Comparative efficacy of #treatments for #Clostridium difficile #infection: a systematic review and network meta-analysis (Lancet Infect Dis., abstract)

[Source: The Lancet Infectious Diseases, full page: (LINK). Abstract, edited.]

Comparative efficacy of treatments for Clostridium difficile infection: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Tumas Beinortas, MBBCh†, Nicholas E Burr, MBBS†, Prof Mark H Wilcox, MD

†Contributed equally

Published: 16 July 2018 / DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30285-8

© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

 

Summary

Background

Several new treatments for Clostridium difficile infections have been investigated. We aimed to compare and rank treatments for non-multiply recurrent infections with C difficile in adults.

Methods

We did a random effects network meta-analysis within a frequentist setting to obtain direct and indirect comparisons of trials. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov for published and unpublished trials from the creation of these databases until June 30, 2017. We included randomised controlled trials of treatments for non-multiply recurrent infections with confirmed C difficile in adults (at least 18 years) that reported both primary cure and recurrence rates, and we used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool to appraise trial methods. For our analysis, we extracted the total numbers of patients with primary cure and recurrence from published and unpublished reports. The primary outcome was sustained symptomatic cure, defined as the number of patients with resolution of diarrhoea minus the number with recurrence or death.

Findings

Of 23 004 studies screened, 24 trials, which comprised 5361 patients and 13 different treatments, were included in the analysis. The overall quality of evidence was rated as moderate to low. For sustained symptomatic cure, fidaxomicin (odds ratio 0·67, 95% CI 0·55–0·82) and teicoplanin (0·37, 0·14–0·94) were significantly better than vancomycin. Teicoplanin (0·27, 0·10–0·70), ridinilazole (0·41, 0·19–0·88), fidaxomicin (0·49, 0·35–0·68), surotomycin (0·66, 0·45–0·97), and vancomycin (0·73, 0·56–0·95) were better than metronidazole. Bacitracin was inferior to teicoplanin (0·22, 0·06–0·77) and fidaxomicin (0·40, 0·17–0·94), and tolevamer was inferior to all drugs except for LFF571 (0·50, 0·18–1·39) and bacitracin (0·67, 0·28–1·58). Global heterogeneity of the entire network was low (Cochran’s Q=15·70; p=0·47).

Interpretation

Among the treatments for non-multiply recurrent infections by C difficile, the highest quality evidence indicates that fidaxomicin provides a sustained symptomatic cure most frequently. Fidaxomicin is a better treatment option than vancomycin for all patients except those with severe infections with C difficile and could be considered as a first-line therapy. Metronidazole should not be recommended for treatment of C difficile.

Funding

None.

Keywords: Clostridium difficile; Antibiotics; Fidaxomicin; Vancomycin; Metronidazole.

——

Advertisements

Published by

gimi69

I am an Italian blogger, active since 2005 with main focus on emerging infectious diseases such as avian influenza, SARS, antibiotics resistance, and many other global Health issues. Other fields of interest are: climate change, global warming, geological and biological sciences. My activity consists mainly in collection and analysis of news, public services updates, confronting sources and making decision about what are the 'signals' of an impending crisis (an outbreak, for example). When a signal is detected, I follow traces during the entire course of an event. I started in 2005 my blog ''A TIME'S MEMORY'', now with more than 40,000 posts and 3 millions of web interactions. Subsequently I added an Italian Language blog, then discontinued because of very low traffic and interest. I contributed for seven years to a public forum (FluTrackers.com) in the midst of the Ebola epidemic in West Africa in 2014, I left the site to continue alone my data tracking job.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s