Oral versus intra-vaginal imidazole and triazole anti-fungal treatment of uncomplicated vulvovaginal candidiasis (thrush)

Infectious Vaginitis, Cervicitis, and Pelvic Inflammatory Disease

Vaginal symptoms are one of the most common reasons women consult with physicians and can significantly impact quality of life. The differential diagnosis of vaginal discharge includes physiologic discharge, vaginitis, cervicitis, and pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). Vaginitis is inflammation of the vagina, most commonly caused by bacterial vaginosis (BV), vulvovaginal candidiasis, and trichomoniasis infections. Cervicitis is an inflammation of the cervix and typically caused by Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae. PID is infection of the female upper genital tract, involving the uterus, fallopian tubes, ovaries, and/or pelvic peritoneum and usually caused by Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and bacterial vaginosis-associated pathogens. A pelvic exam should be performed for any woman presenting with vaginal discharge to confirm the diagnosis and rule out an upper tract infection. BV and vulvovaginal candidal infections only require treatment if symptomatic and do not require partner therapy, whereas treatment and partner therapy is recommended for sexually transmitted illnesses, such as trichomoniasis, chlamydia and gonorrhea. Vaginitis may be uncomfortable, but rarely leads to serious long-term consequence, but pelvic inflammatory disease can lead to serious long-term sequelae, including increased risk for ectopic pregnancy, infertility, and chronic pelvic pain.

Oral versus intra-vaginal imidazole and triazole anti-fungal treatment of uncomplicated vulvovaginal candidiasis (thrush)

BACKGROUND

Anti-fungals are available for oral and intra-vaginal treatment of uncomplicated vulvovaginal candidiasis.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this review is to assess the relative effectiveness (clinical cure) of oral versus intra-vaginal anti-fungals for the treatment of uncomplicated vulvovaginal candidiasis. Secondary objectives include the assessment of the relative effectiveness in terms of mycological cure, in addition to safety, side effects, treatment preference, time to first relief of symptoms, and costs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers on 29 August 2019 together with reference checking and citation searching.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials published in any language comparing at least one oral anti-fungal with one intra-vaginal anti-fungal in women (aged 16 years or over) with a mycological diagnosis (positive culture, microscopy for yeast, or both) of uncomplicated vulvovaginal candidiasis. We excluded trials if they solely involved participants who were HIV positive, immunocompromised, pregnant, breast feeding or diabetic.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as recommended by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 26 trials (5007 participants). Eight anti-fungals are represented. All but three trials included participants with acute vulvovaginal candidiasis. Trials were conducted in Europe: UK (3), Croatia (2). Finland (2), the Netherlands (2), Germany (1), Italy (1), Sweden (1) and one trial across multiple European countries, USA (7) Thailand (2), Iran (2), Japan (1) and Africa (Nigeria) (1). The duration of follow-up varied between trials. The overall risk of bias of the included trials was high. There was probably little or no difference shown between oral and intra-vaginal anti-fungal treatment for clinical cure at short-term follow-up (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.43; 13 trials; 1859 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and long-term follow-up (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.50; 9 trials; 1042 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that if the rate of clinical cure at short-term follow-up with intra-vaginal treatment is 77%, the rate with oral treatment would be between 75% and 83%; if the rate of clinical cure at long term follow-up with intra-vaginal treatment is 84%, the rate with oral treatment would be between 80% and 89%. Oral treatment probably improves mycological cure over intra-vaginal treatment at short term (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.50: 19 trials; 3057 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and long-term follow-up (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.60; 13 trials; 1661 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that if the rate of mycological cure at short-term follow-up with intra-vaginal treatment is 80%, the rate with oral treatment would be between 80% and 85%; if the rate of mycological cure at long-term follow-up with intra-vaginal treatment is 66%, the rate with oral treatment would be between 67% and 76%. In terms of patient safety, there is a low risk of participants withdrawing from the studies due to adverse drug effects for either treatment (23 trials; 4637 participants; high-certainty evidence). Due to the low certainty of evidence, it is undetermined whether oral treatments reduced the number of side effects compared with intra-vaginal treatments (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.29; 16 trials; 3155 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that if the rate of side effects with intra-vaginal treatment is 12%, the rate with oral treatment would be between 10% and 15%. We noted that the type of side effects differed, with intra-vaginal treatments being more often associated with local reactions, and oral treatments being more often associated with systemic effects including gastro-intestinal symptoms and headaches. Oral treatment appeared to be the favoured treatment preference over intra-vaginal treatment or no preference (12 trials; 2206 participants), however the data were poorly reported and the certainty of the evidence was low. There was little or no difference in time to first relief of symptoms between oral and intra-vaginal treatments: four trials favoured the oral treatment, four favoured intra-vaginal, one study reported no difference and one was unclear. The measurements varied between the 10 trials (1910 participants) and the certainty of the evidence was low. Costs were not reported in any of the trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oral anti-fungal treatment probably improves short- and long-term mycological cure over intra-vaginal treatment for uncomplicated vaginal candidiasis. Oral treatment was the favoured treatment preference by participants, though the certainty of this evidence is low. The decision to prescribe or recommend an anti-fungal for oral or intra-vaginal administration should take into consideration safety in terms of withdrawals and side effects, as well as cost and treatment preference. Unless there is a previous history of adverse reaction to one route of administration or contraindications, women who are purchasing their own treatment should be given full information about the characteristics and costs of treatment to make their own decision. If health services are paying the treatment cost, decision-makers should consider whether the higher cost of some oral anti-fungals is worth the gain in convenience, if this is the patient's preference.

Innovative nanocompounds for cutaneous administration of classical antifungal drugs: a systematic review

Nanomedicine manipulates materials at atomic, molecular, and supramolecular scale, with at least one dimension within the nanometer range, for biomedical applications. The resulting nanoparticles have been consistently shown beneficial effects for antifungal drugs delivery, overcoming the problems of low bioavailability and high toxicity of these drugs. Due to their unique features, namely the small mean particle size, nanoparticles contribute to the enhanced drug absorption and uptake by the target cells, potentiating the therapeutic drug effect. The topical route is desirable due to the adverse effects arising from oral administration. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the use of nano compounds for the current treatment of topical fungal infections. A special emphasis is given to the employment of lipid nanoparticles, due to their recognized efficacy, versatility, and biocompatibility, attracting the major attention as novel topical nanocompounds used for the administration of antifungal drugs.

Current concept of the diagnostics and treatment of vulvovaginal candidosis

In spite of high prevalence of vulvovaginal candidosis (VVC), its diagnostics and treatment pose a serious problem. Factors such as accessibility of antimycotic drugs, their uncontrolled application by patients and absence of any appropriate laboratory diagnostics result in the growth of the incidence rate, in particular, of recurrent forms related to a steady growth in the number of fungi of clinical importance as well as strains resistant to antifungal drugs. Discussion and conclusion. Today the problem of the need to develop VVC prevention drugs is increasingly urgent because reduced immunity results in relapses of the disease. Clinical trials of drugs for immune system correction are ongoing, and some of them have reached Phase 2. Based on the present-day research data, it is possible to conclude that the key standards for VVC diagnostics and treatment are as follows: mandatory diagnostics with the use of microbiological tests to determine the sensitivity to antifungal medicines, in particular, in case of recurrent VVC, and collection of detailed medical history data and physical examination to determine the form and severity of the disease (acute, recurrent, complicated or uncomplicated) and treatment duration: 1-7 days for acute uncomplicated forms and 7-14 days for recurrent complicated forms. The specific drug and route of administration are to be selected based on the physician’s preferences, patient’s convenience and cost of the drug provided the drug sensitivity is determined by laboratory tests. The administration of probiotics for VVC prevention and treatment is disputable today.

Factors involved in patient choice of oral or vaginal treatment for vulvovaginal candidiasis

Vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) is an extremely common cause of vaginal symptoms in women. Multiple antifungal products are available by either the oral or vaginal route, although no new drugs have become available for two decades. Given the therapeutic equivalence of the antimycotic agents and their routes of administration, the specific drug and formulation selected is entirely arbitrary in relation to final treatment outcome. Nevertheless, multiple factors affecting preference, both practitioner-dependent and patient-dependent, impact on selection of a specific drug and route of administration.

European (IUSTI/WHO) guideline on the management of vaginal discharge, 2011

Three common infections are associated with vaginal discharge: bacterial vaginosis, trichomoniasis and candidiasis, of which trichomoniasis is a sexually transmitted infection (STI). This guideline covers the presentation and clinical findings of these infections and outlines the differential diagnoses. Recommendations for investigation and management based on currently available evidence are made, including the management of persistent and recurrent infections.

Itraconazole vs fluconazole for the treatment of uncomplicated acute vaginal and vulvovaginal candidiasis in nonpregnant women: a metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials

In this metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) we aimed to compare the in vivo and in vitro activity and the safety of per os itraconazole and fluconazole treatment of uncomplicated acute vaginal/vulvovaginal candidiasis in nonpregnant women. We used PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify the studies that were relevant to our metaanalysis RCTs. Six RCTs were included in this study that comprised 1092 enrolled patients with signs and symptoms of vaginal/vulvovaginal candidiasis that was confirmed by microscopy and/or microbiologic cultures that were obtained from the ectocervix and/or vaginal fundus. Overall, there was no difference between itraconazole and fluconazole regarding clinical cure and improvement at the first and second scheduled visit assessments (pooled odds ratio [OR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.6-1.48] and 1.09 [95% CI, 0.68-1.75], respectively), mycologic cure at the first and second scheduled visit assessments (OR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.31-1.7] and 0.71 [95% CI, 0.49-1.03], respectively), withdrawal of patients because of severe adverse events (OR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.16-3.32]), and adverse events noted from the nervous and digestive systems (OR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.42-2.73] and 1.84 [95% CI, 0.3-11.27], respectively). In conclusion, effectiveness and safety of oral itraconazole and fluconazole in the treatment of acute uncomplicated vaginal/vulvovaginal candidiasis are similar.

[Up to date in sexually transmitted infections: epidemiology, diagnostic approaches and treatments]

In the last years, there have been important advances in sexually transmitted infections such as genome sequencing of Treponema pallidum, Chlamydia trachomatis or Mycoplasma genitalium; the new taxonomic position of Calymmatobacterium granulomatis; commercial diagnostic systems based on nucleic acid amplification; the emergence of quinolone resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae; new therapeutic approaches in vulvovaginal candidiasis that include boric acid; the demonstration that valacyclovir reduces the risk of transmission of genital herpes or the availability of immune-response modifier in the treatment of genital warts, and that are questions in the goal of this review. Viral hepatitis and HIV were no reviewed by space reasons.

The development of evidence-based guidelines for over-the-counter treatment of vulvovaginal candidiasis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to develop evidence-based guidelines for over-the-counter (OTC) treatment of vulvovaginal candidiasis with non-prescription anti-fungal medicines purchased from community pharmacies.

METHOD

A multidisciplinary guideline development group was recruited from the locality where the guidelines were to be tested. A Nominal Group Technique (NGT) was used to achieve formal consensus within the group regarding the issues that the guidelines would address. Guideline recommendations were developed from the results of two systematic literature reviews that assessed which symptoms were predictive of vulvovaginal candidiasis (using data from epidemiological studies) and estimated the relative effectiveness of oral and intra-vaginal anti-fungals using data from randomised controlled trials.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Evidence-based guideline recommendations. The guideline statements were linked to the evidence using a standard hierarchy.

RESULTS

The guideline development group met four times. The use of NGT was an effective way of achieving consensus on guideline content. Two systematic reviews carried out as part of the guideline development process identified evidence for the guidelines on the efficacy of OTC treatments and symptoms suggestive of vulvovaginal candidiasis. The guideline recommendations were presented as a booklet and a laminated algorithm. In summary, the guidelines highlighted symptoms suggestive of vulvovaginal candidiasis, and symptoms associated with other vaginal conditions that should be referred to the GP. The guidelines stated that oral treatment and intra-vaginal treatment are equally effective, and that selection of an anti-fungal should be based upon safety, cost and patient preference. Many of the recommendations were influenced by OTC license restrictions of each antifungal product. Contra-indications to, and special precautions with, antifungals were also listed. In addition, the guidelines stated that the male sexual partner does not require treatment unless symptomatic.

CONCLUSION

There is sufficient evidence available to develop evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of vulvovaginal candidiasis in the community pharmacy setting. The NGT is a useful component in the guideline development process.