Clinical Manifestations and Outcomes of Fluoroquinolone-Related Acute Interstitial Nephritis

Overview of Side-Effects of Antibacterial Fluoroquinolones: New Drugs versus Old Drugs, a Step Forward in the Safety Profile?

Antibacterial fluoroquinolones (FQs) are frequently used in treating infections. However, the value of FQs is debatable due to their association with severe adverse effects (AEs). The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued safety warnings concerning their side-effects in 2008, followed by the European Medicine Agency (EMA) and regulatory authorities from other countries. Severe AEs associated with some FQs have been reported, leading to their withdrawal from the market. New systemic FQs have been recently approved. The FDA and EMA approved delafloxacin. Additionally, lascufloxacin, levonadifloxacin, nemonoxacin, sitafloxacin, and zabofloxacin were approved in their origin countries. The relevant AEs of FQs and their mechanisms of occurrence have been approached. New systemic FQs present potent antibacterial activity against many resistant bacteria (including resistance to FQs). Generally, in clinical studies, the new FQs were well-tolerated with mild or moderate AEs. All the new FQs approved in the origin countries require more clinical studies to meet FDA or EMA requirements. Post-marketing surveillance will confirm or infirm the known safety profile of these new antibacterial drugs. The main AEs of the FQs class were addressed, highlighting the existing data for the recently approved ones. In addition, the general management of AEs when they occur and the rational use and caution of modern FQs were outlined.

Explorative Analysis of Treatment Outcomes of Levofloxacin- and Moxifloxacin-Based Regimens and Outcome Predictors in Ethiopian MDR-TB Patients: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Purpose/Background

Although Ethiopia is among the thirty high multi-drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) burden countries in the world, comparative therapeutic efficacy of moxifloxacin and levofloxacin has not been explored, particularly in MDR-TB patients. We therefore aimed to prospectively compare clinical outcomes and determine potential predictors of the outcomes among patients on moxifloxacin or levofloxacin-based MDR-TB drug regimens.

Methods

We analyzed clinical parameters and laboratory data of eighty MDR-TB patients on moxifloxacin- or levofloxacin-based regimens. The clinical outcomes were compared using the Kaplan–Meier survival functions and the outcome definitions of the 2013 World Health Organization. Monthly sputum culture conversions and a molecular line probe assay results were also assessed. Observed outcomes and patient-related variables between the two groups were compared using chi-square, Wilcoxon Rank and Fisher exact tests. We also determined the potential predictors influencing treatment outcomes of moxifloxacin and levofloxacin using Cox proportional hazard model.

Results

The levofloxacin-based treatment group had a lower failure rate and adverse drug events as well as better treatment success than the moxifloxacin-based group. Overall treatment success was 65%. Disaggregating the data revealed that 53.8% were cured, 11.2% completed treatment, 10.0% died, 11.2% failed, and 13.8% were lost-to-follow-up. The line probe assay result showed that 11.3% of the clinical isolates were resistant to fluoroquinolones and 3.8% were resistant to both fluoroquinolones and injectable anti-TB agents. Treatment regimen type, culture conversion rate, alcohol use, cavity lesion, serum levels of creatinine and alanine aminotransferase were independent predictors of treatment outcome.

Conclusion

The levofloxacin-based regimen group has a better overall treatment success than the moxifloxacin-based group among MDR-TB patients. Clinical parameters and substance use history of the patients influenced treatment outcomes. We recommend further broader clinical studies to substantiate our findings as an input to review MDR-TB treatment guidelines.

Drug Therapies Affecting Renal Function: An Overview

Undesirable side effects of medication are inevitable. Due to the role of the kidneys in clearance and filtration, the renal system faces a unique situation when it comes to the side effects of drugs. It has an important role for different classes of drugs to be excreted, and drugs are a key factor for this system to be at risk. Medications in articles were divided into classes using the standard set by the Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal. Many drug classes cause renal insults. The top six classes were pain killers, antibiotics, proton pump inhibitors, antidiabetics, antihyperlipidemics, and agents for erectile dysfunction. Renal insults caused by these agents could vary in severity. Some drugs could cause nephrotoxicity from one dose, while others may only need continuous monitoring. Different populations also operate under different rules, as some people need dose adjustments while others who are medically free of major illnesses do not. A variety of unfavorable outcomes for the kidney could take place, such as acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, and end-stage renal disease, and unfortunately, some of these issues could lead to the need for renal replacement therapies. The outcome of this review paper will help multidisciplinary physicians to understand the renal side effects of the most used drug classes in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, their destructive mechanisms, and most importantly, the clinical presentations of renal dysfunction in relation to each class. Emphasizing these adverse effects will prevent future unfavorable outcomes, especially in commonly used drugs that are frequently prescribed for different age groups. Moreover, some of these drugs are considered to be over-the-counter medications, which makes them a serious problem that needs to be handled cautiously.

Acute kidney injury in interstitial nephritis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to describe the most common causes of acute interstitial nephritis (AIN), the diagnostic work-up and the therapeutic management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several case series and registries have found an increasing incidence of AIN, especially among older patients. Drug-induced AIN still represents the most common cause. Early withdrawal of the culprit drug together with corticosteroid therapy remain the mainstay of treatment, although recent studies have shown that prolonged treatment beyond 8 weeks does not further improve kidney function recovery.

SUMMARY

AIN is a common cause of acute kidney injury, and therefore, physicians should suspect this entity especially in patients exposed to multiple medications. While immune-allergic reaction to numerous drugs is the most common cause of AIN, other underlying systemic diseases may also be involved, and therefore, every patient should undergo a complete diagnostic evaluation. Kidney biopsy provides the definitive diagnosis of AIN, and certain histologic features may help to identify the underlying condition. In drug-induced AIN, an early discontinuation of the culprit drug is the mainstay of therapy, and unless a rapid recovery of kidney function is observed, a course of glucocorticoid therapy should be initiated.