Twice vs three-times daily antibiotics in the treatment of pulmonary exacerbations of cystic fibrosis

[CF Lung Disease - a German S3 Guideline: Pseudomonas aeruginosa]

Cystic Fibrosis (CF) is the most common autosomal recessive genetic multisystemic disease. In Germany, it affects at least 8000 people. The disease is caused by mutations in the Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator (CFTR) gene leading to dysfunction of CFTR, a transmembrane chloride channel. This defect causes insufficient hydration of the airway epithelial lining fluid which leads to reduction of the mucociliary clearance.Even if highly effective, CFTR modulator therapy has been available for some years and people with CF are getting much older than before, recurrent and chronic infections of the airways as well as pulmonary exacerbations still occur. In adult CF life, Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) is the most relevant pathogen in colonisation and chronic infection of the lung, leading to further loss of lung function. There are many possibilities to treat PA-infection.This is a S3-clinical guideline which implements a definition for chronic PA-infection and demonstrates evidence-based diagnostic methods and medical treatment in order to give guidance for individual treatment options.

Single versus combination intravenous anti-pseudomonal antibiotic therapy for people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

The choice of antibiotic, and the use of single or combined therapy are controversial areas in the treatment of respiratory infection due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis (CF). Advantages of combination therapy include wider range of modes of action, possible synergy and reduction of resistant organisms; advantages of monotherapy include lower cost, ease of administration and reduction of drug-related toxicity. Current evidence does not provide a clear answer and the use of intravenous antibiotic therapy in CF requires further evaluation. This is an update of a previously published review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of single compared to combination intravenous anti-pseudomonal antibiotic therapy for treating people with CF.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Most recent search of the Group's Trials Register: 07 October 2020. We also searched online trials registries on 16 November 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a single intravenous anti-pseudomonal antibiotic with a combination of that antibiotic plus a second anti-pseudomonal antibiotic in people with CF.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We assessed the certainty of the data using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 59 trials, of which we included eight trials (356 participants) comparing a single anti-pseudomonal agent to a combination of the same antibiotic and one other. There was a wide variation in the individual antibiotics used in each trial. In total, the trials included seven comparisons of a beta-lactam antibiotic (penicillin-related or third generation cephalosporin) with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination and three comparisons of an aminoglycoside with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination.  There was considerable heterogeneity amongst these trials, leading to difficulties in performing the review and interpreting the results. These results should be interpreted cautiously. Six of the included trials were published between 1977 and 1988; these were single-centre trials with flaws in the randomisation process and small sample size. Overall, the methodological quality was poor and the certainty of the evidence ranged from low to moderate. The review did not find any differences between monotherapy and combination therapy in either the short term or in the long term for the outcomes of different lung function measures, bacteriological outcome measures, need for additional treatment, adverse effects, quality of life or symptom scores.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review are inconclusive. The review raises important methodological issues. There is a need for an RCT which needs to be well-designed in terms of adequate randomisation allocation, blinding, power and long-term follow-up. Results need to be standardised to a consistent method of reporting, in order to validate the pooling of results from multiple trials.

Outcomes and endpoints reported in studies of pulmonary exacerbations in people with cystic fibrosis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus about which outcomes should be evaluated in studies of pulmonary exacerbations in people with cystic fibrosis (CF). Outcomes used for evaluation should be meaningful; that is, they should capture how people feel, function or survive and be acknowledged as important to people with CF, or should be reliable surrogates of those outcomes. We aimed to summarise the outcomes and corresponding endpoints which have been reported in studies of pulmonary exacerbations, and to identify those which are most likely to be meaningful.

METHODS

A PROSPERO registered systematic review (CRD42020151785) was conducted in Medline, Embase and Cochrane from inception until July 2020. Registered trials were also included.

RESULTS

144 studies met the inclusion criteria. A wide range of outcomes and corresponding endpoints were reported. Death, QoL and many patient-reported outcomes are likely to be meaningful as they directly capture how people feel, function or survive. Forced expiratory volume in 1-second [FEV₁] is a validated surrogate of risk of death and reduced QoL. The extent of structural lung disease has also been correlated with lung function, pulmonary exacerbations and risk of death. Since no evidence of a correlation between airway microbiology or biomarkers with clinically meaningful outcomes was found, the value of these as surrogates was unclear.

CONCLUSIONS

Death, QoL, patient-reported outcomes, FEV₁, and structural lung changes were identified as outcomes that are most likely to be meaningful. Development of a core outcome set in collaboration with stakeholders including people with CF is recommended.

Liposomes for Antibiotic Encapsulation and Delivery

When antibiotics are administered, orally or intravenously, they pass through different organs and layers of tissue on their way to the site of infection; this can cause dilution and/or intoxication. To overcome these problems, drug delivery vehicles have been used to encapsulate and deliver antibiotics, improving their therapeutic index while minimizing their adverse effects. Liposomes are self-assembled lipid vesicles made from at least one bilayer of phospholipids with an inner aqueous compartment. Liposomes are attractive vehicles to deliver antibiotics because they can encapsulate both hydrophobic and hydrophilic antibiotics, they have low toxicity, and they can change the biodistribution of the drug. Furthermore, liposomes have been approved by regulatory agencies. However, most developmental and mechanistic research in the field has been focused on encapsulation and delivery of anticancer drugs, a class of molecules that differ significantly in chemistry from antibiotics. In this critical Review, we discuss the state of knowledge regarding the design of liposomes for encapsulation and delivery of antibiotics and offer insight into the challenges and promises of using liposomes for antibiotic delivery.

Duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Progressive lung damage from recurrent exacerbations is the major cause of mortality and morbidity in cystic fibrosis. Life expectancy of people with cystic fibrosis has increased dramatically in the last 40 years. One of the major reasons for this increase is the mounting use of antibiotics to treat chest exacerbations caused by bacterial infections. The optimal duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy is not clearly defined. Individuals usually receive intravenous antibiotics for 14 days, but treatment may range from 10 to 21 days. A shorter duration of antibiotic treatment risks inadequate clearance of infection which could lead to further lung damage. Prolonged courses of intravenous antibiotics are expensive and inconvenient. The risk of systemic side effects such as allergic reactions to antibiotics also increases with prolonged courses and the use of aminoglycosides requires frequent monitoring to minimise some of their side effects. However, some organisms which infect people with cystic fibrosis are known to be multi-resistant to antibiotics, and may require a longer course of treatment. This is an update of previously published reviews.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the optimal duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy for treating chest exacerbations in people with cystic fibrosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearches of relevant journals, abstract books and conference proceedings. Most recent search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 30 May 2019.We also searched online trials registries. Most recent search of the ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) portal: 06 January 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing different durations of intravenous antibiotic courses for acute respiratory exacerbations in people with CF, either with the same drugs at the same dosage, the same drugs at a different dosage or frequency or different antibiotics altogether, including studies with additional therapeutic agents.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

No eligible trials were identified for inclusion. A trial looking at the standardised treatment of pulmonary exacerbations is currently ongoing and will be included when the results are published.  MAIN RESULTS: No eligible trials were included.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are no clear guidelines on the optimum duration of intravenous antibiotic treatment. Duration of treatment is currently based on unit policies and response to treatment. Shorter duration of treatment should improve quality of life and adherence, result in a reduced incidence of drug reactions and be less costly. However, the shorter duration may not be sufficient to clear a chest infection and may result in an early recurrence of an exacerbation. This systematic review identifies the need for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing different durations of intravenous antibiotic treatment as it has important clinical and financial implications. The currently ongoing STOP2 trial is expected to provide some guidance on these questions when published.

Once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing with intravenous aminoglycosides for cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

People with cystic fibrosis, who are chronically colonised with the organism Pseudomonas aeruginosa, often require multiple courses of intravenous aminoglycoside antibiotics for the management of pulmonary exacerbations. The properties of aminoglycosides suggest that they could be given in higher doses less often. This is an update of a previously published review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing of intravenous aminoglycoside antibiotics for the management of pulmonary exacerbations in cystic fibrosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cystic Fibrosis Specialist Register held at the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's editorial base, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals and handsearching abstract books of conference proceedings.Date of the most recent search: 31 January 2019.We also searched online trial registries. Date of latest search: 25 February 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials, whether published or unpublished, in which once-daily dosing of aminoglycosides has been compared with multiple-daily dosing in terms of efficacy or toxicity or both, in people with cystic fibrosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The two authors independently selected the studies to be included in the review and assessed the risk of bias of each study; authors also assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE criteria. Data were independently extracted by each author. Authors of the included studies were contacted for further information. As yet unpublished data were obtained for one of the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 15 studies for possible inclusion in the review. Five studies reporting results from a total of 354 participants (aged 5 to 50 years) were included in this review. All studies compared once-daily dosing with thrice-daily dosing. One cross-over trial had 26 participants who received the first-arm treatment but only 15 received the second arm. One study had a low risk of bias for all criteria assessed; the remaining included studies had a high risk of bias from blinding, but for other criteria were judged to have either an unclear or a low risk of bias.There was little or no difference between treatment groups in: forced expiratory volume in one second, mean difference (MD) 0.33 (95% confidence interval (CI) -2.81 to 3.48, moderate-quality evidence); forced vital capacity, MD 0.29 (95% CI -6.58 to 7.16, low-quality evidence); % weight for height, MD -0.82 (95% CI -3.77 to 2.13, low-quality evidence); body mass index, MD 0.00 (95% CI -0.42 to 0.42, low-quality evidence); or in the incidence of ototoxicity, relative risk 0.56 (95% CI 0.04 to 7.96, moderate-quality evidence). Once-daily treatment in children probably improved the percentage change in creatinine, MD -8.20 (95% CI -15.32 to -1.08, moderate-quality evidence), but showed no difference in adults, MD 3.25 (95% CI -1.82 to 8.33, moderate-quality evidence). The included trials did not report antibiotic resistance patterns or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Once- and three-times daily aminoglycoside antibiotics appear to be equally effective in the treatment of pulmonary exacerbations of cystic fibrosis. There is evidence of less nephrotoxicity in children.

Liposomal Nanovesicles for Efficient Encapsulation of Staphylococcal Antibiotics

Liposomes are attractive vehicles for localized delivery of antibiotics. There exists, however, a gap in knowledge when it comes to achieving high liposomal loading efficiencies for antibiotics. To address this issue, we investigated three antibiotics of clinical relevance against staphylococcal infections with different hydrophilicity and chemical structure, namely, vancomycin hydrochloride, teicoplanin, and rifampin. We categorized the suitability of different encapsulation techniques on the basis of encapsulation efficiency, lipid requirement (important for avoiding lipid toxicity), and mass yield (percentage of mass retained during the preparation process). The moderately hydrophobic (teicoplanin) and highly hydrophobic (rifampin) antibiotics varied significantly in their encapsulation load (max 23.4 and 15.5%, respectively) and mass yield (max 74.1 and 71.8%, respectively), favoring techniques that maximized partition between the aqueous core and the lipid bilayer or those that produce oligolamellar vesicles, whereas vancomycin hydrochloride, a highly hydrophilic molecule, showed little preference to any of the protocols. In addition, we report significant bias introduced by the choice of analytical method adopted to quantify the encapsulation efficiency (underestimation of up to 24% or overestimation by up to 57.9% for vancomycin and underestimation of up to 61.1% for rifampin) and further propose ultrafiltration and bursting by methanol as the method with minimal bias for quantification of encapsulation efficiency in liposomes. The knowledge generated in this work provides critical insight into the more practical, albeit less investigated, aspects of designing vesicles for localized antibiotic delivery and can be extended to other nanovehicles that may suffer from the same biases in analytical protocols.

Intravenous Push Administration of Antibiotics: Literature and Considerations

Intravenous (IV) push administration can provide clinical and practical advantages over longer IV infusions in multiple clinical scenarios, including in the emergency department, in fluid-restricted patients, and when supplies of diluents are limited. In these settings, conversion to IV push administration may provide a solution. This review compiles available data on IV push administration of antibiotics in adults, including preparation, stability, and administration instructions. Prescribing information, multiple tertiary drug resources, and primary literature were consulted to compile relevant data. Several antibiotics are Food and Drug Administration-approved for IV push administration, including many beta-lactams. In addition, cefepime, ceftriaxone, ertapenem, gentamicin, and tobramycin have primary literature data to support IV push administration. While amikacin, ciprofloxacin, imipenem/cilastatin, and metronidazole have limited primary literature data on IV push administration, available data do not support that route. In addition, a discussion on practical considerations, such as IV push best practices and pharmacodynamic considerations, is provided.

Once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing with intravenous aminoglycosides for cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

People with cystic fibrosis, who are chronically colonised with the organism Pseudomonas aeruginosa, often require multiple courses of intravenous aminoglycoside antibiotics for the management of pulmonary exacerbations. The properties of aminoglycosides suggest that they could be given in higher doses less often. This is an update of a previously published review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing of intravenous aminoglycoside antibiotics for the management of pulmonary exacerbations in cystic fibrosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cystic Fibrosis Specialist Register held at the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's editorial base, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals and handsearching abstract books of conference proceedings.Date of the most recent search: 24 June 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials, whether published or unpublished, in which once-daily dosing of aminoglycosides has been compared with multiple-daily dosing in terms of efficacy or toxicity or both, in people with cystic fibrosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The two authors independently selected the studies to be included in the review and assessed the risk of bias of each study; authors also assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE criteria. Data were independently extracted by each author. Authors of the included studies were contacted for further information. As yet unpublished data were obtained for one of the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen studies were identified for possible inclusion in the review. Four studies reporting results from a total of 328 participants (aged 5 to 50 years) were included in this review. All studies compared once-daily dosing with thrice-daily dosing. One study had a low risk of bias for all criteria assessed; the remaining three included studies had a high risk of bias from blinding, but for other criteria were judged to have either an unclear or a low risk of bias.There was no significant difference between treatment groups in: forced expiratory volume in one second, mean difference 0.33 (95% confidence interval -2.81 to 3.48, moderate quality evidence); forced vital capacity, mean difference 0.29 (95% confidence interval -6.58 to 7.16, low quality evidence); % weight for height, mean difference -0.82 (95% confidence interval -3.77 to 2.13, low quality evidence); body mass index, mean difference 0.00 (95% confidence interval -0.42 to 0.42, low quality evidence); or in the incidence of ototoxicity, relative risk 0.56 (95% confidence interval 0.04 to 7.96, moderate quality evidence). The percentage change in creatinine significantly favoured once-daily treatment in children, mean difference -8.20 (95% confidence interval -15.32 to -1.08, moderate quality evidence), but showed no difference in adults, mean difference 3.25 (95% confidence interval -1.82 to 8.33, moderate quality evidence). The included trials did not report antibiotic resistance patterns or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Once- and three-times daily aminoglycoside antibiotics appear to be equally effective in the treatment of pulmonary exacerbations of cystic fibrosis. There is evidence of less nephrotoxicity in children.

Single versus combination intravenous anti-pseudomonal antibiotic therapy for people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Choice of antibiotic, and the use of single or combined therapy are controversial areas in the treatment of respiratory infection due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis (CF). Advantages of combination therapy include wider range of modes of action, possible synergy and reduction of resistant organisms; advantages of monotherapy include lower cost, ease of administration and reduction of drug-related toxicity. Current evidence does not provide a clear answer and the use of intravenous antibiotic therapy in cystic fibrosis requires further evaluation. This is an update of a previously published review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of single compared to combination intravenous anti-pseudomonal antibiotic therapy for treating people with cystic fibrosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.Most recent search of the Group's Trials Register: 14 October 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a single intravenous anti-pseudomonal antibiotic with a combination of that antibiotic plus a second anti-pseudomonal antibiotic in people with CF.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 45 trials, of which eight trials (356 participants) comparing a single anti-pseudomonal agent to a combination of the same antibiotic and one other, were included.There was a wide variation in the individual antibiotics used in each trial. In total, the trials included seven comparisons of a beta-lactam antibiotic (penicillin-related or third generation cephalosporin) with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination and three comparisons of an aminoglycoside with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination. These two groups of trials were analysed as separate subgroups.There was considerable heterogeneity amongst these trials, leading to difficulties in performing the review and interpreting the results. The meta-analysis did not demonstrate any significant differences between monotherapy and combination therapy, in terms of lung function; symptom scores; adverse effects; and bacteriological outcome measures.These results should be interpreted cautiously. Six of the included trials were published between 1977 and 1988; these were single-centre trials with flaws in the randomisation process and small sample size. Overall, the methodological quality was poor.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review are inconclusive. The review raises important methodological issues. There is a need for an RCT which needs to be well-designed in terms of adequate randomisation allocation, blinding, power and long-term follow up. Results need to be standardised to a consistent method of reporting, in order to validate the pooling of results from multiple trials.

Duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Respiratory disease is the major cause of mortality and morbidity in cystic fibrosis. Life expectancy of people with cystic fibrosis has increased dramatically in the last 40 years. One of the major reasons for this increase is the mounting use of antibiotics to treat chest exacerbations caused by bacterial infections. The optimal duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy is not clearly defined. Individuals usually receive intravenous antibiotics for 14 days, but treatment may range from 10 to 21 days. A shorter duration of antibiotic treatment risks inadequate clearance of infection which could lead to further lung damage. Prolonged courses of intravenous antibiotics are expensive and inconvenient and the incidence of allergic reactions to antibiotics also increases with prolonged courses. The use of aminoglycosides requires frequent monitoring to avoid some of their side effects. However, some organisms which infect people with cystic fibrosis are known to be multi-resistant to antibiotics, and may require a longer course of treatment. This is an update of previously published reviews.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the optimal duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy for treating chest exacerbations in people with cystic fibrosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearches of relevant journals, abstract books and conference proceedings.Most recent search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 05 May 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing different durations of intravenous antibiotic courses for acute respiratory exacerbations in people with CF, either with the same drugs at the same dosage, the same drugs at a different dosage or frequency or different antibiotics altogether, including studies with additional therapeutic agents.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

No eligible trials were identified.

MAIN RESULTS

No eligible trials were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are no clear guidelines on the optimum duration of intravenous antibiotic treatment. Duration of treatment is currently based on unit policies and response to treatment. Shorter duration of treatment should improve quality of life and compliance; result in a reduced incidence of drug reactions; and be less costly. However, this may not be sufficient to clear a chest infection and may result in an early recurrence of an exacerbation. This systematic review identifies the need for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing different durations of intravenous antibiotic treatment as it has important clinical and financial implications.

Intravenous antibiotics for pulmonary exacerbations in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Cystic fibrosis is a multi-system disease characterised by the production of thick secretions causing recurrent pulmonary infection, often with unusual bacteria. Intravenous antibiotics are commonly used in the treatment of acute deteriorations in symptoms (pulmonary exacerbations); however, recently the assumption that exacerbations are due to increases in bacterial burden has been questioned.

OBJECTIVES

To establish if intravenous antibiotics for the treatment of pulmonary exacerbations in people with cystic fibrosis improve short- and long-term clinical outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews and ongoing trials registers.Date of last search of Cochrane trials register: 27 July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials and the first treatment cycle of cross-over studies comparing intravenous antibiotics (given alone or in an antibiotic combination) with placebo, inhaled or oral antibiotics for people with cystic fibrosis experiencing a pulmonary exacerbation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The authors assessed studies for eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 studies involving 1717 participants. The quality of the included studies was largely poor and, with a few exceptions, these comprised of mainly small, inadequately reported studies.When comparing treatment with a single antibiotic to a combined antibiotic regimen, those participants receiving a combination of antibiotics experienced a greater improvement in lung function when considered as a whole group across a number of different measurements of lung function, but with very low quality evidence. When limited to the four placebo-controlled studies (n = 214), no difference was observed, again with very low quality evidence. With regard to the review's remaining primary outcomes, there was no effect upon time to next exacerbation and no studies in any comparison reported on quality of life. There were no effects on the secondary outcomes weight or adverse effects. When comparing specific antibiotic combinations there were no significant differences between groups on any measure. In the comparisons between intravenous and nebulised antibiotic or oral antibiotic (low quality evidence), there were no significant differences between groups on any measure. No studies in any comparison reported on quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of evidence comparing intravenous antibiotics with placebo is poor. No specific antibiotic combination can be considered to be superior to any other, and neither is there evidence showing that the intravenous route is superior to the inhaled or oral routes. There remains a need to understand host-bacteria interactions and in particular to understand why many people fail to fully respond to treatment.

Single versus combination intravenous antibiotic therapy for people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Choice of antibiotic, and the use of single or combined therapy are controversial areas in the treatment of respiratory infection in cystic fibrosis (CF). Advantages of combination therapy include wider range of modes of action, possible synergy and reduction of resistant organisms; advantages of monotherapy include lower cost, ease of administration and reduction of drug-related toxicity. Current evidence does not provide a clear answer and the use of intravenous antibiotic therapy in CF requires further evaluation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of single compared to combination intravenous antibiotic therapy for treating people with CF.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.Most recent search of the Group's Trials Register: 22 August 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a single intravenous antibiotic with a combination of that antibiotic plus a second antibiotic in people with CF.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 43 trials, of which eight trials (356 participants) comparing a single agent to a combination of the same antibiotic and one other, were included.There was a wide variation in the individual antibiotics used in each trial. In total, the trials included seven comparisons of a beta-lactam antibiotic (penicillin-related or third generation cephalosporin) with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination and three comparisons of an aminoglycoside with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination. These two groups of trials were analysed as separate subgroups.There was considerable heterogeneity amongst these trials, leading to difficulties in performing the review and interpreting the results. The meta-analysis did not demonstrate any significant differences between monotherapy and combination therapy, in terms of lung function; symptom scores; adverse effects; and bacteriological outcome measures.These results should be interpreted cautiously. Six of the included trials were published between 1977 and 1988; these were single-centre trials with flaws in the randomisation process and small sample size. Overall, the methodological quality was poor.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review are inconclusive. The review raises important methodological issues. There is a need for an RCT which needs to be well-designed in terms of adequate randomisation allocation, blinding, power and long-term follow up. Results need to be standardised to a consistent method of reporting, in order to validate the pooling of results from multiple trials.

Once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing with intravenous aminoglycosides for cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

People with cystic fibrosis, who are chronically colonised with the organism Pseudomonas aeruginosa, often require multiple courses of intravenous aminoglycoside antibiotics for the management of pulmonary exacerbations. The properties of aminoglycosides suggest that they could be given in higher doses less often.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing of intravenous aminoglycoside antibiotics for the management of pulmonary exacerbations in cystic fibrosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cystic Fibrosis Specialist Register held at the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's editorial base, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals and handsearching abstract books of conference proceedings.Date of the most recent search: 25 November 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials, whether published or unpublished, in which once-daily dosing of aminoglycosides has been compared with multiple-daily dosing in terms of efficacy or toxicity or both, in people with cystic fibrosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The two authors independently selected the studies to be included in the review and assessed the risk of bias of each study. Data were independently extracted by each author. Authors of the included studies were contacted for further information. As yet unpublished data were obtained for one of the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen studies were identified for possible inclusion in the review. Four studies reporting results from a total of 328 participants were included in this review. All studies compared once-daily dosing with thrice-daily dosing. One study had a low risk of bias for all criteria assessed; the remaining three included studies had a high risk of bias from blinding, but for other criteria were judged to have either an unclear or a low risk of bias.There was no significant difference between treatment groups in: forced expiratory volume at one second, mean difference 0.33 (95% confidence interval -2.81 to 3.48); forced vital capacity, mean difference 0.29 (95% confidence interval -6.58 to 7.16); % weight for height, mean difference -0.82 (95% confidence interval -3.77 to 2.13); body mass index, mean difference 0.00 (95% confidence interval -0.42 to 0.42); or in the incidence of ototoxicity, relative risk 0.56 (95% confidence interval 0.04 to 7.96). The percentage change in creatinine significantly favoured once-daily treatment in children, mean difference -8.20 (95% confidence interval -15.32 to -1.08), but showed no difference in adults, mean difference 3.25 (95% confidence interval -1.82 to 8.33).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Once- and three-times daily aminoglycoside antibiotics appear to be equally effective in the treatment of pulmonary exacerbations of cystic fibrosis. There is evidence of less nephrotoxicity in children.

Small airway deposition of dornase alfa during exacerbations in cystic fibrosis; a randomized controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Small airway obstruction is important in the pathophysiology of cystic fibrosis (CF) lung disease. Additionally, many CF patients lose lung function in the long term as a result of respiratory tract exacerbations (RTEs). No trials have been performed to optimize mucolytic therapy during a RTE. We investigated whether specifically targeting dornase alfa to the small airways improves small airway obstruction during RTEs.

METHODS

In a multi-center, double-blind, randomized controlled trial CF patients hospitalized for a RTE and on maintenance treatment with dornase alfa were switched to a smart nebulizer. Patients were randomized to small airway deposition (n = 19) or large airway deposition (n = 19) of dornase alfa for at least 7 days. Primary endpoint was forced expiratory flow at 75% of forced vital capacity (FEF75 ).

MAIN RESULTS

Spirometry parameters improved significantly during admission, but the difference in mean change in FEF75 between treatment groups was not significant: 0.7 SD, P = 0.30. FEF25-75 , FEV1 , nocturnal oxygen saturation and diary symptom scores also did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study did not detect a difference if inhaled dornase alfa was targeted to small versus large airways during a RTE. However, the 95% confidence interval for the change in FEF75 was wide. Further studies are needed to improve the effectiveness of RTE treatment in CF.

Liposomal antibiotics for the treatment of infectious diseases

INTRODUCTION

Liposomal delivery systems have been utilized in developing effective therapeutics against cancer and targeting microorganisms in and out of host cells and within biofilm community. The most attractive feature of liposome-based drugs are enhancing therapeutic index of the new or existing drugs while minimizing their adverse effects.

AREAS COVERED

This communication provides an overview on several aspects of liposomal antibiotics including the most widely used preparation techniques for encapsulating different agents and the most important characteristic parameters applied for examining shape, size and stability of the spherical vesicles. In addition, the routes of administration, liposome-cell interactions and host parameters affecting the biodistribution of liposomes are highlighted.

EXPERT OPINION

Liposomes are safe and suitable for delivery of variety of molecules and drugs in biomedical research and medicine. They are known to improve the therapeutic index of encapsulated agents and reduce drug toxicity. Recent studies on liposomal formulation of chemotherapeutic and bioactive agents and their targeted delivery show liposomal antibiotics potential in the treatment of microbial infections.

Duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy in people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Respiratory disease is the major cause of mortality and morbidity in cystic fibrosis (CF). Life expectancy of people with CF has increased dramatically in the last 40 years. One of the major reasons for this increase is the mounting use of antibiotics to treat chest exacerbations caused by bacterial infections. The optimal duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy is not clearly defined. Individuals usually receive intravenous antibiotics for 14 days, but treatment may range from 10 to 21 days. A shorter duration of antibiotic treatment risks inadequate clearance of infection which could lead to further lung damage. Prolonged courses of intravenous antibiotics are expensive and inconvenient and the incidence of allergic reactions to antibiotics also increases with prolonged courses. The use of aminoglycosides requires frequent monitoring to avoid some of their side effects. However, some organisms which infect people with CF are known to be multi-resistant to antibiotics, and may require a longer course of treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the optimal duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy for treating chest exacerbations in people with cystic fibrosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearches of relevant journals, abstract books and conference proceedings.Most recent search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 15 November 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing different durations of intravenous antibiotic courses for acute respiratory exacerbations in people with CF, either with the same drugs at the same dosage, the same drugs at a different dosage or frequency or different antibiotics altogether, including studies with additional therapeutic agents.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

No eligible trials were identified.

MAIN RESULTS

No eligible trials were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are no clear guidelines on the optimum duration of intravenous antibiotic treatment. Duration of treatment is currently based on unit policies and response to treatment. Shorter duration of treatment should improve quality of life and compliance; result in a reduced incidence of drug reactions; and be less costly. However, this may not be sufficient to clear a chest infection and may result in an early recurrence of an exacerbation. This systematic review identifies the need for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing different durations of intravenous antibiotic treatment as it has important clinical and financial implications.

Efficacy of liposomal bismuth-ethanedithiol-loaded tobramycin after intratracheal administration in rats with pulmonary Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection

We sought to investigate alterations in quorum-sensing signal molecule N-acyl homoserine lactone secretion and in the release of Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence factors, as well as the in vivo antimicrobial activity of bismuth-ethanedithiol incorporated into a liposome-loaded tobramycin formulation (LipoBiEDT-TOB) administered to rats chronically infected with P. aeruginosa. The quorum-sensing signal molecule N-acyl homoserine lactone was monitored by using a biosensor organism. P. aeruginosa virulence factors were assessed spectrophotometrically. An agar beads model of chronic Pseudomonas lung infection in rats was used to evaluate the efficacy of the liposomal formulation in the reduction of bacterial count. The levels of active tobramycin in the lungs and the kidneys were evaluated by microbiological assay. LipoBiEDT-TOB was effective in disrupting both quorum-sensing signal molecules N-3-oxo-dodeccanoylhomoserine lactone and N-butanoylhomoserine lactone, as well as significantly (P < 0.05) reducing lipase, chitinase, and protease production. At 24 h after 3 treatments, the CFU counts in lungs of animals treated with LipoBiEDT-TOB were of 3 log(10) CFU/lung, comparated to 7.4 and 4.7 log(10) CFU/lung, respectively, in untreated lungs and in lungs treated with free antibiotic. The antibiotic concentration after the last dose of LipoBiEDT-TOB was 25.1 μg/lung, while no tobramycin was detected in the kidneys. As for the free antibiotic, we found 6.5 μg/kidney but could not detect any tobramycin in the lungs. Taken together, LipoBiEDT-TOB reduced the production of quorum-sensing molecules and virulence factors and could highly improve the management of chronic pulmonary infection in cystic fibrosis patients.

Once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing with intravenous aminoglycosides for cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

People with cystic fibrosis, who are chronically colonised with the organism Pseudomonas aeruginosa, often require multiple courses of intravenous aminoglycoside antibiotics for the management of pulmonary exacerbations. The properties of aminoglycosides suggest that they could be given in higher doses less often.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing of intravenous aminoglycoside antibiotics for the management of pulmonary exacerbations in cystic fibrosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cystic Fibrosis Specialist Register held at the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's editorial base, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals and handsearching abstract books of conference proceedings.Date of the most recent search: 29 September 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials, whether published or unpublished, in which once-daily dosing of aminoglycosides has been compared with multiple-daily dosing in terms of efficacy or toxicity or both, in people with cystic fibrosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The two authors independently selected the studies to be included in the review and assessed methodological quality of each study. Data were independently extracted by each author. Authors of the included studies were contacted for further information. As yet unpublished data were obtained for one of the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen studies were identified for possible inclusion in the review. Four studies reporting results from a total of 328 participants were included in this review. All studies compared once-daily dosing with thrice-daily dosing. There was no significant difference between treatment groups in: forced expiratory volume at one second, mean difference 0.33 (95% confidence interval -2.81 to 3.48); forced vital capacity, mean difference 0.29 (95% confidence interval -6.58 to 7.16); % weight for height, mean difference -0.82 (95% confidence interval -3.77 to 2.13); body mass index, mean difference 0.00 (95% confidence interval -0.42 to 0.42); or in the incidence of ototoxicity, relative risk 0.56 (95% confidence interval 0.04 to 7.96). The percentage change in creatinine significantly favoured once-daily treatment in children, mean difference -8.20 (95% confidence interval -15.32 to -1.08), but showed no difference in adults, mean difference 3.25 (95% confidence interval -1.82 to 8.33).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Once- and three-times daily aminoglycoside antibiotics appear to be equally effective in the treatment of pulmonary exacerbations of cystic fibrosis. There is evidence of less nephrotoxicity in children.

Single versus combination intravenous antibiotic therapy for people with cystic fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Choice of antibiotic, and the use of single or combined therapy are controversial areas in the treatment of respiratory infection in cystic fibrosis (CF). Advantages of combination therapy include wider range of modes of action, possible synergy and reduction of resistant organisms; advantages of monotherapy include lower cost, ease of administration and reduction of drug-related toxicity. Current evidence does not provide a clear answer and the use of intravenous antibiotic therapy in CF requires further evaluation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of single compared to combination intravenous antibiotic therapy for treating people with CF.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Most recent search of the Group's register: January 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a single intravenous antibiotic with a combination of that antibiotic plus a second antibiotic in people with CF.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-seven trials were identified, of which eight trials (with 356 participants) comparing a single agent to a combination of the same antibiotic and one other, were included. There was a wide variation in the individual antibiotics used in each trial. In total, the trials included seven comparisons of a beta-lactam antibiotic (penicillin-related or third generation cephalosporin) with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination and three comparisons of an aminoglycoside with a beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination. These two groups of trials were analysed as separate subgroups. There was considerable heterogeneity amongst these trials, leading to difficulties in performing the review and interpreting the results. The meta-analysis did not demonstrate any significant differences between monotherapy and combination therapy, in terms of lung function; symptom scores; adverse effects; and bacteriological outcome measures. These results should be interpreted cautiously. Six of the included trials were published between 1977 and 1988; these were single centre trials with flaws in the randomisation process and small sample size. Overall, the methodological quality was poor.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review are inconclusive. The review raises important methodological issues. There is a need for an RCT which needs to be well designed in terms of adequate randomisation allocation, blinding, power and long-term follow up. Results need to be standardised to a consistent method of reporting, in order to validate the pooling of results from multiple trials.