCTs with 6614 participants comparing pyronaridine-artesunate to other antimalarials, four of which were not in the previous version of this review. A further two RCTs, comparing pyronaridine alone to other treatments, contributed to the synthesis of all adverse events.Raised alanine aminotransferase (ALT) greater than five times the upper limit of normal (> 5 x ULN) is more frequent with pyronaridine-artesunate compared to other antimalarials (RR 3.34, 95% CI 1.63 to 6.84; 8 RCTS, 6581 participants, high-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference for raised bilirubin > 2.5 x ULN between pyronaridine-artesunate and other antimalarials (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.18; 7 RCTs, 6384 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). There was one reported case in which raised ALT occurred with raised bilirubin, meeting criteria for moderate drug-induced liver injury. No study reported severe drug-induced liver injury. Electrocardiograph (ECG) abnormalities were less common with pyronaridine-artesunate compared to other antimalarials. We identified no other safety concerns.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Pyronaridine-artesunate was efficacious against uncomplicated P falciparum malaria, achieved a PCR-adjusted treatment failure rate of less than 5% at days 28 and 42, and may be at least as good as, or better than other marketed ACTs.Pyronaridine-artesunate increases the risk of episodes of raised ALT > 5 x ULN. This meets criteria for mild drug-induced liver injury. On one instance this was linked to raised bilirubin, indicating moderate drug-induced liver injury. No episodes of severe drug-induced liver injury were reported. The findings of this review cannot fully inform a risk-benefit assessment for an unselected population. Readers should remain aware of this uncertainty when considering use of pyronaridine-artesunate in patients with known or suspected pre-existing liver dysfunction, and when co-administering with other medications which may cause liver dysfunction.

Albendazole alone or in combination with microfilaricidal drugs for lymphatic filariasis

BACKGROUND

The Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis recommends mass treatment of albendazole co-administered with the microfilaricidal (antifilarial) drugs diethylcarbamazine (DEC) or ivermectin; and recommends albendazole alone in areas where loiasis is endemic.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of albendazole alone, and the effects of adding albendazole to DEC or ivermectin, in people and communities with lymphatic filariasis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (OVID), LILACS (BIREME), and reference lists of included trials. We also searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify ongoing trials. We performed all searches up to 15 January 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs that compared albendazole to placebo or no placebo, or compared albendazole combined with a microfilaricidal drug to a microfilaricidal drug alone, given to people known to have lymphatic filariasis or communities where lymphatic filariasis was known to be endemic. We sought data on measures of transmission potential (microfilariae (mf) prevalence and density); markers of adult worm infection (antigenaemia prevalence and density, and adult worm prevalence detected by ultrasound); and data on clinical disease and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed the trials, evaluated the risks of bias, and extracted data. The main analysis examined albendazole overall, whether given alone or added to a microfilaricidal drug. We used data collected from all randomized individuals at time of longest follow-up (up to 12 months) for meta-analysis of outcomes. We evaluated mf density data up to six months and at 12 months follow-up to ensure that we did not miss any subtle temporal effects. We conducted additional analyses for different follow-up periods and whether trials reported on individuals known to be infected or both infected and uninfected. We analysed dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We could not meta-analyse data on parasite density outcomes and we summarized them in tables. Where data were missing, we contacted trial authors. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 trials (12 individually-randomized and one small cluster-randomized trial) with 8713 participants in total. No trials evaluated population-level effects of albendazole in mass drug administration programmes. Seven trials enrolled people with a variety of inclusion criteria related to filarial infection, and six trials enrolled individuals from endemic areas. Outcomes were reported as end or change values. Mf and antigen density data were reported using the geometric mean, log mean and arithmetic mean, and reductions in density were variously calculated. Two trials discounted any increases in mf density in individuals at follow-up by setting any density increase to zero.For mf prevalence over two weeks to 12 months, albendazole alone or added to another microfilaricidal drug makes little or no difference (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.07; 5027 participants, 12 trials, high-certainty evidence). For mf density there is no trend, with some trials reporting a greater reduction in mf density with albendazole and others a greater reduction with the control group. For mf density up to six months and at 12 months, we do not know if albendazole has an effect (one to six months: 1216 participants, 10 trials, very low-certainty evidence; at 12 months: 1052 participants, 9 trials, very low-certainty evidence).For antigenaemia prevalence between six to 12 months, albendazole alone or added to another microfilaricidal drug makes little or no difference (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.12; 3774 participants, 7 trials, high-certainty evidence). For antigen density over six to 12 months, the trend shows little or no effect of albendazole; but we do not know if albendazole has an effect on antigen density (1374 participants, 5 trials, very low-certainty evidence). For adult worm prevalence detected by ultrasound at 12 months, albendazole added to a microfilaricidal drug may make little or no difference (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.86; 165 participants, 3 trials, low-certainty evidence).For people reporting adverse events, albendazole makes little or no difference (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.13; 2894 participants, 6 trials, high-certainty evidence).We also provide meta-analyses and GRADE tables by drug, as operationally this may be of interest: for albendazole versus placebo (4 trials, 1870 participants); for albendazole with DEC compared to DEC alone (8 trials, 3405 participants); and albendazole with ivermectin compared to ivermectin alone (4 trials, 3438 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is good evidence that albendazole makes little difference to clearing microfilaraemia or adult filarial worms in the 12 months post-treatment. This finding is consistent in trials evaluating albendazole alone, or added to DEC or ivermectin. Trials reporting mf density included small numbers of participants, calculated density data variously, and gave inconsistent results.The review raises questions over whether albendazole has any important contribution to the elimination of lymphatic filariasis. To inform policy for areas with loiasis where only albendazole can be used, it may be worth conducting placebo-controlled trials of albendazole alone.

Fly control to prevent diarrhoea in children

BACKGROUND

Diarrhoeal disease accounts for millions of child deaths every year. Although the role of flies as vectors of infectious diarrhoea has been established, fly control is not often mentioned as an approach to decrease childhood diarrhoea. Theoretically, fly control for decreasing diarrhoea incidence can be achieved by intervening at four different levels: reduction or elimination of fly breeding sites; reduction of sources that attract houseflies; prevention of contact between flies and disease-causing organisms; and protection of people, food, and food utensils from contact with flies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of various housefly control measures on the incidence of diarrhoea and its related morbidity and mortality in children under five years of age.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched electronic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and LILACS, from database inception to 24 May 2018. We also searched trial registries for relevant grey literature and ongoing trials. We checked the references of the identified studies and reviews. We did not apply any filters for language, publication status (published, unpublished, in press, and ongoing), or publication date.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and controlled before-and-after studies that studied the effect of fly control on diarrhoea in children under five years of age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted the data and independently assessed the risk of bias in the included study. We planned to contact study authors for additional information, where necessary. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one cluster-RCT (491 participants) conducted in Pakistan that evaluated insecticide spraying in the first two years and baited fly traps in the third year. Insecticide spraying reduced the fly population (house index) in the intervention group during the four months of the year when both flies and cases of diarrhoea were more common, but not at other times. On average, this was associated with a reduction in the incidence of diarrhoea in the first year (illustrative mean episodes per child-year in the intervention group was 6.3 while in the control group was 7.1) and second year of the intervention (illustrative mean episodes per child‒year in the intervention group was 4.4 while in the control group was 6.5; rate ratio (RaR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 0.89, low-certainty evidence). In the third year of the intervention, the baited fly traps did not demonstrate an effect on the fly population or on diarrhoea incidence (RaR 1.15, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.47, low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The trial, conducted in a setting where there were clear seasonal peaks in fly numbers and associated diarrhoea, shows insecticide spraying may reduce diarrhoea in children. Further research on whether this finding is applicable to other setting is required, as well as work on other fly control methods, their effects, feasibility, costs, and acceptability.

Piperonyl butoxide (PBO) combined with pyrethroids in insecticide-treated nets to prevent malaria in Africa

BACKGROUND

Public health strategies that target mosquito vectors, particularly pyrethroid long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs), have been largely responsible for the substantial reduction in the number of people in Africa developing malaria. The spread of insecticide resistance in Anopheles mosquitoes threatens these impacts. One way to control insecticide-resistant populations is by using insecticide synergists. Piperonyl butoxide (PBO) is a synergist that inhibits specific metabolic enzymes within mosquitoes and has been incorporated into pyrethroid-LLINs to form pyrethroid-PBO nets. Pyrethroid-PBO nets are currently produced by four LLIN manufacturers and, following a recommendation from the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2017, are being included in distribution campaigns in countries. This review examines epidemiological and entomological evidence on whether the addition of PBO to LLINs improves their efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

1. Evaluate whether adding PBO to pyrethroid LLINs increases the epidemiological and entomological effectiveness of the nets.2. Compare the effects of pyrethroid-PBO nets currently in commercial development or on the market with their non-PBO equivalent in relation to:a. malaria infection (prevalence or incidence);b. entomological outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group (CIDG) Specialized Register; CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CAB Abstracts, and two clinical trial registers (ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) up to 24 August 2018. We contacted organizations for unpublished data. We checked the reference lists of trials identified by the above methods.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included laboratory trials, experimental hut trials, village trials, and randomized clinical trials with mosquitoes from the Anopheles gambiae complex or Anopheles funestus group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed each trial for eligibility, extracted data, and determined the risk of bias for included trials. We resolved disagreements through discussion with a third review author. We analysed the data using Review Manager 5 and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen trials met the inclusion criteria: two laboratory trials, eight experimental hut trials, and five cluster-randomized controlled village trials.One village trial examined the effect of pyrethroid-PBO nets on malaria infection prevalence in an area with highly pyrethroid-resistant mosquitoes. The latest endpoint at 21 months post-intervention showed that malaria prevalence probably decreased in the intervention arm (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.80; 1 trial, 1 comparison, moderate-certainty evidence).In highly pyrethroid-resistant areas (< 30% mosquito mortality), in comparisons of unwashed pyrethroid-PBO nets to unwashed standard-LLINs, PBO nets resulted in higher mosquito mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.84, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.11; 14,620 mosquitoes, 5 trials, 9 comparisons, high-certainty evidence) and lower blood feeding success (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.71; 14,000 mosquitoes, 4 trials, 8 comparisons, high-certainty evidence). However, in comparisons of washed pyrethroid-PBO nets to washed LLINs we do not know if PBO nets have a greater effect on mosquito mortality (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.63; 10,268 mosquitoes, 4 trials, 5 comparisons, very low-certainty evidence), although the washed pyrethroid-PBO nets do decrease blood feeding success compared to standard-LLINs (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.92; 9674 mosquitoes, 3 trials, 4 comparisons, high-certainty evidence).In areas where pyrethroid resistance is considered moderate (31% to 60% mosquito mortality), there may be little or no difference in effects of unwashed pyrethroid-PBO nets compared to unwashed standard-LLINs on mosquito mortality (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.54; 242 mosquitoes, 1 trial, 1 comparison, low-certainty evidence), and there may be little or no difference in the effects on blood feeding success (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.13; 242 mosquitoes, 1 trial, 1 comparison, low-certainty evidence). The same pattern is apparent for washed pyrethroid-PBO nets compared to washed standard-LLINs (mortality: RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.54; 329 mosquitoes, 1 trial, 1 comparison, low-certainty evidence; blood feeding success: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.13; 329 mosquitoes, 1 trial, 1 comparison, low-certainty evidence).In areas where pyrethroid resistance is low (61% to 90% mosquito mortality), there is probably little or no difference in the effect of unwashed pyrethroid-PBO nets compared to unwashed standard-LLINs on mosquito mortality (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.16; 708 mosquitoes, 1 trial, 2 comparisons, moderate-certainty evidence), but there is no evidence for an effect on blood feeding success (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.06 to 7.37; 708 mosquitoes, 1 trial, 2 comparisons, very low-certainty evidence). For washed pyrethroid-PBO nets compared to washed standard-LLINs we do not know if there is any difference in mosquito mortality (RR 1.16, 96% CI 0.83 to 1.63; 878 mosquitoes, 1 trial, 2 comparisons, very low-certainty evidence), but blood feeding may decrease (RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.54; 878 mosquitoes, 1 trial, 2 comparisons, low-certainty evidence).In areas were mosquito populations are susceptible to insecticides (> 90% mosquito mortality), there may be little or no difference in the effect of unwashed pyrethroid-PBO nets compared to unwashed standard-LLINs on mosquito mortality (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.26; 2791 mosquitoes, 2 trials, 2 comparisons, low-certainty evidence). This is similar for washed nets (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.25; 2644 mosquitoes, 2 trials, 2 comparisons, low-certainty evidence). We do not know if unwashed pyrethroid-PBO nets have any effect on blood feeding success of susceptible mosquitoes (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.32; 2791 mosquitoes, 2 trials, 2 comparisons, very low-certainty evidence). The same applies to washed nets (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.04; 2644 mosquitoes, 2 trials, 2 comparisons, low-certainty evidence).In village trials comparing pyrethroid-PBO nets to LLINs, there was no difference in sporozoite rate (4 trials, 5 comparison) and mosquito parity (3 trials, 4 comparisons).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In areas of high insecticide resistance, pyrethroid-PBO nets reduce mosquito mortality and blood feeding rates, and results from a single clinical trial demonstrate that this leads to lower malaria prevalence. Questions remain about the durability of PBO on nets, as the impact of pyrethroid-PBO LLINs on mosquito mortality was not sustained over 20 washes in experimental hut trials. There is little evidence to support higher entomological efficacy of pyrethroid-PBO nets in areas where the mosquitoes show lower levels of resistance to pyrethroids.

Mefloquine for preventing malaria in pregnant women

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization recommends intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine for malaria for all women who live in moderate to high malaria transmission areas in Africa. However, parasite resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine has been increasing steadily in some areas of the region. Moreover, HIV-infected women on cotrimoxazole prophylaxis cannot receive sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine because of potential drug interactions. Thus, there is an urgent need to identify alternative drugs for prevention of malaria in pregnancy. One such candidate is mefloquine.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of mefloquine for preventing malaria in pregnant women, specifically, to evaluate:• the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of mefloquine for preventing malaria in pregnant women; and• the impact of HIV status, gravidity, and use of insecticide-treated nets on the effects of mefloquine.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), the Malaria in Pregnancy Library, and two trial registers up to 31 January 2018. In addition, we checked references and contacted study authors to identify additional studies, unpublished data, confidential reports, and raw data from published trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing mefloquine IPT or mefloquine prophylaxis against placebo, no treatment, or an alternative drug regimen.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened all records identified by the search strategy, applied inclusion criteria, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We contacted trial authors to ask for additional information when required. Dichotomous outcomes were compared using risk ratios (RRs), count outcomes as incidence rate ratios (IRRs), and continuous outcomes using mean differences (MDs). We have presented all measures of effect with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the following main outcomes of analysis: maternal peripheral parasitaemia at delivery, clinical malaria episodes during pregnancy, placental malaria, maternal anaemia at delivery, low birth weight, spontaneous abortions and stillbirths, dizziness, and vomiting.

MAIN RESULTS

Six trials conducted between 1987 and 2013 from Thailand (1), Benin (3), Gabon (1), Tanzania (1), Mozambique (2), and Kenya (1) that included 8192 pregnant women met our inclusion criteria.Two trials (with 6350 HIV-uninfected pregnant women) compared two IPTp doses of mefloquine with two IPTp doses of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. Two other trials involving 1363 HIV-infected women compared three IPTp doses of mefloquine plus cotrimoxazole with cotrimoxazole. One trial in 140 HIV-infected women compared three doses of IPTp-mefloquine with cotrimoxazole. Finally, one trial enrolling 339 of unknown HIV status compared mefloquine prophylaxis with placebo.Study participants included women of all gravidities and of all ages (four trials) or > 18 years (two trials). Gestational age at recruitment was > 20 weeks (one trial), between 16 and 28 weeks (three trials), or ≤ 28 weeks (two trials). Two of the six trials blinded participants and personnel, and only one had low risk of detection bias for safety outcomes.When compared with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, IPTp-mefloquine results in a 35% reduction in maternal peripheral parasitaemia at delivery (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.86; 5455 participants, 2 studies; high-certainty evidence) but may have little or no effect on placental malaria infections (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.86; 4668 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). Mefloquine results in little or no difference in the incidence of clinical malaria episodes during pregnancy (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.05, 2 studies; high-certainty evidence). Mefloquine decreased maternal anaemia at delivery (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.94; 5469 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Data show little or no difference in the proportions of low birth weight infants (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.17; 5641 participants, 2 studies; high-certainty evidence) and in stillbirth and spontaneous abortion rates (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.58; 6219 participants, 2 studies; I² statistic = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). IPTp-mefloquine increased drug-related vomiting (RR 4.76, 95% CI 4.13 to 5.49; 6272 participants, 2 studies; high-certainty evidence) and dizziness (RR 4.21, 95% CI 3.36 to 5.27; participants = 6272, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence).When compared with cotrimoxazole, IPTp-mefloquine plus cotrimoxazole probably results in a 48% reduction in maternal peripheral parasitaemia at delivery (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.93; 989 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and a 72% reduction in placental malaria (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.57; 977 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) but has little or no effect on the incidence of clinical malaria episodes during pregnancy (IRR 0.76, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.76, 1 study; high-certainty evidence) and probably no effect on maternal anaemia at delivery (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.20; 1197 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), low birth weight rates (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.60; 1220 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), and rates of spontaneous abortion and stillbirth (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.42 to 2.98; 1347 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). Mefloquine was associated with higher risks of drug-related vomiting (RR 7.95, 95% CI 4.79 to 13.18; 1055 participants, one study; high-certainty evidence) and dizziness (RR 3.94, 95% CI 2.85 to 5.46; 1055 participants, 1 study; high-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Mefloquine was more efficacious than sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in HIV-uninfected women or daily cotrimoxazole prophylaxis in HIV-infected pregnant women for prevention of malaria infection and was associated with lower risk of maternal anaemia, no adverse effects on pregnancy outcomes (such as stillbirths and abortions), and no effects on low birth weight and prematurity. However, the high proportion of mefloquine-related adverse events constitutes an important barrier to its effectiveness for malaria preventive treatment in pregnant women.

Antiretroviral resistance testing in HIV-positive people

BACKGROUND

Resistance to antiretroviral therapy (ART) among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) compromises treatment effectiveness, often leading to virological failure and mortality. Antiretroviral drug resistance tests may be used at the time of initiation of therapy, or when treatment failure occurs, to inform the choice of ART regimen. Resistance tests (genotypic or phenotypic) are widely used in high-income countries, but not in resource-limited settings. This systematic review summarizes the relative merits of resistance testing in treatment-naive and treatment-exposed people living with HIV.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of antiretroviral resistance testing (genotypic or phenotypic) in reducing mortality and morbidity in HIV-positive people.

SEARCH METHODS

We attempted to identify all relevant studies, regardless of language or publication status, through searches of electronic databases and conference proceedings up to 26 January 2018. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov to 26 January 2018. We searched Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) and the Web of Science for publications from 1996 to 26 January 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared resistance testing to no resistance testing in people with HIV irrespective of their exposure to ART.Primary outcomes of interest were mortality and virological failure. Secondary outcomes were change in mean CD4-T-lymphocyte count, clinical progression to AIDS, development of a second or new opportunistic infection, change in viral load, and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed each reference for prespecified inclusion criteria. Two review authors then independently extracted data from each included study using a standardized data extraction form. We analysed data on an intention-to-treat basis using a random-effects model. We performed subgroup analyses for the type of resistance test used (phenotypic or genotypic), use of expert advice to interpret resistance tests, and age (children and adolescents versus adults). We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven RCTs (published between 1999 and 2006), which included 2531 participants, met our inclusion criteria. All of these trials exclusively enrolled patients who had previous exposure to ART. We found no observational studies. Length of follow-up time, study settings, and types of resistance testing varied greatly. Follow-up ranged from 12 to 150 weeks. All studies were conducted in Europe, USA, or South America. Seven studies used genotypic testing, two used phenotypic testing, and two used both phenotypic and genotypic testing. Only one study was funded by a manufacturer of resistance tests.Resistance testing made little or no difference in mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 2.22; 5 trials, 1140 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may have slightly reduced the number of people with virological failure (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.87; 10 trials, 1728 participants; low-certainty evidence); and probably made little or no difference in change in CD4 cell count (mean difference (MD) -1.00 cells/mm³, 95% CI -12.49 to 10.50; 7 trials, 1349 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or progression to AIDS (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.29; 3 trials, 809 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Resistance testing made little or no difference in adverse events (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.55; 4 trials, 808 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably reduced viral load (MD -0.23, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.11; 10 trials, 1837 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported on development of new opportunistic infections or quality of life. We found no statistically significant heterogeneity for any outcomes, and the I² statistic value ranged from 0 to 25%. We found no subgroup effects for types of resistance testing (genotypic versus phenotypic), the addition of expert advice to interpretation of resistance tests, or age. Results for mortality were consistent when we compared studies at high or unclear risk of bias versus studies at low risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Resistance testing probably improved virological outcomes in people who have had virological failure in trials conducted 12 or more years ago. We found no evidence in treatment-naive people. Resistance testing did not demonstrate important patient benefits in terms of risk of death or progression to AIDS. The trials included very few participants from low- and middle-income countries.

Insecticide-treated nets for preventing malaria

BACKGROUND

A previous version of this Cochrane Review identified that insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) are effective at reducing child mortality, parasite prevalence, and uncomplicated and severe malaria episodes. Insecticide-treated nets have since become a core intervention for malaria control and have contributed greatly to the dramatic decline in disease incidence and malaria-related deaths seen since the turn of the millennium. However, this time period has also seen a rise in resistance to pyrethroids (the insecticide used in ITNs), raising questions over whether the evidence from trials conducted before resistance became widespread can be applied to estimate the impact of ITNs on malaria transmission today.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this review was to assess the impact of ITNs on mortality and malaria morbidity, incorporating any evidence published since the previous update into new and existing analyses, and assessing the certainty of the resulting evidence using GRADE.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) published in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the ISRCTN registry for new trials published since 2004 and up to 18 April 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs comparing bed nets or curtains treated with a synthetic pyrethroid insecticide at a minimum target impregnation dose recommended by the WHO with no nets or untreated nets.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author assessed the identified trials for eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. We compared intervention and control data using risk ratios (RRs), rate ratios, and mean differences, and presented all results with their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. We drew on evidence from a meta-analysis of entomological outcomes stratified by insecticide resistance from 2014 to inform the GRADE assessments.

MAIN RESULTS

Our updated search identified three new trials. A total of 23 trials met the inclusion criteria, enrolling more than 275,793 adults and children. The included studies were conducted between 1987 and 2001.ITN versus no netsInsecticide-treated nets reduce child mortality from all causes by 17% compared to no nets (rate ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.89; 5 trials, 200,833 participants, high-certainty evidence). This corresponds to a saving of 5.6 lives (95% CI 3.6 to 7.6) each year for every 1000 children protected with ITNs. Insecticide-treated nets also reduce the incidence of uncomplicated episodes of Plasmodium falciparum malaria by almost a half (rate ratio 0.55, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.64; 5 trials, 35,551 participants, high-certainty evidence) and probably reduce the incidence of uncomplicated episodes of Plasmodium vivax malaria (risk ratio (RR) 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77; 2 trials, 10,967 participants, moderate-certainty evidence).Insecticide-treated nets were also shown to reduce the prevalence of P falciparum malaria by 17% compared to no nets (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; 6 trials, 18,809 participants, high-certainty evidence) but may have little or no effect on the prevalence of P vivax malaria (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.34; 2 trials, 10,967 participants, low-certainty evidence). A 44% reduction in the incidence of severe malaria episodes was seen in the ITN group (rate ratio 0.56, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.82; 2 trials, 31,173 participants, high-certainty evidence), as well as an increase in mean haemoglobin (expressed as mean packed cell volume) compared to the no-net group (mean difference 1.29, 95% CI 0.42 to 2.16; 5 trials, 11,489 participants, high-certainty evidence).ITN versus untreated netsInsecticide-treated nets probably reduce child mortality from all causes by a third compared to untreated nets (rate ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.23; 2 trials, 25,389 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). This corresponds to a saving of 3.5 lives (95% CI -2.4 to 6.8) each year for every 1000 children protected with ITNs. Insecticide-treated nets also reduce the incidence of uncomplicated P falciparum malaria episodes (rate ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.78; 5 trials, 2036 participants, high-certainty evidence) and may also reduce the incidence of uncomplicated P vixax malaria episodes (rate ratio 0.73, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.05; 3 trials, 1535 participants, low-certainty evidence).Use of an ITN probably reduces P falciparum prevalence by one-tenth in comparison to use of untreated nets (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.05; 3 trials, 2,259 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). However, based on the current evidence it is unclear whether or not ITNs impact on P vivax prevalence (1 trial, 350 participants, very low certainty evidence) or mean packed cell volume (2 trials, 1,909 participants, low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although there is some evidence that insecticide resistance frequency has some effects on mosquito mortality, it is unclear how quantitatively important this is. It appeared insufficient to downgrade the strong evidence of benefit on mortality and malaria illness from the trials conducted earlier.

Insecticide space spraying for preventing malaria transmission

BACKGROUND

Space spraying is the dispersal of a liquid fog of insecticide into an outdoor area to kill adult insects. It has been regularly used in public health and pest control programmes, including use as an emergency response to malaria epidemics. This Cochrane Review aims to assist the decision-making of malaria vector control programmes by summarizing the evidence of the impact of space spraying on malaria transmission.

OBJECTIVES

The review's primary objective was to evaluate the impact of space spraying on malaria transmission, or the incremental impact when applied in combination with other malaria control methods, in comparison to equivalent conditions with no space spraying intervention.To guide future evaluations of space spraying, a secondary objective was to identify and summarize the range of space spraying strategies that have been trialled, those which were promising and warrant further evaluation, and those which appear unlikely to warrant further evaluation (for example, if they were not feasible to implement, or were unacceptable to the population).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; PubMed (MEDLINE); Embase (OVID), CAB Abstracts (Web of Science), LILACS (BIREME), the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to 18 April 2018. We contacted organizations for ongoing and unpublished trials, and checked the reference lists of all included studies for relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included cluster-randomized controlled trials, interrupted time series (ITS) studies, randomized cross-over studies, and controlled before-and-after (CBA) studies comparing space spraying with no space spraying that met the inclusion criteria for the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted the data. For ITS studies, we present findings graphically, and estimated the effect of space spraying on the step change and the slope change. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Two ITS studies, conducted between 1972 and 1984, met our inclusion criteria for the primary objective, and one study contributed to the quantitative analysis. This study was conducted in India, reported the incidence of malaria in four separate sites, and covered a total population of 18,460 people. In the pooled analysis across sites, there was no step effect for the incidence of uncomplicated malaria (step rate ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 1.92). There was an effect on the slope: the number of cases was reduced by 15% per month (slope rate ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.91). Using these ratios, we estimated the effect of 12 months of space spraying on malaria incidence to be a reduction from 6 cases to 1 case per month per 1000 population (95% CI 0 to 2 cases, very low-certainty evidence). The second study reported the impact of space spraying on malaria incidence and adult mosquito density in a population of 15,106 in Haiti, but it did not provide data from previous years. Thus, we could not estimate an effect of space spraying that was independent from temporal trends.For the review's secondary objective, we identified a further two studies in addition to the two ITS studies; both used a CBA design and were conducted between 1973 and 2000. The four studies used a range of delivery methods including handheld, vehicle-mounted, and aircraft-mounted spraying equipment. A variety of insecticides, doses, and spraying times were also used, with methods typically determined based on environmental factors and vector profiles.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from one state in India conducted over 30 years ago suggests an effect of space spraying on the incidence of malaria, but the certainty of the evidence is very low. Reliable research in a variety of settings will help establish whether and when this intervention may be worthwhile.

Antibiotics for treating scrub typhus

BACKGROUND

Scrub typhus, an important cause of acute fever in Asia, is caused by Orientia tsutsugamushi, an obligate intracellular bacterium. Antibiotics currently used to treat scrub typhus include tetracyclines, chloramphenicol, macrolides, and rifampicin.

OBJECTIVES

To assess and compare the effects of different antibiotic regimens for treatment of scrub typhus.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 8 January 2018: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group specialized trials register; CENTRAL, in the Cochrane Library (2018, Issue 1); MEDLINE; Embase; LILACS; and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT). We checked references and contacted study authors for additional data. We applied no language or date restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing antibiotic regimens in people with the diagnosis of scrub typhus based on clinical symptoms and compatible laboratory tests (excluding the Weil-Felix test).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, two review authors re-extracted all data and assessed the certainty of evidence. We meta-analysed data to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes when appropriate, and elsewhere tabulated data to facilitate narrative analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs and one quasi-RCT with 548 participants; they took place in the Asia-Pacific region: Korea (three trials), Malaysia (one trial), and Thailand (three trials). Only one trial included children younger than 15 years (N = 57). We judged five trials to be at high risk of performance and detection bias owing to inadequate blinding. Trials were heterogenous in terms of dosing of interventions and outcome measures. Across trials, treatment failure rates were low.Two trials compared doxycycline to tetracycline. For treatment failure, the difference between doxycycline and tetracycline is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence). Doxycycline compared to tetracycline may make little or no difference in resolution of fever within 48 hours (risk ratio (RR) 1.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.44, 55 participants; one trial; low-certainty evidence) and in time to defervescence (116 participants; one trial; low-certainty evidence). We were unable to extract data for other outcomes.Three trials compared doxycycline versus macrolides. For most outcomes, including treatment failure, resolution of fever within 48 hours, time to defervescence, and serious adverse events, we are uncertain whether study results show a difference between doxycycline and macrolides (very low-certainty evidence). Macrolides compared to doxycycline may make little or no difference in the proportion of patients with resolution of fever within five days (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.10; 185 participants; two trials; low-certainty evidence). Another trial compared azithromycin versus doxycycline or chloramphenicol in children, but we were not able to disaggregate date for the doxycycline/chloramphenicol group.One trial compared doxycycline versus rifampicin. For all outcomes, we are uncertain whether study results show a difference between doxycycline and rifampicin (very low-certainty evidence). Of note, this trial deviated from the protocol after three out of eight patients who had received doxycycline and rifampicin combination therapy experienced treatment failure.Across trials, mild gastrointestinal side effects appeared to be more common with doxycycline than with comparator drugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tetracycline, doxycycline, azithromycin, and rifampicin are effective treatment options for scrub typhus and have resulted in few treatment failures. Chloramphenicol also remains a treatment option, but we could not include this among direct comparisons in this review.Most available evidence is of low or very low certainty. For specific outcomes, some low-certainty evidence suggests there may be little or no difference between tetracycline, doxycycline, and azithromycin as treatment options. Given very low-certainty evidence for rifampicin and the risk of inducing resistance in undiagnosed tuberculosis, clinicians should not regard this as a first-line treatment option. Clinicians could consider rifampicin as a second-line treatment option after exclusion of active tuberculosis.Further research should consist of additional adequately powered trials of doxycycline versus azithromycin or other macrolides, trials of other candidate antibiotics including rifampicin, and trials of treatments for severe scrub typhus. Researchers should standardize diagnostic techniques and reporting of clinical outcomes to allow robust comparisons.

Primary antifungal prophylaxis for cryptococcal disease in HIV-positive people

BACKGROUND

Cryptococcal disease remains one of the main causes of death in HIV-positive people who have low cluster of differentiation 4 (CD4) cell counts. Currently, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends screening HIV-positive people with low CD4 counts for cryptococcal antigenaemia (CrAg), and treating those who are CrAg-positive. This Cochrane Review examined the effects of an approach where those with low CD4 counts received regular prophylactic antifungals, such as fluconazole.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of antifungal drugs for the primary prevention of cryptococcal disease in adults and children who are HIV-positive.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE PubMed, Embase OVID, CINAHL EBSCOHost, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, conference proceedings for the International AIDS Society (IAS) and Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI), and reference lists of relevant articles up to 31 August 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials of adults and children, who are HIV-positive with low CD4 counts, without a current or prior diagnosis of cryptococcal disease that compared any antifungal drug taken as primary prophylaxis to placebo or standard care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted and analysed data. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. We summarized all outcomes using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where appropriate, we pooled data in meta-analyses. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials, enrolling 5426 participants, met the inclusion criteria of this review. Six trials administered fluconazole, while three trials administered itraconazole.Antifungal prophylaxis may make little or no difference to all-cause mortality (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.43; 6 trials, 3220 participants; low-certainty evidence). For cryptococcal specific outcomes, prophylaxis probably reduces the risk of developing cryptococcal disease (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.49; 7 trials, 5000 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably reduces deaths due to cryptococcal disease (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.72; 5 trials, 3813 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Fluconazole prophylaxis may make no clear difference to the risk of developing clinically resistant Candida disease (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.56; 3 trials, 1198 participants; low-certainty evidence); however, there may be an increased detection of fluconazole-resistant Candida isolates from surveillance cultures (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.55; 3 trials, 539 participants; low-certainty evidence). Antifungal prophylaxis was generally well-tolerated with probably no clear difference in the risk of discontinuation of antifungal prophylaxis compared with placebo (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.13; 4 trials, 2317 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Antifungal prophylaxis may also make no difference to the risk of having any adverse event (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.30; 4 trials, 2317 participants; low-certainty evidence), or a serious adverse event (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.41; 4 trials, 888 participants; low-certainty evidence) when compared to placebo or standard care.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antifungal prophylaxis reduced the risk of developing and dying from cryptococcal disease. Therefore, where CrAG screening is not available, antifungal prophylaxis may be used in patients with low CD4 counts at diagnosis and who are at risk of developing cryptococcal disease.

Drugs for treating Buruli ulcer (Mycobacterium ulcerans disease)

BACKGROUND

Buruli ulcer is a necrotizing cutaneous infection caused by infection with Mycobacterium ulcerans bacteria that occurs mainly in tropical and subtropical regions. The infection progresses from nodules under the skin to deep ulcers, often on the upper and lower limbs or on the face. If left undiagnosed and untreated, it can lead to lifelong disfigurement and disabilities. It is often treated with drugs and surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the evidence of drug treatments for treating Buruli ulcer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (PubMed); Embase (Ovid); and LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature; BIREME). We also searched the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en/). All searches were run up to 19 December 2017. We also checked the reference lists of articles identified by the literature search, and contacted leading researchers in this topic area to identify any unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared antibiotic therapy to placebo or alternative therapy such as surgery, or that compared different antibiotic regimens. We also included prospective observational studies that evaluated different antibiotic regimens with or without surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, extracted the data, and assessed methodological quality. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 18 studies: five RCTs involving a total of 319 participants, ranging from 12 participants to 151 participants, and 13 prospective observational studies, with 1665 participants. Studies evaluated various drugs usually in addition to surgery, and were carried out across eight countries in areas with high Buruli ulcer endemicity in West Africa and Australia. Only one RCT reported adequate methods to minimize bias. Regarding monotherapy, one RCT and one observational study evaluated clofazimine, and one RCT evaluated sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim. All three studies had small sample sizes, and no treatment effect was demonstrated. The remaining studies examined combination therapy.Rifampicin combined with streptomycinWe found one RCT and six observational studies which evaluated rifampicin combined with streptomycin for different lengths of treatment (2, 4, 8, or 12 weeks) (941 participants). The RCT did not demonstrate a difference between the drugs added to surgery compared with surgery alone for recurrence at 12 months, but was underpowered (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.51; 21 participants; very low-certainty evidence).An additional five single-arm observational studies with 828 participants using this regimen for eight weeks with surgery (given to either all participants or to a select group) reported healing rates ranging from 84.5% to 100%, assessed between six weeks and one year. Four observational studies reported healing rates for participants who received the regimen alone without surgery, reporting healing rates ranging from 48% to 95% assessed between eight weeks and one year.Rifampicin combined with clarithromycinTwo observational studies administered combined rifampicin and clarithromycin. One study evaluated the regimen alone (no surgery) for eight weeks and reported a healing rate of 50% at 12 months (30 participants). Another study evaluated the regimen administered for various durations (as determined by the clinicians, durations unspecified) with surgery and reported a healing rate of 100% at 12 months (21 participants).Rifampicin with streptomycin initially, changing to rifampicin with clarithromycin in consolidation phaseOne RCT evaluated this regimen (four weeks in each phase) against continuing with rifampicin and streptomycin in the consolidation phase (total eight weeks). All included participants had small lesions, and healing rates were above 90% in both groups without surgery (healing rate at 12 months RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.03; 151 participants; low-certainty evidence). One single-arm observational study evaluating the substitution of streptomycin with clarithromycin in the consolidation phase (6 weeks, total 8 weeks) without surgery given to a select group showed a healing rate of 98% at 12 months (41 participants).Novel combination therapyTwo large prospective studies in Australia evaluated some novel regimens. One study evaluating rifampicin combined with either ciprofloxacin, clarithromycin, or moxifloxacin without surgery reported a healing rate of 76.5% at 12 months (132 participants). Another study evaluating combinations of two to three drugs from rifampicin, ciprofloxacin, clarithromycin, ethambutol, moxifloxacin, or amikacin with surgery reported a healing rate of 100% (90 participants).Adverse effects were reported in only three RCTs (158 participants) and eight prospective observational studies (878 participants), and were consistent with what is already known about the adverse effect profile of these drugs. Paradoxical reactions (clinical deterioration after treatment caused by enhanced immune response to M ulcerans) were evaluated in six prospective observational studies (822 participants), and the incidence of paradoxical reactions ranged from 1.9% to 26%.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While the antibiotic combination treatments evaluated appear to be effective, we found insufficient evidence showing that any particular drug is more effective than another. How different sizes, lesions, and stages of the disease may contribute to healing and which kind of lesions are in need of surgery are unclear based on the included studies. Guideline development needs to consider these factors in designing practical treatment regimens. Forthcoming trials using clarithromycin with rifampicin and other trials of new regimens that also address these factors will help to identify the best regimens.

Treatment for HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis

BACKGROUND

Cryptococcal meningitis is a severe fungal infection that occurs primarily in the setting of advanced immunodeficiency and remains a major cause of HIV-related deaths worldwide. The best induction therapy to reduce mortality from HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis is unclear, particularly in resource-limited settings where management of drug-related toxicities associated with more potent antifungal drugs is a challenge.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the best induction therapy to reduce mortality from HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis; to compare side effect profiles of different therapies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), LILACS (BIREME), African Index Medicus, and Index Medicus for the South-East Asia Region (IMSEAR) from 1 January 1980 to 9 July 2018. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the ISRCTN registry; and abstracts of select conferences published between 1 July 2014 and 9 July 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that compared antifungal induction therapies used for the first episode of HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis. Comparisons could include different individual or combination therapies, or the same antifungal therapies with differing durations of induction (less than two weeks or two or more weeks, the latter being the current standard of care). We included data regardless of age, geographical region, or drug dosage. We specified no language restriction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts identified by the search strategy. We obtained the full texts of potentially eligible studies to assess eligibility and extracted data using standardized forms. The main outcomes included mortality at 2 weeks, 10 weeks, and 6 months; mean rate of cerebrospinal fluid fungal clearance in the first two weeks of treatment; and Division of AIDS (DAIDS) grade three or four laboratory events. Using random-effects models we determined pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. For the direct comparison of 10-week mortality, we assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We performed a network meta-analysis using multivariate meta-regression. We modelled treatment differences (RR and 95% CI) and determined treatment rankings for two-week and 10-week mortality outcomes using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). We assessed transitivity by comparing distribution of effect modifiers between studies, local inconsistency through a node-splitting approach, and global inconsistency using design-by-treatment interaction modelling. For the network meta-analysis, we applied a modified GRADE approach for assessing the certainty of the evidence for 10-week mortality.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 eligible studies that enrolled 2426 participants and compared 21 interventions. All studies were carried out in adults, and all but two studies were conducted in resource-limited settings, including 11 of 12 studies with 10-week mortality data.In the direct pairwise comparisons evaluating 10-week mortality, one study from four sub-Saharan African countries contributed data to several key comparisons. At 10 weeks these data showed that those on the regimen of one-week amphotericin B deoxycholate (AmBd) and flucytosine (5FC) followed by fluconazole (FLU) on days 8 to 14 had lower mortality when compared to (i) two weeks of AmBd and 5FC (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.93; 228 participants, 1 study), (ii) two weeks of AmBd and FLU (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.86; 227 participants, 1 study), (iii) one week of AmBd with two weeks of FLU (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.72; 224 participants, 1 study), and (iv) two weeks of 5FC and FLU (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.99; 338 participants, 1 study). The evidence for each of these comparisons was of moderate certainty. For other outcomes, this shortened one-week AmBd and 5FC regimen had similar fungal clearance (MD 0.05 log₁₀ CFU/mL/day, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.12; 186 participants, 1 study) as well as lower risk of grade three or four anaemia (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.60; 228 participants, 1 study) compared to the two-week regimen of AmBd and 5FC.For 10-week mortality, the comparison of two weeks of 5FC and FLU with two weeks of AmBd and 5FC (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.23; 340 participants, 1 study) or two weeks of AmBd and FLU (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.13; 339 participants, 1 study) did not show a difference in mortality, with moderate-certainty evidence for both comparisons.When two weeks of combination AmBd and 5FC was compared with AmBd alone, pooled data showed lower mortality at 10 weeks (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.95; 231 participants, 2 studies, moderate-certainty evidence).When two weeks of AmBd and FLU was compared to AmBd alone, there was no difference in 10-week mortality in pooled data (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.62; 371 participants, 3 studies, low-certainty evidence).One week of AmBd and 5FC followed by FLU on days 8 to 14 was the best induction therapy regimen after comparison with 11 other regimens for 10-week mortality in the network meta-analysis, with an overall SUCRA ranking of 88%.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In resource-limited settings, one-week AmBd- and 5FC-based therapy is probably superior to other regimens for treatment of HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis. An all-oral regimen of two weeks 5FC and FLU may be an alternative in settings where AmBd is unavailable or intravenous therapy cannot be safely administered. We found no mortality benefit of combination two weeks AmBd and FLU compared to AmBd alone. Given the absence of data from studies in children, and limited data from high-income countries, our findings provide limited guidance for treatment in these patients and settings.

Early versus delayed antiretroviral treatment in HIV-positive people with cryptococcal meningitis

BACKGROUND

There remains uncertainty about the optimum timing of antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation in HIV-positive people with cryptococcal meningitis. This uncertainty is the result of conflicting data on the mortality risk and occurrence of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS) when ART is initiated less than four weeks after cryptococcal meningitis treatment is commenced.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the outcomes of early initiation of ART (less than four weeks after starting antifungal treatment) versus delayed initiation of ART (four weeks or more after starting antifungal treatment) in HIV-positive people with concurrent cryptococcal meningitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase for trials published between 1 January 1980 and 7 August 2017. We additionally searched international trial registries, including ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and conference abstracts from the International AIDS Society (IAS) and the Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI) for ongoing or unpublished studies between 2015 and 2017. We reviewed reference lists of included studies to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared early versus delayed ART initiation in HIV-positive people with cryptococcal meningitis. Children, adults, and adolescents from any setting were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria and extracted data. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We presented time-to-death data as hazard ratios with 95% CIs. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials including 294 adult participants met the inclusion criteria of this review. Participants were predominantly from low- and middle-income countries. Two trials treated cryptococcal meningitis with amphotericin B and fluconazole; a third trial used fluconazole monotherapy; and the fourth trial did not specify the antifungal used.Early ART initiation may increase all-cause mortality compared to delayed ART initiation (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.97; 294 participants, 4 trials; low-certainty evidence). Early ART initiation may reduce relapse of cryptococcal meningitis compared to delayed ART initiation (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.04; 205 participants, 2 trials, low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether early ART initiation increases or reduces cryptococcal IRIS events compared to delayed ART initiation (RR 3.56, 95% CI 0.51 to 25.02; 205 participants, 2 trials; I² = 54%; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if early ART initiation increases or reduces virological suppression at six months compared to delayed ART initiation (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.22; 205 participants, 2 trials; I² statistic = 0%; very low-certainty evidence).We were unable to pool results related to rate of fungal clearance for the two trials that reported this outcome; individual trial results indicated that there was no difference in cerebrospinal fluid fungal clearance between trial arms. Similarly, we were unable to pool results on adverse events for the trials reporting on this outcome; individual trial results indicated no difference in the occurrence of grade 3 to 5 adverse events between trial arms.Three of the four included trials had an overall low or unclear risk of bias related to the primary outcome of all-cause mortality. However, we assessed one trial as at high risk of bias due to selective outcome reporting and other bias. This, in addition to the few clinical events and imprecision of effect estimates, led to downgrading of the evidence to low or very low certainty.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review are relevant to HIV-positive adults with cryptococcal meningitis in low- and middle-income countries. These data suggest a higher risk of mortality among people who initiate ART within four weeks of cryptococcal meningitis diagnosis. However, it is unclear if this higher mortality risk is related to cryptococcal meningitis-IRIS.

Ribavirin for treating Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever

BACKGROUND

Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever (CCHF) is a tick-borne disease that occurs in parts of Asia, Europe and Africa. Since 2000 the infection has caused epidemics in Turkey, Iran, Russia, Uganda and Pakistan. Good-quality general supportive medical care helps reduce mortality. There is uncertainty and controversy about treating CCHF with the antiviral drug ribavirin.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of ribavirin for treating people with Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE (PubMed); Embase (OVID); Science Citation Index-Expanded, Social Sciences Citation index, conference proceedings (Web of Science); and CINAHL (EBSCOHost). We also searched the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov for trials in progress. We conducted all searches up to 16 October 2017. We also contacted experts in the field and obtained further studies from these sources.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We evaluated studies assessing the use of ribavirin in people with suspected or confirmed Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever. We included randomised control trials (RCTs); non-randomised studies (NRSs) that included more than 10 participants designed as cohort studies with comparators; and case-control studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed eligibility, risk of bias, and extracted data. For non-randomized studies we used the ROBINS-I tool to assess risk of bias. The main effects analysis included all studies where we judged the risk of bias to be low, moderate or high. We summarized dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RRs) and continuous outcomes using mean differences (MDs), and used meta-analyses where appropriate. We carried out a subsidiary appraisal and analysis of studies with critical risk of bias for the primary outcome, as these are often cited to support using ribavirin.

MAIN RESULTS

For the main effects analysis, five studies met our inclusion criteria: one RCT with 136 participants and four non-randomized studies with 612 participants. We excluded 18 non-randomized studies with critical risk of bias, where none had attempted to control for confounding.We do not know if ribavirin reduces mortality (1 RCT; RR 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 4.32; 136 participants; very low-certainty evidence; 3 non-randomized studies; RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.28; 549 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We do not know if ribavirin reduces the length of stay in hospital (1 RCT: mean difference (MD) 0.70 days, 95% CI -0.39 to 1.79; 136 participants; and 1 non-randomized study: MD -0.80, 95% CI -2.70 to 1.10; 50 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We do not know if it reduces the risk of patients needing platelet transfusions (1 RCT: RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.96; 136 participants; very low-certainty evidence). For adverse effects (including haemolytic anaemia and a need to discontinue treatment), we do not know whether there is an increased risk with ribavirin in people with CCHF as data are insufficient.We do not know if adding ribavirin to early supportive care improves outcomes. One non-randomized study assessed mortality in people receiving ribavirin and supportive care within four days or less from symptom onset compared to after four days since symptom onset: mortality was lower in the group receiving early supportive care and ribavirin, but it is not possible to distinguish between the effects of ribavirin and early supportive medical care alone.In the subsidiary analysis, 18 studies compared people receiving ribavirin with those not receiving ribavirin. All had a critical risk of bias due to confounding, reflected in the mortality point estimates favouring ribavirin.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We do not know if ribavirin is effective for treating Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever. Non-randomized studies are often cited as evidence of an effect, but the risk of bias in these studies is high.

Ivermectin and permethrin for treating scabies

BACKGROUND

Scabies is an intensely itchy parasitic infection of the skin. It occurs worldwide, but is particularly problematic in areas of poor sanitation, overcrowding, and social disruption. In recent years, permethrin and ivermectin have become the most relevant treatment options for scabies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of topical permethrin and topical or systemic ivermectin for scabies in people of all ages.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 25 April 2017: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and IndMED. We searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the ISRCTN registry, CenterWatch Clinical Trials Listing, ClinicalTrials.gov, TrialsCentral, and the UK Department of Health National Research Register for ongoing trials. We also searched multiple sources for grey literature and checked reference lists of included studies for additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that compared permethrin or ivermectin against each other for people with scabies of all ages and either sex.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the identified records, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias for the included trials.The primary outcome was complete clearance of scabies. Secondary outcomes were number of participants re-treated, number of participants with at least one adverse event, and number of participants withdrawn from study due to an adverse event.We summarized dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). If it was not possible to calculate the point estimate, we described the data qualitatively. Where appropriate, we calculated combined effect estimates using a random-effects model and assessed heterogeneity. We calculated numbers needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome when we found a difference.We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the control rate average to provide illustrative clearance rates in the comparison groups.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen studies (1896 participants) comparing topical permethrin, systemic ivermectin, or topical ivermectin met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the risk of bias in the included trials was moderate: reporting in many studies was poor. Nearly all studies were conducted in South Asia or North Africa, where the disease is more common, and is associated with poverty.EfficacyOral ivermectin (at a standard dose of 200 μg/kg) may lead to slightly lower rates of complete clearance after one week compared to permethrin 5% cream. Using the average clearance rate of 65% in the trials with permethrin, the illustrative clearance with ivermectin is 43% (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.78; 613 participants, 6 studies; low-certainty evidence). However, by week two there may be little or no difference (illustrative clearance of permethrin 74% compared to ivermectin 68%; RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.08; 459 participants, 5 studies; low-certainty evidence). Treatments with one to three doses of ivermectin or one to three applications of permethrin may lead to little or no difference in rates of complete clearance after four weeks' follow-up (illustrative cures with 1 to 3 applications of permethrin 93% and with 1 to 3 doses of ivermectin 86%; RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.03; 581 participants, 5 studies; low-certainty evidence).After one week of treatment with oral ivermectin at a standard dose of 200 μg/kg or one application of permethrin 5% lotion, there is probably little or no difference in complete clearance rates (illustrative cure rates: permethrin 73%, ivermectin 68%; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.17; 120 participants, 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence). After two weeks of treatment, one dose of systemic ivermectin compared to one application of permethrin lotion may lead to similar complete clearance rates (extrapolated cure rates: 67% in both groups; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.29; 120 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence).There is probably little or no difference in rates of complete clearance between systemic ivermectin at standard dose and topical ivermectin 1% lotion four weeks after initiation of treatment (illustrative cure rates: oral ivermectin 97%, ivermectin lotion 96%; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03; 272 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Likewise, after four weeks, ivermectin lotion probably leads to little or no difference in rates of complete clearance when compared to permethrin cream (extrapolated cure rates: permethrin cream 94%, ivermectin lotion 96%; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.08; 210 participants, 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence), and there is little or no difference among systemic ivermectin in different doses (extrapolated cure rates: 2 doses 90%, 1 dose 87%; RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.14; 80 participants, 1 study; high-certainty evidence).SafetyReporting of adverse events in the included studies was suboptimal. No withdrawals due to adverse events occurred in either the systemic ivermectin or the permethrin group (moderate-certainty evidence). Two weeks after treatment initiation, there is probably little or no difference in the proportion of participants treated with systemic ivermectin or permethrin cream who experienced at least one adverse event (55 participants, 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence). After four weeks, ivermectin may lead to a slightly larger proportion of participants with at least one adverse event (extrapolated rates: permethrin 4%, ivermectin 5%; RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.83; 502 participants, 4 studies; low-certainty evidence).Adverse events in participants treated with topical ivermectin were rare and of mild intensity and comparable to those with systemic ivermectin. For this comparison, it is uncertain whether there is any difference in the number of participants with at least one adverse event (very low-certainty evidence). No withdrawals due to adverse events occurred (62 participants, 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence).It is uncertain whether topical ivermectin or permethrin differ in the number of participants with at least one adverse event (very low-certainty evidence). We found no studies comparing systemic ivermectin in different doses that assessed safety outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that for the most part, there was no difference detected in the efficacy of permethrin compared to systemic or topical ivermectin. Overall, few and mild adverse events were reported. Our confidence in the effect estimates was mostly low to moderate. Poor reporting is a major limitation.

Nutritional supplements for patients being treated for active visceral leishmaniasis

BACKGROUND

Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is a disease caused by a parasite, which can lead to death if untreated. Poor nutritional status hastens the progression of VL infection, and VL worsens malnutrition status. Malnutrition is one of the poor prognostic factors identified for leishmaniasis. However, the effects of nutritional supplementation in people treated for VL are not known.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of oral nutritional supplements in people being treated with anti-leishmanial drug therapy for VL.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group (CIDG) Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and two trial registers up to 12 September 2017. We checked conference proceedings and WHO consultative meeting reports, the reference lists of key documents and existing reviews, and contacted experts and nutritional supplement companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-randomized controlled trials (quasi-RCTs), and non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) of any oral nutritional supplement, compared to no nutritional intervention, placebo, or dietary advice alone, in people being treated for VL.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the literature search results for studies that met the inclusion criteria. We had planned for two review authors to independently extract data and assess the risk of bias of the included studies. We planned to follow the Cochrane standard methodological procedures for assessing risk of bias and analysing the data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no eligible studies for this review, either completed or ongoing.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no studies, either completed or ongoing, that assessed the effects of oral nutritional supplements in people with VL who were being treated with anti-leishmanial drug therapy. Thus, we could not draw any conclusions on the impact of these interventions on primary cure of VL, definitive cure of VL, treatment completion, self-reported recovery from illness or resolution of symptoms, weight gain, increased skinfold thickness, other measures of lean or total mass, or growth in children.This absence of evidence should not be interpreted as evidence of no effect for nutritional supplements in people under VL treatment. It means that we did not identify research that fulfilled our review inclusion criteria.The effects of oral nutritional supplements in people with VL who are being treated with anti-leishmanial drug therapy have yet to be determined by rigorous experimental studies, such as cluster-randomized trials, that focus on outcomes relevant for patients.

Mosquito repellents for malaria prevention

BACKGROUND

Malaria is an important cause of illness and death across endemic regions. Considerable success against malaria has been achieved within the past decade mainly through long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs). However, elimination of the disease is proving difficult as current control methods do not protect against mosquitoes biting outdoors and when people are active. Repellents may provide a personal protection solution during these times.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of topical repellents, insecticide-treated clothing, and spatial repellents on malaria transmission.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 26 June 2017: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; US AFPMB; CAB Abstracts; and LILACS. We also searched trial registration platforms and conference proceedings; and contacted organizations and companies for ongoing and unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-randomized controlled trials of topical repellents proven to repel mosquitoes; permethrin-treated clothing; and spatial repellents such as mosquito coils. We included trials that investigated the use of repellents with or without LLINs, referred to as insecticide-treated nets.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed trials for inclusion, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. A third review author resolved any discrepancies. We analysed data by conducting meta-analysis and stratified by whether the trials had included LLINs. We combined results from cRCTs with individually RCTs by adjusting for clustering and presented results using forest plots. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight cRCTs and two RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Six trials investigated topical repellents, two trials investigated insecticide-treated clothing, and two trials investigated spatial repellents.Topical repellentsSix RCTS, five of them cluster-randomized, investigated topical repellents involving residents of malaria-endemic regions. Four trials used topical repellents in combination with nets, but two trials undertaken in displaced populations used topical repellents alone. It is unclear if topical repellents can prevent clinical malaria (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.07, very low certainty evidence) or malaria infection (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.12, low-certainty evidence) caused by P. falciparum. It is also unclear if there is any protection against clinical cases of P. vivax (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.76, low-certainty evidence) or incidence of infections (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.41, low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis of trials including insecticide-treated nets did not show a protective effect of topical repellents against malaria. Only two studies did not include insecticide-treated nets, and they measured different outcomes; one reported a protective effect against clinical cases of P. falciparum (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.71); but the other study measured no protective effect against malaria infection incidence caused by either P. falciparum or P. vivax.Insecticide-treated clothingInsecticide-treated clothing were investigated in trials conducted in refugee camps in Pakistan and amongst military based in the Colombian Amazon. Neither study provided participants with insecticide-treated nets. In the absence of nets, treated clothing may reduce the incidence of clinical malaria caused by P. falciparum by approximately 50% (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.83, low-certainty evidence) and P. vivax (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.01, low-certainty evidence).Spatial repellentsTwo cluster-randomized RCTs investigated mosquito coils for malaria prevention. We do not know the effect of spatial repellents on malaria prevention (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.72, very low certainty evidence). There was large heterogeneity between studies and one study had high risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to conclude topical or spatial repellents can prevent malaria. There is a need for better designed trials to generate higher certainty of evidence before well-informed recommendations can be made. Adherence to daily compliance remains a major limitation. Insecticide-treated clothing may reduce risk of malaria infection in the absence of insecticide-treated nets; further studies on insecticide-treated clothing in the general population should be done to broaden the applicability of the results.

Primaquine or other 8-aminoquinolines for reducing Plasmodium falciparum transmission

BACKGROUND

The 8-aminoquinoline (8AQ) drugs act on Plasmodium falciparum gametocytes, which transmit malaria from infected people to mosquitoes. In 2012, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended a single dose of 0.25 mg/kg primaquine (PQ) be added to malaria treatment schedules in low-transmission areas or those with artemisinin resistance. This replaced the previous recommendation of 0.75 mg/kg, aiming to reduce haemolysis risk in people with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency, common in people living in malarious areas. Whether this approach, and at this dose, is effective in reducing transmission is not clear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of single dose or short-course PQ (or an alternative 8AQ) alongside treatment for people with P. falciparum malaria.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICRTP) portal using 'malaria*', 'falciparum', 'primaquine', '8-aminoquinoline', and eight 8AQ drug names as search terms. We checked reference lists of included trials, and contacted researchers and organizations. Date of last search: 21 July 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs in children or adults, adding PQ (or alternative 8AQ) as a single dose or short course alongside treatment for P. falciparum malaria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors screened abstracts, applied inclusion criteria, and extracted data. We sought evidence on transmission (community incidence), infectiousness (people infectious and mosquitoes infected), and potential infectiousness (gametocyte measures assessed by microscopy or polymerase chain reaction [PCR]). We grouped trials into artemisinin and non-artemisinin treatments, and stratified by PQ dose (low, 0.2 to 0.25 mg/kg; moderate, 0.4 to 0.5 mg/kg; high, 0.75 mg/kg). We used GRADE, and absolute effects of infectiousness using trial control groups.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 RCTs and one quasi-RCT, comprising 43 arms. Fourteen trials evaluated artemisinin treatments (23 arms), nine trials evaluated non-artemisinin treatments (13 arms), and two trials included both artemisinin and non-artemisinin arms (three and two arms, respectively). Two trial arms used bulaquine. Seven PQ arms used low dose (six with artemisinin), 11 arms used moderate dose (seven with artemisinin), and the remaining arms used high dose. Fifteen trials tested for G6PD status: 11 excluded participants with G6PD deficiency, one included only those with G6PD deficiency, and three included all, irrespective of status. The remaining 10 trials either did not test or did not report on testing.No cluster trials evaluating community effects on malaria transmission met the inclusion criteria.With artemisinin treatmentLow dose PQInfectiousness (participants infectious to mosquitoes) was reduced (day 3 or 4: RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.88, 3 trials, 105 participants; day 8: RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.58, 4 trials, 243 participants; low certainty evidence). This translates to a reduction in percentage of people infectious on day 3 or 4 from 14% to 2%, and, for day 8, from 4% to 1%; the waning infectiousness in the control group by day 8 making the absolute effect smaller by day 8. For gametocytes detected by PCR, there was little or no effect of PQ at day 3 or 4 (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.21; 3 trials, 414 participants; moderate certainty evidence); with reduction at day 8 (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.65; 4 trials, 532 participants; high certainty evidence). Severe haemolysis was infrequent, with or without PQ, in these groups with few G6PD-deficient individuals (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.39; 4 trials, 752 participants, moderate certainty evidence).Moderate dose PQInfectiousness was reduced (day 3 or 4: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.94; 3 trials, 109 participants; day 8 RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.57; 4 trials, 246 participants; low certainty evidence). Illustrative risk estimates for moderate dose were the same as low dose. The pattern and level of certainty of evidence with gametocytes detected by PCR was the same as low dose, and severe haemolysis was infrequent in both groups.High dose PQInfectiousness was reduced (day 4: RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.68, 1 trial, 101 participants; day 8: RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.41, 2 trials, 181 participants, low certainty evidence). The effects on gametocyte prevalence showed a similar pattern to moderate and low dose PQ. Trials did not systematically report evidence of haemolysis.With non-artemisinin treatmentTrials with non-artemisinin treatment have been conducted only for moderate and high dose PQ. With high dose, infectiousness appeared markedly reduced on day 5 (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.62; 30 participants, very low certainty evidence), with similar reductions at day 8. For both moderate dose (two trials with 221 people) and high dose (two trials with 30 people), reduction in gametocytes (detected by microscopy) showed similar patterns as for artemisinin treatments, with little or no effect at day 4 or 5, and larger effects by day 8. No trials with non-artemisinin partner drugs systematically sought evidence of severe haemolysis.Two trials comparing bulaquine with PQ suggest bulaquine may have larger effects on gametocytes by microscopy on day 8 (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.66; 2 trials, 112 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A single low dose of PQ (0.25 mg/kg) added to artemisinin-based combination therapy for malaria reduces infectiousness of people to mosquitoes at day 3-4 and day 8, and appears as effective as higher doses. The absolute effect is greater at day 3 or 4, and smaller at day 8, in part because of the lower infectiousness in the control group. There was no evidence of increased haemolysis at 0.25 mg/kg, but few G6PD-deficient individuals were included in the trials. The effect on infectiousness precedes the effect of PQ on gametocyte prevalence. We do not know whether single dose PQ could reduce malaria transmission at community level.

Interventions to increase tuberculosis case detection at primary healthcare or community-level services

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary tuberculosis is usually diagnosed when symptomatic individuals seek care at healthcare facilities, and healthcare workers have a minimal role in promoting the health-seeking behaviour. However, some policy specialists believe the healthcare system could be more active in tuberculosis diagnosis to increase tuberculosis case detection.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of different strategies to increase tuberculosis case detection through improving access (geographical, financial, educational) to tuberculosis diagnosis at primary healthcare or community-level services.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases for relevant studies up to 19 December 2016: the Cochrane Infectious Disease Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library, Issue 12, 2016; MEDLINE; Embase; Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index; BIOSIS Previews; and Scopus. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and non-randomized controlled studies comparing any intervention that aims to improve access to a tuberculosis diagnosis, with no intervention or an alternative intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. We compared interventions using risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine cluster-randomized trials, one individual randomized trial, and seven non-randomized controlled studies. Nine studies were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa (Ethiopia, Nigeria, South Africa, Zambia, and Zimbabwe), six in Asia (Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Nepal, and Pakistan), and two in South America (Brazil and Colombia); which are all high tuberculosis prevalence areas.Tuberculosis outreach screening, using house-to-house visits, sometimes combined with printed information about going to clinic, may increase tuberculosis case detection (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.79; 4 trials, 6,458,591 participants in 297 clusters, low-certainty evidence); and probably increases case detection in areas with tuberculosis prevalence of 5% or more (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.09; 3 trials, 155,918 participants, moderate-certainty evidence; prespecified stratified analysis). These interventions may lower the early default (prior to starting treatment) or default during treatment (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.96; 3 trials, 849 participants, low-certainty evidence). However, this intervention may have may have little or no effect on treatment success (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.15; 3 trials, 849 participants, low-certainty evidence), and we do not know if there is an effect on treatment failure or mortality. One study investigated long-term prevalence in the community, but with no clear effect due to imprecision and differences in care between the two groups (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.00; 1 trial, 556,836 participants, very low-certainty evidence).Four studies examined health promotion activities to encourage people to attend for screening, including mass media strategies and more locally organized activities. There was some increase, but this could have been related to temporal trends, with no corresponding increase in case notifications, and no evidence of an effect on long-term tuberculosis prevalence. Two studies examined the effects of two to six nurse practitioner educational sessions in tuberculosis diagnosis, with no clear effect on tuberculosis cases detected. One trial compared mobile clinics every five days with house-to-house screening every six months, and showed an increase in tuberculosis cases.There was also insufficient evidence to determine if sustained improvements in case detection impact on long-term tuberculosis prevalence; this was evaluated in one study, which indicated little or no effect after four years of either contact tracing, extensive health promotion activities, or both (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.30; 1 study, 405,788 participants in 12 clusters, very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence demonstrates that when used in appropriate settings, active case-finding approaches may result in increase in tuberculosis case detection in the short term. The effect of active case finding on treatment outcome needs to be further evaluated in sufficiently powered studies.

Mefloquine for preventing malaria during travel to endemic areas

BACKGROUND

Mefloquine is one of four antimalarial agents commonly recommended for preventing malaria in travellers to malaria-endemic areas. Despite its high efficacy, there is controversy about its psychological side effects.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the efficacy and safety of mefloquine used as prophylaxis for malaria in travellers.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published on the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase (OVID); TOXLINE (https://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/newtoxnet/toxline.htm); and LILACS. We also searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/) and ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home) for trials in progress, using 'mefloquine', 'Lariam', and 'malaria' as search terms. The search date was 22 June 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (for efficacy and safety) and non-randomized cohort studies (for safety). We compared prophylactic mefloquine with placebo, no treatment, or an alternative recommended antimalarial agent. Our study populations included all adults and children, including pregnant women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of trials, extracted and analysed data. We compared dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Prespecified adverse outcomes are included in 'Summary of findings' tables, with the best available estimate of the absolute frequency of each outcome in short-term international travellers. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 RCTs (11,470 participants); 35 cohort studies (198,493 participants); and four large retrospective analyses of health records (800,652 participants). Nine RCTs explicitly excluded participants with a psychiatric history, and 25 cohort studies stated that the choice of antimalarial agent was based on medical history and personal preference. Most RCTs and cohort studies collected data on self-reported or clinician-assessed symptoms, rather than formal medical diagnoses. Mefloquine efficacyOf 12 trials comparing mefloquine and placebo, none were performed in short-term international travellers, and most populations had a degree of immunity to malaria. The percentage of people developing a malaria episode in the control arm varied from 1% to 82% (median 22%) and 0% to 13% in the mefloquine group (median 1%).In four RCTs that directly compared mefloquine, atovaquone-proguanil and doxycycline in non-immune, short-term international travellers, only one clinical case of malaria occurred (4 trials, 1822 participants). Mefloquine safety versus atovaquone-proguanil Participants receiving mefloquine were more likely to discontinue their medication due to adverse effects than atovaquone-proguanil users (RR 2.86, 95% CI 1.53 to 5.31; 3 RCTs, 1438 participants; high-certainty evidence). There were few serious adverse effects reported with mefloquine (15/2651 travellers) and none with atovaquone-proguanil (940 travellers).One RCT and six cohort studies reported on our prespecified adverse effects. In the RCT with short-term travellers, mefloquine users were more likely to report abnormal dreams (RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.37 to 3.04, moderate-certainty evidence), insomnia (RR 4.42, 95% CI 2.56 to 7.64, moderate-certainty evidence), anxiety (RR 6.12, 95% CI 1.82 to 20.66, moderate-certainty evidence), and depressed mood during travel (RR 5.78, 95% CI 1.71 to 19.61, moderate-certainty evidence). The cohort studies in longer-term travellers were consistent with this finding but most had larger effect sizes. Mefloquine users were also more likely to report nausea (high-certainty evidence) and dizziness (high-certainty evidence).Based on the available evidence, our best estimates of absolute effect sizes for mefloquine versus atovaquone-proguanil are 6% versus 2% for discontinuation of the drug, 13% versus 3% for insomnia, 14% versus 7% for abnormal dreams, 6% versus 1% for anxiety, and 6% versus 1% for depressed mood. Mefloquine safety versus doxycyclineNo difference was found in numbers of serious adverse effects with mefloquine and doxycycline (low-certainty evidence) or numbers of discontinuations due to adverse effects (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.87; 4 RCTs, 763 participants; low-certainty evidence).Six cohort studies in longer-term occupational travellers reported our prespecified adverse effects; one RCT in military personnel and one cohort study in short-term travellers reported adverse events. Mefloquine users were more likely to report abnormal dreams (RR 10.49, 95% CI 3.79 to 29.10; 4 cohort studies, 2588 participants, very low-certainty evidence), insomnia (RR 4.14, 95% CI 1.19 to 14.44; 4 cohort studies, 3212 participants, very low-certainty evidence), anxiety (RR 18.04, 95% CI 9.32 to 34.93; 3 cohort studies, 2559 participants, very low-certainty evidence), and depressed mood (RR 11.43, 95% CI 5.21 to 25.07; 2 cohort studies, 2445 participants, very low-certainty evidence). The findings of the single cohort study reporting adverse events in short-term international travellers were consistent with this finding but the single RCT in military personnel did not demonstrate a difference between groups in frequencies of abnormal dreams or insomnia.Mefloquine users were less likely to report dyspepsia (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.74; 5 cohort studies, 5104 participants, low certainty-evidence), photosensitivity (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.11; 2 cohort studies, 1875 participants, very low-certainty evidence), vomiting (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.27; 4 cohort studies, 5071 participants, very low-certainty evidence), and vaginal thrush (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.16; 1 cohort study, 1761 participants, very low-certainty evidence).Based on the available evidence, our best estimates of absolute effect for mefloquine versus doxycyline were: 2% versus 2% for discontinuation, 12% versus 3% for insomnia, 31% versus 3% for abnormal dreams, 18% versus 1% for anxiety, 11% versus 1% for depressed mood, 4% versus 14% for dyspepsia, 2% versus 19% for photosensitivity, 1% versus 5% for vomiting, and 2% versus 16% for vaginal thrush.Additional analyses, including comparisons of mefloquine with chloroquine, added no new information. Subgroup analysis by study design, duration of travel, and military versus non-military participants, provided no conclusive findings.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The absolute risk of malaria during short-term travel appears low with all three established antimalarial agents (mefloquine, doxycycline, and atovaquone-proguanil).The choice of antimalarial agent depends on how individual travellers assess the importance of specific adverse effects, pill burden, and cost. Some travellers will prefer mefloquine for its once-weekly regimen, but this should be balanced against the increased frequency of abnormal dreams, anxiety, insomnia, and depressed mood.

Interventions for treating tuberculous pericarditis

BACKGROUND

Tuberculous pericarditis can impair the heart's function and cause death; long term, it can cause the membrane to fibrose and constrict causing heart failure. In addition to antituberculous chemotherapy, treatments include corticosteroids, drainage, and surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of treatments for tuberculous pericarditis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (27 March 2017); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library (2017, Issue 2); MEDLINE (1966 to 27 March 2017); Embase (1974 to 27 March 2017); and LILACS (1982 to 27 March 2017). In addition we searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal using 'tuberculosis' and 'pericard*' as search terms on 27 March 2017. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and contacted researchers in the field of tuberculous pericarditis. This is a new version of the original 2002 review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened search outputs, evaluated study eligibility, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data; and we resolved any discrepancies by discussion and consensus. One trial assessed the effects of both corticosteroid and Mycobacterium indicus pranii treatment in a two-by-two factorial design; we excluded data from the group that received both interventions. We conducted fixed-effect meta-analysis and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven trials met the inclusion criteria; all were from sub-Saharan Africa and included 1959 participants, with 1051/1959 (54%) HIV-positive. All trials evaluated corticosteroids and one each evaluated colchicine, M. indicus pranii immunotherapy, and open surgical drainage. Four trials (1841 participants) were at low risk of bias, and three trials (118 participants) were at high risk of bias.In people who are not infected with HIV, corticosteroids may reduce deaths from all causes (risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.09; 660 participants, 4 trials, low certainty evidence) and the need for repeat pericardiocentesis (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.04; 492 participants, 2 trials, low certainty evidence). Corticosteroids probably reduce deaths from pericarditis (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.80; 660 participants, 4 trials, moderate certainty evidence). However, we do not know whether or not corticosteroids have an effect on constriction or cancer among HIV-negative people (very low certainty evidence).In people living with HIV, only 19.9% (203/1959) were on antiretroviral drugs. Corticosteroids may reduce constriction (RR 0.55, 0.26 to 1.16; 575 participants, 3 trials, low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether corticosteroids have an effect on all-cause death or cancer (very low certainty evidence); and may have little or no effect on repeat pericardiocentesis (RR 1.02, 0.89 to 1.18; 517 participants, 2 trials, low certainty evidence).For colchicine among people living with HIV, we found one small trial (33 participants) which had insufficient data to make any conclusions about any effects on death or constrictive pericarditis.Irrespective of HIV status, due to very low certainty evidence from one trial, it is uncertain whether adding M. indicus pranii immunotherapy to antituberculous drugs has an effect on any outcome.Open surgical drainage for effusion may reduce repeat pericardiocentesis In HIV-negative people (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.76; 122 participants, 1 trial, low certainty evidence) but may make little or no difference to other outcomes. We did not find an eligible trial that assessed the effects of open surgical drainage in people living with HIV.The review authors found no eligible trials that examined the length of antituberculous treatment needed nor the effects of other adjunctive treatments for tuberculous pericarditis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For HIV-negative patients, corticosteroids may reduce death. For HIV-positive patients not on antiretroviral drugs, corticosteroids may reduce constriction. For HIV-positive patients with good antiretroviral drug viral suppression, clinicians may consider the results from HIV-negative patients more relevant.Further research may help evaluate percutaneous drainage of the pericardium under local anaesthesia, the timing of pericardiectomy in tuberculous constrictive pericarditis, and new antibiotic regimens.

Vitamin A supplements for reducing mother-to-child HIV transmission

BACKGROUND

Strategies to reduce the risk of mother-to-child transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) include lifelong antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV-positive women, exclusive breastfeeding from birth for six weeks plus nevirapine or replacement feeding plus nevirapine from birth for four to six weeks, elective Caesarean section delivery, and avoiding giving children chewed food. In some settings, these interventions may not be practical, feasible, or affordable. Simple, inexpensive, and effective interventions (that could potentially be implemented even in the absence of prenatal HIV testing programmes) would be valuable. Vitamin A, which plays a role in immune function, is one low-cost intervention that has been suggested in such settings.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the effects of giving vitamin A supplements to HIV-positive women during pregnancy and after delivery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) up to 25 August 2017, and checked the reference lists of relevant articles for eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials conducted in any setting that compared vitamin A supplements to placebo or no intervention among HIV-positive women during pregnancy or after delivery, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and extracted data. We expressed study results as risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD) as appropriate, with their 95% confidence intervals (CI), and conducted random-effects meta-analyses. This is an update of a review last published in 2011.

MAIN RESULTS

Five trials met the inclusion criteria. These were conducted in Malawi, South Africa, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe between 1995 and 2005 and none of the participants received ART. Women allocated to intervention arms received vitamin A supplements at a variety of doses (daily during pregnancy; a single dose immediately after delivery, or daily doses during pregnancy plus a single dose after delivery). Women allocated to comparison arms received identical placebo (6601 women, 4 trials) or no intervention (697 women, 1 trial). Four trials (with 6995 women) had low risk of bias and one trial (with 303 women) had high risk of attrition bias.The trials show that giving vitamin A supplements to HIV-positive women during pregnancy, the immediate postpartum period, or both, probably has little or no effect on mother-to-child transmission of HIV (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.26; 4428 women, 5 trials, moderate certainty evidence) and may have little or no effect on child death by two years of age (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.22; 3883 women, 3 trials, low certainty evidence). However, giving vitamin A supplements during pregnancy may increase the mean birthweight (MD 34.12 g, 95% CI -12.79 to 81.02; 2181 women, 3 trials, low certainty evidence) and probably reduces the incidence of low birthweight (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.97; 1819 women, 3 trials, moderate certainty evidence); but we do not know whether vitamin A supplements affect the risk of preterm delivery (1577 women, 2 trials), stillbirth (2335 women, 3 trials), or maternal death (1267 women, 2 trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antepartum or postpartum vitamin A supplementation, or both, probably has little or no effect on mother-to-child transmission of HIV in women living with HIV infection and not on antiretroviral drugs. The intervention has largely been superseded by ART which is widely available and effective in preventing vertical transmission.

Isoniazid for preventing tuberculosis in HIV-infected children

BACKGROUND

Tuberculosis (TB) is an important cause of illness and death in HIV-positive children living in areas of high TB prevalence. We know that isoniazid prophylaxis prevents TB in HIV-negative children following TB exposure, but there is uncertainty related to its role in TB preventive treatment in HIV-positive children.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the effects of TB preventive treatment versus placebo in HIV-positive children with no known TB contact on active TB, death, and reported adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase and two trial registers up to February 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials of HIV-positive children with and without known TB exposure, randomized to receive TB preventive treatment or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently used the study selection criteria, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We assessed effects using risk, incidence rate and hazard ratios and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three trials, involving 991 participants, below the age of 13 years, from South Africa and Botswana. Children were randomized to isoniazid prophylaxis or placebo, given daily or three times weekly. The median length of follow-up ranged from 5.7 to 34 months; some were on antiretroviral therapy (ART).In HIV-positive children not on ART, isoniazid prophylaxis may reduce the risk of active TB (hazard ratio (HR) 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 0.87; 1 trial, 240 participants, low certainty evidence), and death (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.95; 1 trial, 240 participants, low certainty evidence). One trial (182 participants) reported number of children with laboratory adverse events, which was similar between the isoniazid prophylaxis and placebo groups. No clinical adverse events were reported.In HIV-positive children on ART, we do not know if isoniazid prophylaxis reduces the risk of active TB (risk ratio (RR) 0.76, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.14; 3 trials, 737 participants, very low certainty evidence) or death (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.72; 3 trials, 737 participants, very low certainty evidence). Two trials (714 participants) reported number of clinical adverse events and three trials (795 participants) reported number of laboratory adverse events; for both categories, the number of adverse events were similar between the isoniazid prophylaxis and placebo groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Isoniazid prophylaxis given to all children diagnosed with HIV may reduce the risk of active TB and death in HIV-positive children not on ART in studies from Africa. For children on ART, no clear benefit was detected. .

Rapid diagnostic tests for typhoid and paratyphoid (enteric) fever

BACKGROUND

Differentiating both typhoid (Salmonella Typhi) and paratyphoid (Salmonella Paratyphi A) infection from other causes of fever in endemic areas is a diagnostic challenge. Although commercial point-of-care rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for enteric fever are available as alternatives to the current reference standard test of blood or bone marrow culture, or to the widely used Widal Test, their diagnostic accuracy is unclear. If accurate, they could potentially replace blood culture as the World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended main diagnostic test for enteric fever.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of commercially available rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and prototypes for detecting Salmonella Typhi or Paratyphi A infection in symptomatic persons living in endemic areas.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, IndMED, African Index Medicus, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) up to 4 March 2016. We manually searched WHO reports, and papers from international conferences on Salmonella infections. We also contacted test manufacturers to identify studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy studies of enteric fever RDTs in patients with fever or with symptoms suggestive of enteric fever living in endemic areas. We classified the reference standard used as either Grade 1 (result from a blood culture and a bone marrow culture) or Grade 2 (result from blood culture and blood polymerase chain reaction, or from blood culture alone).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the test result data. We used a modified QUADAS-2 extraction form to assess methodological quality. We performed a meta-analysis when there were sufficient studies for the test and heterogeneity was reasonable.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria and included a total of 5080 participants (range 50 to 1732). Enteric fever prevalence rates in the study populations ranged from 1% to 75% (median prevalence 24%, interquartile range (IQR) 11% to 46%). The included studies evaluated 16 different RDTs, and 16 studies compared two or more different RDTs. Only three studies used the Grade 1 reference standard, and only 11 studies recruited unselected febrile patients. Most included studies were from Asia, with five studies from sub-Saharan Africa. All of the RDTs were designed to detect S.Typhi infection only.Most studies evaluated three RDTs and their variants: TUBEX in 14 studies; Typhidot (Typhidot, Typhidot-M, and TyphiRapid-Tr02) in 22 studies; and the Test-It Typhoid immunochromatographic lateral flow assay, and its earlier prototypes (dipstick, latex agglutination) developed by the Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam (KIT) in nine studies. Meta-analyses showed an average sensitivity of 78% (95% confidence interval (CI) 71% to 85%) and specificity of 87% (95% CI 82% to 91%) for TUBEX; and an average sensitivity of 69% (95% CI 59% to 78%) and specificity of 90% (95% CI 78% to 93%) for all Test-It Typhoid and prototype tests (KIT). Across all forms of the Typhidot test, the average sensitivity was 84% (95% CI 73% to 91%) and specificity was 79% (95% CI 70% to 87%). When we based the analysis on the 13 studies of the Typhidot test that either reported indeterminate test results or where the test format means there are no indeterminate results, the average sensitivity was 78% (95% CI 65% to 87%) and specificity was 77% (95% CI 66% to 86%). We did not identify any difference in either sensitivity or specificity between TUBEX, Typhidot, and Test-it Typhoid tests when based on comparison to the 13 Typhidot studies where indeterminate results are either reported or not applicable. If TUBEX and Test-it Typhoid are compared to all Typhidot studies, the sensitivity of Typhidot was higher than Test-it Typhoid (15% (95% CI 2% to 28%), but other comparisons did not show a difference at the 95% level of CIs.In a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients presenting with fever where 30% (300 patients) have enteric fever, on average Typhidot tests reporting indeterminate results or where tests do not produce indeterminate results will miss the diagnosis in 66 patients with enteric fever, TUBEX will miss 66, and Test-It Typhoid and prototype (KIT) tests will miss 93. In the 700 people without enteric fever, the number of people incorrectly diagnosed with enteric fever would be 161 with Typhidot tests, 91 with TUBEX, and 70 with Test-It Typhoid and prototype (KIT) tests. The CIs around these estimates were wide, with no difference in false positive results shown between tests.The quality of the data for each study was evaluated using a standardized checklist called QUADAS-2. Overall, the certainty of the evidence in the studies that evaluated enteric fever RDTs was low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In 37 studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of RDTs for enteric fever, few studies were at a low risk of bias. The three main RDT tests and variants had moderate diagnostic accuracy. There was no evidence of a difference between the average sensitivity and specificity of the three main RDT tests. More robust evaluations of alternative RDTs for enteric fever are needed.

Interleukin-2 as an adjunct to antiretroviral therapy for HIV-positive adults

BACKGROUND

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) continues to be a leading cause of morbidity and mortality, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Although antiretroviral drugs have helped to improve the quality of life and life expectancy of HIV-positive individuals, there is still a need to explore other interventions that will help to further reduce the disease burden. One potential strategy is the use of interleukin-2 (IL-2) in combination with antiretroviral therapy (ART). IL-2 is a cytokine that regulates the proliferation and differentiation of lymphocytes and may help to boost the immune system.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interleukin-2 (IL-2) as an adjunct to antiretroviral therapy for HIV-positive adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources up to 26 May 2016: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; the Web of Science; LILACS; the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (ICTRP); and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also checked conference abstracts, contacted experts and relevant organizations in the field, and checked the reference list of all studies identified by the above methods for any other potentially eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of IL-2 as an adjunct to ART in reducing the morbidity and mortality in HIV-positive adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened records and selected trials that met the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included trials. Where possible, we compared the effects of interventions using risk ratios (RR), and presented them with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Following a comprehensive literature search up to 26 May 2016, we identified 25 eligible trials. The interventions involved the use of IL-2 in combination with ART compared with ART alone. There was no difference in mortality apparent between the IL-2 group and the ART alone group (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.17; 6 trials, 6565 participants, high certainty evidence). Seventeen of 21 trials reported an increase in the CD4 cell count with the use of IL-2 compared to control using different measures (21 trials, 7600 participants). Overall, there was little or no difference in the proportion of participants with a viral load of less than 50 cells/mL or less than 500 cells/mL by the end of the trials (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.15; 5 trials, 805 participants, high certainty evidence) and (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.12; 4 trials, 5929 participants, high certainty evidence) respectively. Overall there may be little or no difference in the occurrence of opportunistic infections (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.13; 7 trials, 6141 participants, low certainty evidence). There was probably an increase in grade 3 or 4 adverse events (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.96; 6 trials, 6291 participants, moderate certainty evidence). None of the included trials reported adherence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high certainty evidence that IL-2 in combination with ART increases the CD4 cell count in HIV-positive adults. However, IL-2 does not confer any significant benefit in mortality, there is probably no difference in the incidence of opportunistic infections, and there is probably an increase in grade 3 or 4 adverse effects. Our findings do not support the use of IL-2 as an adjunct to ART in HIV-positive adults. Based on our findings, further trials are not justified.

Micronutrient supplementation in adults with HIV infection

BACKGROUND

Micronutrient deficiencies are common among adults living with HIV disease, particularly in low-income settings where the diet may be low in essential vitamins and minerals. Some micronutrients play critical roles in maintenance of the immune system, and routine supplementation could therefore be beneficial. This is an update of a Cochrane Review previously published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether micronutrient supplements are effective and safe in reducing mortality and HIV-related morbidity of HIV-positive adults (excluding pregnant women).

SEARCH METHODS

We performed literature searches from January 2010 to 18 November 2016 for new randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of micronutrient supplements since the previous review included all trials identified from searches prior to 2010. We searched the CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), Embase, and PubMed databases. Also we checked the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and the ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers. We also checked the reference lists of all new included trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs that compared supplements that contained either single, dual, or multiple micronutrients with placebo, no treatment, or other supplements. We excluded studies that were primarily designed to investigate the role of micronutrients for the treatment of HIV-positive participants with metabolic morbidity related to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, morbidity, and disease progression.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, and appraised trial quality for risk of bias. Where possible, we presented results as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous variables, as hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event data, and as mean differences (MD) for continuous variables, each with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Since we were often unable to pool the outcome data, we tabulated it for each comparison. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 trials with 10,325 participants, of which 17 trials were new trials. Ten trials compared a daily multiple micronutrient supplement to placebo in doses up to 20 times the dietary reference intake, and one trial compared a daily standard dose with a high daily dose of multivitamins. Nineteen trials compared supplementation with single or dual micronutrients (such as vitamins A and D, zinc, and selenium) to placebo, and three trials compared different dosages or combinations of micronutrients. Multiple micronutrientsWe conducted analyses across antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive adults (3 trials, 1448 participants), adults on antiretroviral therapy (ART) (1 trial, 400 participants), and ART-naive adults with concurrent active tuberculosis (3 trials, 1429 participants). Routine multiple micronutrient supplementation may have little or no effect on mortality in adults living with HIV (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.15; 7 trials, 2897 participants, low certainty evidence).Routine supplementation for up to two years may have little or no effect on the average of mean CD4+ cell count (MD 26.40 cells/mm³, 95% CI -22.91 to 75.70; 6 trials, 1581 participants, low certainty evidence), or the average of mean viral load (MD -0.1 log₁₀viral copies, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.06; 4 trials, 840 participants, moderate certainty evidence). One additional trial in ART-naïve adults did report an increase in the time to reach a CD4+ cell count < 250 cells/mm³ after two years of high dose supplementation in Botswana (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.88; 1 trial, 439 participants). However, the trial authors reported this effect only in the trial arm that received multiple micronutrients plus selenium (not either supplementation alone), which is inconsistent with the findings of other trials that used similar combinations of micronutrients and selenium.In one additional trial that compared high-dose multiple micronutrient supplementation with standard doses in people on ART, peripheral neuropathy was lower with high dose supplements compared to standard dose (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.7 to 0.94; 1 trial, 3418 participants), but the trial was stopped early due to increased adverse events (elevated alanine transaminase (ALT) levels) in the high dose group. Single or dual micronutrientsNone of the trials of single or dual micronutrient supplements were adequately powered to assess for effects on mortality or morbidity outcomes. No clinically significant changes in CD4 cell count (data not pooled, 14 trials, 2370 participants, very low or low certainty evidence) or viral load (data not pooled, seven studies, 1334 participants, very low or low certainty evidence), were reported. Supplementation probably does increase blood concentrations of vitamin D and zinc (data not pooled, vitamin D: 4 trials, 299 participants, zinc: 4 trials, 484 participants, moderate certainty evidence) and may also increase blood concentrations of vitamin A (data not pooled, 3 trials, 495 participants, low certainty evidence), especially in those who are deficient.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The analyses of the available trials have not revealed consistent clinically important benefits with routine multiple micronutrient supplementation in people living with HIV. Larger trials might reveal small but important effects.These findings should not be interpreted as a reason to deny micronutrient supplements for people living with HIV where specific deficiencies are found or where the person's diet is insufficient to meet the recommended daily allowance of vitamins and minerals.

Psychosocial group interventions to improve psychological well-being in adults living with HIV

BACKGROUND

Being diagnosed with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and labelled with a chronic, life-threatening, and often stigmatizing disease, can impact on a person's well-being. Psychosocial group interventions aim to improve life-functioning and coping as individuals adjust to the diagnosis.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of psychosocial group interventions for improving the psychological well-being of adults living with HIV/AIDS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases up to 14 March 2016: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) published in the Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2016), PubMed (MEDLINE) (1996 to 14 March 2016), Embase (1996 to 14 March 2016), and Clinical Trials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs that compared psychosocial group interventions with versus control (standard care or brief educational interventions), with at least three months follow-up post-intervention. We included trials that reported measures of depression, anxiety, stress, or coping using standardized scales.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened abstracts, applied the inclusion criteria, and extracted data. We compared continuous outcomes using mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), and pooled data using a random-effects model. When the included trials used different measurement scales, we pooled data using standardized mean difference (SMD) values. We reported trials that we could not include in the meta analysis narratively in the text. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 trials (19 articles) that enrolled 2520 adults living with HIV. All the interventions were multifaceted and included a mix of psychotherapy, relaxation, group support, and education. The included trials were conducted in the USA (12 trials), Canada (one trial), Switzerland (one trial), Uganda (one trial), and South Africa (one trial), and published between 1996 and 2016. Ten trials recruited men and women, four trials recruited homosexual men, and two trials recruited women only. Interventions were conducted with groups of four to 15 people, for 90 to 135 minutes, every week for up to 12 weeks. All interventions were conducted face-to-face except two, which were delivered by telephone. All were delivered by graduate or postgraduate trained health, psychology, or social care professionals except one that used a lay community health worker and two that used trained mindfulness practitioners.Group-based psychosocial interventions based on cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) may have a small effect on measures of depression, and this effect may last for up to 15 months after participation in the group sessions (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.10; 1139 participants, 10 trials, low certainty evidence). Most trials used the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), which has a maximum score of 63, and the mean score in the intervention groups was around 1.4 points lower at the end of follow-up. This small benefit was consistent across five trials where participants had a mean depression score in the normal range at baseline, but trials where the mean score was in the depression range at baseline effects were less consistent. Fewer trials reported measures of anxiety, where there may be little or no effect (four trials, 471 participants, low certainty evidence), stress, where there may be little or no effect (five trials, 507 participants, low certainty evidence), and coping (five trials, 697 participants, low certainty evidence).Group-based interventions based on mindfulness have not demonstrated effects on measures of depression (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.03; 233 participants, 2 trials, very low certainty evidence), anxiety (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.15; 62 participants, 2 trials, very low certainty evidence), or stress (MD -2.02, 95% CI -4.23 to 0.19; 137 participants, 2 trials, very low certainty evidence). No mindfulness based interventions included in the studies had any valid measurements of coping.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Group-based psychosocial interventions may have a small effect on measures of depression, but the clinical importance of this is unclear. More high quality evidence is needed to assess whether group psychosocial intervention improve psychological well-being in HIV positive adults.

Corticosteroids for tuberculous pleurisy

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroids used in addition to antituberculous therapy have been reported to benefit people with tuberculous pleurisy. However, research findings are inconsistent and raise doubt as to whether such treatment is worthwhile. There is also concern regarding the potential adverse effects of corticosteroids, especially in HIV-positive people.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of adding corticosteroids to drug regimens for tuberculous pleural effusion.

SEARCH METHODS

In April 2016, we searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Current Controlled Trials, and the reference lists of articles identified by the literature search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared any corticosteroid with no treatment, placebo, or other active treatment (both groups should have received the same antituberculous drug regimen) in people diagnosed with tuberculous pleurisy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the search results, extracted data from the included trials, and assessed trial methodological quality using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We analysed the data using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We applied the fixed-effect model in the absence of statistically significant heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Six trials with 590 participants met the inclusion criteria, which were conducted in Asia (three trials), Africa (two trials), and Europe (one trial). Two trials were in HIV-negative people, one trial was in HIV-positive people, and three trials did not report HIV status.Corticosteroids may reduce the time to resolution of pleural effusion. Risk of residual pleural effusion on chest X-ray was reduced by 45% at eight weeks (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.78; 237 participants, 2 trials, low certainty evidence), and 65% at 24 weeks (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.66; 237 participants, 2 trials, low certainty evidence).Compared with control, corticosteroids may reduce the risk of having pleural changes (such as pleural thickening or pleural adhesions), on chest X-ray at the end of follow-up by almost one third (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.92; 393 participants, 5 trials,low certainty evidence), which translates to an absolute risk reduction of 16%.One trial reported deaths in people that were HIV-positive, with no obvious difference between the groups; the trial authors' analysis suggests that the deaths observed in this trial were related to HIV disease rather than pleural TB (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.31; 197 participants, 1 trial).We found limited data on long-term functional respiratory impairment on 187 people in two trials, which reported that average percentage predicted forced vital capacity was similar in the group receiving prednisolone and in the control group (very low certainty evidence).The risk of adverse events that led to discontinuation of the trial drug was higher in people with pleural TB receiving corticosteroids (RR 2.78, 95% CI 1.11 to 6.94; 587 participants, 6 trials, low certainty evidence). The trial in HIV-positive people reported on six different HIV-related infections, with no obvious differences. However, cases of Kaposi's sarcoma were only seen in the corticosteroid group (with 6/99 cases in the steroid group compared to 0/98 in the control group) (very low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Long-term respiratory function is potentially the most important outcome for assessing the effects of adjunctive treatments for people with pleural TB. However, the information on the impact of pleural TB on long-term respiratory function is unknown and could be eclipsed by other risk factors, such as concurrent pulmonary TB, smoking, and HIV. This probably needs to be quantified to help decide whether further trials of corticosteroids for pleural TB would be worthwhile.

Oral zinc for treating diarrhoea in children

BACKGROUND

In developing countries, diarrhoea causes around 500,000 child deaths annually. Zinc supplementation during acute diarrhoea is currently recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate oral zinc supplementation for treating children with acute or persistent diarrhoea.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 5), MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, CINAHL, mRCT, and reference lists up to 30 September 2016. We also contacted researchers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared oral zinc supplementation with placebo in children aged one month to five years with acute or persistent diarrhoea, including dysentery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Both review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, extracted and analysed data, and drafted the review. The primary outcomes were diarrhoea duration and severity. We summarized dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes using mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where appropriate, we combined data in meta-analyses (using either a fixed-effect or random-effects model) and assessed heterogeneity.We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-three trials that included 10,841 children met our inclusion criteria. Most included trials were conducted in Asian countries that were at high risk of zinc deficiency. Acute diarrhoeaThere is currently not enough evidence from well-conducted RCTs to be able to say whether zinc supplementation during acute diarrhoea reduces death or number of children hospitalized (very low certainty evidence).In children older than six months of age, zinc supplementation may shorten the average duration of diarrhoea by around half a day (MD -11.46 hours, 95% CI -19.72 to -3.19; 2581 children, 9 trials, low certainty evidence), and probably reduces the number of children whose diarrhoea persists until day seven (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.88; 3865 children, 6 trials, moderate certainty evidence). In children with signs of malnutrition the effect appears greater, reducing the duration of diarrhoea by around a day (MD -26.39 hours, 95% CI -36.54 to -16.23; 419 children, 5 trials, high certainty evidence).Conversely, in children younger than six months of age, the available evidence suggests zinc supplementation may have no effect on the mean duration of diarrhoea (MD 5.23 hours, 95% CI -4.00 to 14.45; 1334 children, 2 trials, moderate certainty evidence), or the number of children who still have diarrhoea on day seven (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.54; 1074 children, 1 trial, moderate certainty evidence).None of the included trials reported serious adverse events. However, zinc supplementation increased the risk of vomiting in both age groups (children greater than six months of age: RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.86; 2605 children, 6 trials, moderate certainty evidence; children less than six months of age: RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.24; 1334 children, 2 trials, moderate certainty evidence). Persistent diarrhoeaIn children with persistent diarrhoea, zinc supplementation probably shortens the average duration of diarrhoea by around 16 hours (MD -15.84 hours, 95% CI -25.43 to -6.24; 529 children, 5 trials, moderate certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In areas where the prevalence of zinc deficiency or the prevalence of malnutrition is high, zinc may be of benefit in children aged six months or more. The current evidence does not support the use of zinc supplementation in children less six months of age, in well-nourished children, and in settings where children are at low risk of zinc deficiency.

Polymer-based oral rehydration solution for treating acute watery diarrhoea

BACKGROUND

Acute diarrhoea is one of the main causes of morbidity and mortality among children in low-income countries. Glucose-based oral rehydration solution (ORS) helps replace fluid and prevent further dehydration from acute diarrhoea. Since 2004, the World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended the osmolarity of less than 270 mOsm/L (ORS ≤ 270) versus greater than 310 mOsm/L formulation (ORS ≥ 310). Polymer-based ORS (for example, prepared using rice or wheat) slowly releases glucose and may be superior to glucose-based ORS.

OBJECTIVES

To compare polymer-based oral rehydration solution (polymer-based ORS) with glucose-based oral rehydration solution (glucose-based ORS) for treating acute watery diarrhoea.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources up to 5 September 2016: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group (CIDG) Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1966 to 5 September 2016), EMBASE (1974 to 5 September 2016), LILACS (1982 to 5 September 2016), and mRCT (2007 to 5 September 2016). We also contacted researchers, organizations, and pharmaceutical companies, and searched reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of people with acute watery diarrhoea (cholera and non-cholera associated) that compared polymer-based and glucose-based ORS (with identical electrolyte contents).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the search results and risk of bias, and extracted data. In multiple-treatment arms with two or more treatment groups, we combined outcomes as appropriate and compared collectively with the control group.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five trials that included 4284 participants met the inclusion criteria: 28 trials exclusively included children, five included adults, and two included both adults and children. Polymer-based ORS versus glucose-based ORS (osmolarity ≤ 270) Eight trials (752 participants) evaluated this comparison, and seven trials used rice as a polymer source. Polymer-based ORS may decrease mean stool output in the first 24 hours by 24 mL/kg (mean difference (MD) -24.60 mL/kg, 95% CI -40.69 to -8.51; one trial, 99 participants, low quality evidence). The average duration of diarrhoea may be reduced by eight hours (MD -8.24 hours, 95% CI -13.17 to -3.30; I² statistic = 86%, five trials, 364 participants, low quality evidence) with polymer ORS but results are heterogeneous. Limited trials showed no observed difference in the risk of unscheduled use of intravenous fluid (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.02; I² statistic = 30%; four trials, 376 participants, very low quality evidence), vomiting (very low quality evidence), and hyponatraemia (very low quality evidence). Polymer-based ORS versus glucose-based ORS (osmolarity ≥ 310) Twenty-seven trials (3532 participants) evaluated this comparison using a variety of polymers. On average, polymer ORS may reduce the total stool output in the first 24 hours by around 65 mL/kg (MD -65.47 mL/kg, 95% CI -83.92 to -47.03; 16 trials, 1483 participants, low quality evidence), and may reduce the duration of diarrhoea by around eight hours (MD -8.57 hours; SD -13.17 to -4.03; 16 trials, 1137 participants, low quality evidence) with substantial heterogeneity. The proportion of participants that required intravenous hydration was low in most trials with fewer in the polymer ORS group (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.98; 19 trials, 1877 participant, low quality evidence) . Subgroup analysis by type of pathogen suggested an effect on unscheduled intravenous fluid in those infected with mixed pathogens (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.96; 11 trials, 928 participants, low quality evidence), but not in participants positive for Vibrio cholerae (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.34; 7 trials, 535 participants, low quality evidence). No difference was observed in the number of patients who developed vomiting (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.14; 10 trials, 584 participants, very low quality evidence), hyponatraemia (RR 1.82, 95% CI 0.52 to 6.44; 4 trials, 385 participants, very low quality evidence), hypokalaemia (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.74 to 2.25; 2 trials, 260 participants, low quality evidence), or persistent diarrhoea (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.41; 2 trials, 885 participants, very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Polymer-based ORS shows advantages compared to glucose-based ORS (at ≥ 310 mOsm/L). Comparisons favoured polymer-based ORS over ORS ≤ 270 but analysis was underpowered.

Efavirenz or nevirapine in three-drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide-reverse transcriptase inhibitors for initial treatment of HIV infection in antiretroviral-naïve individuals

BACKGROUND

The advent of highly active antiretroviral therapy (ART) has reduced the morbidity and mortality due to HIV infection. The World Health Organization (WHO) ART guidelines focus on three classes of antiretroviral drugs, namely nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI) and protease inhibitors. Two of the most common medications given as first-line treatment are the NNRTIs, efavirenz (EFV) and nevirapine (NVP). It is unclear which NNRTI is more efficacious for initial therapy. This systematic review was first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To determine which non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, either EFV or NVP, is more effective in suppressing viral load when given in combination with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors as part of initial antiretroviral therapy for HIV infection in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

We attempted to identify all relevant studies, regardless of language or publication status, in electronic databases and conference proceedings up to 12 August 2016. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov to 12 August 2016. We searched LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature) and the Web of Science from 1996 to 12 August 2016. We checked the National Library of Medicine (NLM) Gateway from 1996 to 2009, as it was no longer available after 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared EFV to NVP in people with HIV without prior exposure to ART, irrespective of the dosage or NRTI's given in combination.The primary outcome of interest was virological success. Other primary outcomes included mortality, clinical progression to AIDS, severe adverse events, and discontinuation of therapy for any reason. Secondary outcomes were change in CD4 count, treatment failure, development of ART drug resistance, and prevention of sexual transmission of HIV.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed each reference for inclusion using exclusion criteria that we had established a priori. Two review authors independently extracted data from each included trial using a standardized data extraction form. We analysed data on an intention-to-treat basis. We performed subgroup analyses for concurrent treatment for tuberculosis and dosage of NVP. We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve RCTs, which included 3278 participants, met our inclusion criteria. None of these trials included children. The length of follow-up time, study settings, and NRTI combination drugs varied greatly. In five included trials, participants were receiving concurrent treatment for tuberculosis.There was little or no difference between EFV and NVP in virological success (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.09; 10 trials, 2438 participants; high quality evidence), probably little or no difference in mortality (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.19; 8 trials, 2317 participants; moderate quality evidence) and progression to AIDS (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.11; 5 trials, 2005 participants; moderate quality evidence). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in all severe adverse events (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.18; 8 trials, 2329 participants; very low quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference in discontinuation rate (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.25; 9 trials, 2384 participants; moderate quality evidence) and change in CD4 count (MD -3.03; 95% CI -17.41 to 11.35; 9 trials, 1829 participants; moderate quality evidence). There may be little or no difference in treatment failure (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.24; 5 trials, 737 participants; low quality evidence). Development of drug resistance is probably slightly less in the EFV arms (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.95; 4 trials, 988 participants; moderate quality evidence). No studies were found that looked at sexual transmission of HIV.When we examined the adverse events individually, EFV probably is associated with more people with impaired mental function (7 per 1000) compared to NVP (2 per 1000; RR 4.46, 95% CI 1.65 to 12.03; 6 trials, 2049 participants; moderate quality evidence) but fewer people with elevated transaminases (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.78; 3 trials, 1299 participants; high quality evidence), fewer people with neutropenia (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.82; 3 trials, 1799 participants; high quality evidence), and probably fewer people withrash (229 per 100 with NVP versus 133 per 1000 with EFV; RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.00; 7 trials, 2277 participants; moderate quality evidence). We found that there may be little or no difference in gastrointestinal adverse events (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.21; 6 trials, 2049 participants; low quality evidence), pyrexia (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.73; 3 trials, 1799 participants; low quality evidence), raised alkaline phosphatase (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.50; 1 trial, 1007 participants; low quality evidence), raised amylase (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.73; 2 trials, 1071 participants; low quality evidence) and raised triglycerides (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.13; 2 trials, 1071 participants; low quality evidence). There was probably little or no difference in serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT; MD 3.3, 95% CI -2.06 to 8.66; 1 trial, 135 participants; moderate quality evidence), serum glutamic- pyruvic transaminase (SGPT; MD 5.7, 95% CI -4.23 to 15.63; 1 trial, 135 participants; moderate quality evidence) and raised cholesterol (RR 6.03, 95% CI 0.75 to 48.78; 1 trial, 64 participants; moderate quality evidence).Our subgroup analyses revealed that NVP slightly increases mortality when given once daily (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.90; 3 trials, 678 participants; high quality evidence). There were little or no differences in the primary outcomes for patients who were concurrently receiving treatment for tuberculosis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Both drugs have similar benefits in initial treatment of HIV infection when combined with two NRTIs. The adverse events encountered affect different systems, with EFV more likely to cause central nervous system adverse events and NVP more likely to raise transaminases, cause neutropenia and rash.

Vitamin D supplementation for preventing infections in children under five years of age

BACKGROUND

Vitamin D is a micronutrient important for bone growth and immune function. Deficiency can lead to rickets and has been linked to various infections, including respiratory infections. The evidence on the effects of supplementation on infections in children has not been assessed systematically.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the role of vitamin D supplementation in preventing pneumonia, tuberculosis (TB), diarrhoea, and malaria in children under five years of age. This includes high-, middle-, and low-income countries.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/) , ClinicalTrials.gov and the ISRCTN registry (http://www.isrctn.com/) up to 16 June 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated preventive supplementation of vitamin D (versus placebo or no intervention) in children under five years of age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias of included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 3198 children under five years of age, and were conducted in Afghanistan, Spain, and the USA. Prevalence of vitamin D deficiency varied widely in these populations (range: 73.1% in Afghanistan, 10 to 12% in USA, and 6.2% in Spain). The included trials evaluated mortality (two trials), pneumonia incidence (two trials), diarrhoea incidence (two trials), hospitalization (two trials), and mean serum vitamin D concentrations (four trials).We do not know whether vitamin D supplementation impacts on all-cause mortality because this outcome was underpowered due to few events (risk ratio (RR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 3.74; one trial, 3046 participants, low quality evidence).For pneumonia, episodes of 'radiologically confirmed' first or only episode of pneumonia were little different in the supplemented and unsupplemented group (Rate Ratio: 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.26; two trials, 3134 participants, moderate quality evidence), and similarly for children with confirmed or unconfirmed pneumonia (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.04; one trial, 3046 participants). In these two trials there were no obvious differences between supplemented and unsupplemented children regarding episodes of diarrhoea.In the single large trial from Afghanistan, the trial authors reported that vitamin D supplementation was associated with an increase in repeat episodes of pneumonia confirmed by chest radiograph (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.21; one trial, 3046 participants), but not reflected in the outcome of confirmed or unconfirmed pneumonia (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.13; one trial, 3046 participants).For hospital admission measured in one small trial, there was no difference detected (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.62; one trial, 88 participants; very low quality evidence).The mean serum vitamin D concentrations were higher in supplemented compared to unsupplemented children at the end of supplementation (MD 7.72 ng/mL, 95% CI 0.50 to 14.93; four trials, 266 participants, low quality evidence). These results were driven primarily by two smaller trials with large magnitudes of effect. In the other two bigger trials, serum vitamin D concentrations were elevated in the intervention group for most of the trial duration but not at the end of supplementation. This may be due to time elapsed at measurement from the last dose, incomplete compliance, or increased need of vitamin D with infant age.We did not find any trial that reported on the incidence of TB, malaria or febrile illness, duration of pneumonia, duration of diarrhoea, severity of infection, and cause-specific mortality (due to TB, diarrhoea, or malaria).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from one large trial did not demonstrate benefit of vitamin D supplementation on the incidence of pneumonia or diarrhoea in children under five years. To our knowledge, trials that evaluated supplementation for preventing other infections, including TB and malaria, have not been performed.