A systematic review of the relative efficacy and toxicity of treatment regimens for HIV-associated cerebral toxoplasmosis: is trimephoprim-sulfamethaxozole a real option?
Average rating
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Star rating
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
Authors
Thota, P.Pellegrino, D.
Pasupuleti, V.
Benítes-Zapata, Vicente A.
Vidal, J.
Hernández, Adrian V.
Deshpande, Abhishek
Issue Date
2015-10-15
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
IDWeekAdditional Links
https://idsa.confex.com/idsa/2015/webprogram/Paper53219.htmlType
info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObjectRights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLanguage
engDescription
Background: Pyrimethamine and sulfadiazine (P-S) combination is effective and considered the mainstay therapy for cerebral toxoplasmosis (CT). Alternative treatment regimens are available, but their relative efficacy and tolerability are not well known. Particularly, trimephoprim-sulfamethaxozole (TMP-SMX) shows potential advantages (i.e., tolerability, posology, parenteral formulation, cost, and accessibility) but its use is infrequent when P-S is available. Methods: We searched PubMed and 4 other databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing different regimens for the treatment of HIV-associated CT. Two independent reviewers searched and identified studies and extracted data. Risk ratios (RRs) were pooled across studies using random-effects models. Results: Nine studies were included (5 RCTs, 3 retrospective cohorts, 1 prospective cohort). Treatment with P-S has the same or better clinical efficacy than P-C or TMP-SMX in terms of partial or complete response clinical response (P-C vs P-S: RR 0.87, 95%CI 0.70-1.08; TMP-SMX vs P-S: RR 0.97, 95%CI 0.78-1.21) and radiological response (P-C vs P-S: RR 0.92, 95%CI 0.82-1.03). Safety profile in terms of skin rash (P-C vs P-S: RR 0.81, 95%CI 0.56-1.17; TMP-SMX vs P-S: RR 0.17, 95%CI 0.02-1.29), liver impairment (P-C vs P-S: RR 0.48, 95%CI 0.24-0.97) and drug discontinuation due to adverse events (P-C vs P-S: RR 0.32, 95%CI 0.07-1.47) were worse with P-S regimen. Conclusion: The available evidence fails to identify any one superior regimen for the treatment of CT. However, P-S regimen has worse safety profile than P-C or TMP-SMX. Although current evidence does not allow a definitive recommendation, use of TMP-SMX for treatment of HIV-associated CT is consistent with the available data. More large studies comparing alternative therapies are needed.IDWeek, Evento que se llevó a cabo del 7 -11 de Octubre de 2015, en la ciudad de San Diego, CA, EE.UU. Evento Sesión HIV: Other Opportunistic Infections in HIV. Saturday, October 10, 2015. Room: Poster Hall
Collections
The following license files are associated with this item: