Efficacy and safety of oral telithromycin once daily for 5 days versus moxifloxacin once daily for 10 days in the treatment of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis

Therapeutic Choices in the Treatment of Acute Community-Acquired Bacterial Rhinosinusitis

Background

Acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) is a common medical problem affecting a large percentage of the population. The disease will most often follow a viral upper respiratory tract infection.

Methods

Appropriately diagnosed, ABRS is best treated with antibiotics, but other medications may play a role in some circumstances. Increasing antibiotic resistance to the common bacteria causing ABRS has occurred in the past 20 years, driven largely by inappropriate or unnecessary antibiotic use.

Results

There are many antibiotics available that may be used for the treatment of ABRS. The selection of the best antibiotic option is determined by evaluating a number of factors, with the potential antibiotic resistance being an important consideration.

Conclusion

This article reviews current recommendations for the antibiotic treatment of ABRS.

WITHDRAWN: Antibiotics for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults

Currently, two separate Cochrane reviews, ‘Antibiotics for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults ’ and ‘Antibiotics for clinically diagnosed acute rhinosinusitis in adults ’ describe the effect of antibiotics for acute rhinosinusitis. Although both Cochrane reviews study the same condition, they look at different populations (patients in which the diagnosis was based on clinical signs and symptoms and patients in which the diagnosis was confirmed by imaging). Because of this, the conclusions are different in these Cochrane reviews. This was confusing for clinicians who needed to read both Cochrane reviews to know which conclusions are most applicable to their patients.
 
 This review is being withdrawn and will be incorporated into the updated publication of ‘Antibiotics for clinically diagnosed acute rhinosinusitis in adults ’. This ‘merged’ review will still maintain the relevant distinction between the two populations. However, information on the effectiveness of antibiotics for rhinosinusitis will be published in the ‘merged’ Cochrane review. We will omit the comparison between antibiotics (as published in this Cochrane review) because the choice for certain antibiotics and/or doses differs according to the local antibiotic resistance patterns and therefore this comparison is less relevant.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

Antibiotics for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults

BACKGROUND

Sinusitis is one of the most common diagnoses among adults in ambulatory care, accounting for 15% to 21% of all adult outpatient antibiotic prescriptions. However, the role of antibiotics for sinusitis is controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antibiotics in adults with acute maxillary sinusitis by comparing antibiotics with placebo, antibiotics from different classes and the side effects of different treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 2, MEDLINE (1946 to March week 3, 2013), EMBASE (1974 to March 2013), SIGLE (OpenSIGLE, later OpenGrey (accessed 15 January 2013)), reference lists of the identified trials and systematic reviews of placebo-controlled studies. We also searched for ongoing trials via ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We imposed no language or publication restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing antibiotics with placebo or antibiotics from different classes for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults. We included trials with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis, confirmed or not by imaging or bacterial culture.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed trial quality. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for differences between intervention and control groups in whether the treatment failed or not. All measures are presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We conducted the meta-analyses using either the fixed-effect or random-effects model. In meta-analyses of the placebo-controlled studies, we combined data across antibiotic classes. Primary outcomes were clinical failure rates at 7 to 15 days and 16 to 60 days follow-up. We used GRADEpro to assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 63 studies in this updated review; nine placebo-controlled studies involving 1915 participants (seven of the studies clearly conducted in primary care settings) and 54 studies comparing different classes of antibiotics (10 different comparisons). Five studies at low risk of bias comparing penicillin or amoxicillin to placebo provided information on the main outcome: clinical failure rate at 7 to 15 days follow-up, defined as a lack of full recovery or improvement, for participants with symptoms lasting at least seven days. In these studies antibiotics decreased the risk of clinical failure (pooled RR of 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.94, 1084 participants randomised, 1058 evaluated, moderate quality evidence). However, the clinical benefit was small. Cure or improvement rates were high in both the placebo group (86%) and the antibiotic group (91%) in these five studies. When clinical failure was defined as a lack of full recovery (n = five studies), results were similar: antibiotics decreased the risk of failure (pooled RR of 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.85, high quality evidence) at 7 to 15 days follow-up.Adverse effects in seven of the nine placebo-controlled studies (comparing penicillin, amoxicillin, azithromycin or moxicillin to placebo) were more common in antibiotic than in placebo groups (median of difference between groups 10.5%, range 2% to 23%). However, drop-outs due to adverse effects were rare in both groups: 1.5% in antibiotic groups and 1% in control groups.In the 10 head-to-head comparisons, none of the antibiotic preparations were superior to another. However, amoxicillin-clavulanate had significantly more drop-outs due to adverse effects than cephalosporins and macrolides.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate evidence that antibiotics provide a small benefit for clinical outcomes in immunocompetent primary care patients with uncomplicated acute sinusitis. However, about 80% of participants treated without antibiotics improved within two weeks. Clinicians need to weigh the small benefits of antibiotic treatment against the potential for adverse effects at both the individual and general population levels.

Gender analysis of moxifloxacin clinical trials

PURPOSE

To determine the inclusion of women and the sex-stratification of results in moxifloxacin Clinical Trials (CTs), and to establish whether these CTs considered issues that specifically affect women, such as pregnancy and use of hormonal therapies. Previous publications about women's inclusion in CTs have not specifically studied therapeutic drugs. Although this type of drug is taken by men and women at a similar rate, adverse effects occur more frequently in the latter.

METHODS

We reviewed 158 published moxifloxacin trials on humans, retrieved from MedLine and the Cochrane Library (1998-2010), to determine whether they complied with the gender recommendations published by U.S. Food and Drug Administration Guideline.

RESULTS

Of a total of 80,417 subjects included in the moxifloxacin CTs, only 33.7% were women in phase I, in contrast to phase II, where women accounted for 45%, phase III, where they represented 38.3% and phase IV, where 51.3% were women. About 40.9% (n=52) of trials were stratified by sex and 15.3% (n=13) and 9% (n=7) provided data by sex on efficacy and adverse effects, respectively. We found little information about the influence of issues that specifically affect women. Only 3 of the 59 journals that published the moxifloxacin CTs stated that authors should stratify their results by sex.

CONCLUSIONS

Women are under-represented in the published moxifloxacin trials, and this trend is more marked in phase I, as they comprise a higher proportion in the other phases. Data by sex on efficacy and adverse effects are scarce in moxifloxacin trials. These facts, together with the lack of data on women-specific issues, suggest that the therapeutic drug moxifloxacin is only a partially evidence-based medicine.

Review of macrolides (azithromycin, clarithromycin), ketolids (telithromycin) and glycylcyclines (tigecycline)

The advanced macrolides, azithromycin and clarithromycin, and the ketolide, telithromycin, are structural analogs of erythromycin. They have several distinct advantages when compared with erythromycin, including enhanced spectrum of activity, more favorable pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, once-daily administration, and improved tolerability. Clarithromycin and azithromycin are used extensively for the treatment of respiratory tract infections, sexually transmitted diseases, and Helicobacter pylori-associated peptic ulcer disease. Telithromycin is approved for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. Severe hepatotoxicity has been reported with the use of telithromycin.

Canadian clinical practice guidelines for acute and chronic rhinosinusitis

This document provides healthcare practitioners with information regarding the management of acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) to enable them to better meet the needs of this patient population. These guidelines describe controversies in the management of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) and include recommendations that take into account changes in the bacteriologic landscape. Recent guidelines in ABRS have been released by American and European groups as recently as 2007, but these are either limited in their coverage of the subject of CRS, do not follow an evidence-based strategy, or omit relevant stakeholders in guidelines development, and do not address the particulars of the Canadian healthcare environment.

Advances in understanding the pathophysiology of CRS, along with the development of appropriate therapeutic strategies, have improved outcomes for patients with CRS. CRS now affects large numbers of patients globally and primary care practitioners are confronted by this disease on a daily basis. Although initially considered a chronic bacterial infection, CRS is now recognized as having multiple distinct components (eg, infection, inflammation), which have led to changes in therapeutic approaches (eg, increased use of corticosteroids). The role of bacteria in the persistence of chronic infections, and the roles of surgical and medical management are evolving. Although evidence is limited, guidance for managing patients with CRS would help practitioners less experienced in this area offer rational care. It is no longer reasonable to manage CRS as a prolonged version of ARS, but rather, specific therapeutic strategies adapted to pathogenesis must be developed and diffused.

Guidelines must take into account all available evidence and incorporate these in an unbiased fashion into management recommendations based on the quality of evidence, therapeutic benefit, and risks incurred. This document is focused on readability rather than completeness, yet covers relevant information, offers summaries of areas where considerable evidence exists, and provides recommendations with an assessment of strength of the evidence base and degree of endorsement by the multidisciplinary expert group preparing the document.

These guidelines have been copublished in both Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology and the Journal of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

Macrolides, ketolides, and glycylcyclines: azithromycin, clarithromycin, telithromycin, tigecycline

The advanced macrolides, azithromycin and clarithromycin, and the ketolide, telithromycin, are structural analogs of erythromycin. They have several distinct advantages when compared with erythromycin, including enhanced spectrum of activity, more favorable pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, once-daily administration, and improved tolerability. Clarithromycin and azithromycin are used extensively for the treatment of respiratory tract infections, sexually transmitted diseases, and Helicobacter pylori-associated peptic ulcer disease. Telithromycin is approved for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. Severe hepatotoxicity has been reported with the use of telithromycin.

Benefit-risk assessment of telithromycin in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia

The purpose of this review is to assess the benefits and risks associated with the use of the ketolide antibacterial telithromycin, currently licensed for the treatment of adults with mild to moderate community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Telithromycin is active against both the major (Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis) and atypical/intracellular (Chlamydophila pneumoniae, Legionella pneumophila and Mycoplasma pneumoniae) CAP pathogens. It is associated with a low potential to select for resistance and has maintained its in vitro activity against isolates of respiratory pathogens in countries where it has been in clinical use for several years. In randomized clinical trials, telithromycin has demonstrated efficacy comparable to the established antibacterial classes (macrolides, fluoroquinolones and beta-lactams) in the treatment of CAP.The safety profile of telithromycin is broadly similar to that of other antibacterials used to treat CAP. The most common adverse events are gastrointestinal adverse effects and headache; these are generally mild to moderate in severity and reversible. Telithromycin appears to be well tolerated by adult patients in all age groups, including those with co-morbid conditions. In common with other antibacterials, telithromycin has the potential to affect the corrected QT interval; the concomitant use of cisapride or pimozide with telithromycin is contraindicated, while telithromycin should be avoided in patients receiving Class IA or Class III antiarrhythmic drugs. Visual disturbances (usually transient) have occurred in a small proportion of patients treated with telithromycin; it is recommended that activities such as driving are minimized during treatment. Telithromycin is contraindicated in patients with myasthenia gravis. Hepatic dysfunction may occur in some patients taking telithromycin; rare cases of acute hepatic failure and severe liver injury, including deaths, have been reported. As telithromycin is an inhibitor of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 system, coadministration of telithromycin with drugs metabolized by this pathway may require dose adjustments (e.g. with benzodiazepines) or a temporary hiatus in the use of the coadministered drug (e.g. HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors) metabolized by CYP3A4. Telithromycin may potentiate the effects of oral anticoagulants; careful monitoring is recommended in patients receiving telithromycin and oral anticoagulants simultaneously.Although serious and sometimes fatal events have occurred in patients receiving telithromycin therapy, current data indicate that telithromycin offers an acceptable benefit risk ratio in the treatment of mild to moderate CAP.

Clinical efficacy and time to symptom resolution of 5-day telithromycin versus 10-day amoxicillin-clavulanate in the treatment of acute bacterial sinusitis

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the clinical efficacy, time to symptom resolution, and tolerability of a 5-day regimen of telithromycin with a 10-day regimen of high-dose amoxicillin-clavulanate in acute bacterial sinusitis (ABS).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this multinational (41 centers in Canada, Germany, Greece, Portugal, and Turkey), open-label, noninferiority study, patients >/=18 years old (n=298) with a clinical (>7 days' symptoms) and radiological (air/fluid level, total opacification, mucosal thickening >/=10 mm) diagnosis of ABS were randomized to receive telithromycin 800 mg once daily for 5 days or amoxicillin-clavulanate 875/125 mg twice daily for 10 days. Clinical efficacy and tolerability were assessed at the test-of-cure visit (days 17-21). Time to symptom resolution was based on patients' daily diary assessment of individual symptoms.

RESULTS

The per-protocol clinical success rate (primary endpoint) with telithromycin (88.6% (109/123)) was noninferior to that with amoxicillin-clavulanate (88.8% (111/125)) (95% confidence interval: -8.9 to 8.5). In the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population, the median time for 50% reduction of total symptom scores was significantly shorter for telithromycin (4 days) vs. amoxicillin-clavulanate (5 days; p=0.044); median times for 75% reduction of total symptom scores were: telithromycin, 7 days; amoxicillin-clavulanate, 8 days (p=0.115). The median time for reduction of total symptom scores to the absent/very mild category (mITT population) was 6 days for telithromycin vs. 8 days for amoxicillin-clavulanate (p=0.04). All treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were mostly gastrointestinal and occurred in 20.7% (30/145) of telithromycin-treated patients vs. 31.8% (47/148) of amoxicillin-clavulanate-treated patients (p=0.034). One serious AE was reported in the telithromycin group, but it was considered not to be related to treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This open-label, randomized study demonstrated that treatment of ABS with telithromycin resulted in comparable clinical efficacy, shorter times to symptom resolution, and fewer total TEAEs than treatment with amoxicillin-clavulanate.

Antibiotics for acute maxillary sinusitis

BACKGROUND

Expert opinions vary on the appropriate role of antibiotics for sinusitis, one of the most commonly diagnosed conditions among adults in ambulatory care.

OBJECTIVES

We examined whether antibiotics are effective in treating acute sinusitis, and if so, which antibiotic classes are the most effective.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2007, Issue 3); MEDLINE (1950 to May 2007) and EMBASE (1974 to June 2007).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing antibiotics with placebo or antibiotics from different classes for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults. We included trials with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis, whether or not confirmed by radiography or bacterial culture.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data and quality assessed trials. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for differences in the intervention and control groups to see whether or not the treatment was a failure. In meta-analysing the placebo-controlled studies, the data across antibiotic classes were combined. Primary outcomes were the clinical failure rates at 7 to 15 days and 16 to 60 days follow up.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-seven studies were included in the review; six placebo-controlled studies and 51 studies comparing different classes of antibiotics. Five studies involving 631 participants provided data for comparison of antibiotics to placebo, when clinical failure was defined as a lack of cure or improvement at 7 to 15 days follow up. These studies found a slight statistical difference in favor of antibiotics, compared to placebo, with a pooled RR of 0.66 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.98). However, the clinical significance of the result is equivocal, also considering that cure or improvement rate was high in both the placebo group (80%) and the antibiotic group (90%). Based on six studies, when clinical failure was defined as a lack of total cure, there was significant difference in favor of antibiotics compared to placebo with a pooled RR of 0.74 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.84) at 7 to 15 days follow up. None of the antibiotic preparations was superior to each other.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotics have a small treatment effect in patients with uncomplicated acute sinusitis in a primary care setting with symptoms for more than seven days. However, 80% of participants treated without antibiotics improve within two weeks. Clinicians need to weigh the small benefits of antibiotic treatment against the potential for adverse effects at both the individual and general population level.

Telithromycin Use and Spontaneous Reports of Hepatotoxicity

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Recent reports have described cases of telithromycin-related hepatotoxicity. The objective of this study is to quantify the effect of telithromycin use on the risk of hepatotoxicity.

METHODS

We conducted a spontaneous-report case-control study of hepatotoxicity in telithromycin recipients using reports from the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System. Reports from between 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 were examined. Cases included reports of patients with abnormal liver function tests, hepatocellular damage and hepatic impairment, while patients with reported conditions with similar reporting probabilities were considered as controls. The primary outcome measure of the analysis was the reporting odds ratio (ROR) evaluating the a priori hypothesis that telithromycin use confers an elevated risk of hepatotoxicity relative to other agents.

RESULTS

A total of 2219 cases and 20,667 controls were identified. We estimated an ROR for hepatotoxicity associated with telithromycin compared with other agents of 1.82 (95% CI 1.12, 2.96) after controlling for age and gender, approximating an 82% excess risk in users of telithromycin relative to users of other agents.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis is the first to specifically quantify the effect of telithromycin on the risk of hepatotoxicity. Telithromycin use may increase the risk of hepatotoxicity by >80%. Biases inherent in spontaneous reports include under-reporting of events and differential or time-varying reporting due to enhanced clinician awareness. Future studies should employ alternative data sources because of the inherent limitations of passive surveillance systems.

Disease severity in acute bacterial rhinosinusitis is greater in patients infected with Streptococcus pneumoniae than in those infected with Haemophilus influenzae

BACKGROUND

Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae are the most common causative pathogens in acute bacterial rhinosinusitis. A post hoc pooled analysis of four multinational Phase III clinical trials was conducted to compare disease severity in acute bacterial rhinosinusitis caused by S. pneumoniae or H. influenzae.

METHODS

Patients were evaluated for acute bacterial rhinosinusitis clinician-assessed symptom severity and radiologic findings (total opacity, mucosal thickening, and air-fluid levels on maxillary sinus x-rays). Specimens for bacteriologic identification were collected by maxillary sinus tap, or by selective middle meatal cultures (sinus aspirates or swabs).

RESULTS

Compared with patients infected with H. influenzae (n = 106), patients infected with S. pneumoniae (n = 143) showed a statistically significant higher incidence of severe disease (39.2% vs 23.6%, P = 0.0097) and total opacity (46.2% vs 29.2%, P = 0.0085). Mucosal thickening (47.6% vs 56.6%, P = 0.1616) and air-fluid levels (49% vs 56.6%, P = 0.2500) were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In acute bacterial rhinosinusitis, infection with S. pneumoniae is associated with more severe clinical symptoms and radiographic total opacification findings than infection with H. influenzae.

Acute bacterial rhinosinusitis: a review of U.S. treatment guidelines

Acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) is a common complication of viral upper respiratory tract infections and is associated with a significant socioeconomic burden. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of ABRS have been produced in association with a number of societies in the United States; these guidelines aim to promote the rational selection of antibiotic therapy to optimize clinical outcomes while minimizing the potential for selection of antibiotic resistance. This article provides an overview of current U.S. guidelines for the treatment of ABRS, focusing on the impact of antibiotic resistance on treatment options.

Bibliography. Current world literature. Nose and paranasal sinuses

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patients with advanced head and neck cancer are being treated with chemo-radiotherapy, and life is being prolonged, with or without persistent disease, for longer than was previously. Hypercalcaemia may present in patients with advanced or disseminated head and neck cancer, and, as such, these patients may present to a larger variety of clinicians for advice concerning their symptoms and illness. Modes of presentation of hypercalcaemia and treatment strategies are reviewed.

RECENT FINDINGS

There were previously few large series of head and neck cancer patients diagnosed with hypercalcaemia, which may or may not have been related to their cancer being treated. Investigations, by way of blood/serum calcium level, may identify such patients. Patients with cancer-related hypercalcaemia have a poor prognosis, but many may respond temporarily to treatment when offered, with an improvement of their quality of life and death.

SUMMARY

Hypercalcaemia should and must be considered in all patients who have or possibly have a diagnosis of a head and neck cancer and who present unwell with symptoms of fatigue, lethargy and somnolence. Investigation must include serum calcium (corrected for serum albumin binding) and parathyroid hormone level. Patients may be treated by a combination of rehydration and bisulphonate therapy until the serum calcium is reduced to a level below 3 mmol/l. The majority of patients diagnosed with hypercalcaemia due to head and neck malignancy die of their diseases in the short term, but some may enjoy a prolongation of life with reasonable quality if diagnosed and treated aggressively.

Telithromycin: The first ketolide antimicrobial

BACKGROUND

Telithromycin is the first of the ketolide antibacterials to receive US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for clinical use. It is approved for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB), and acute maxillary sinusitis (AMS) in adults.

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews the mechanism of action, in vitro antimicrobial activity, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, clinical efficacy, safety, and drug-interaction profile of telithromycin.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified through a search of the English-language literature indexed on MEDLINE (1990-March 2005) using the terms telithromycin and HMR 3647, a review of the reference lists of identified articles, and a review of the briefing document prepared by the manufacturer of telithromycin for presentation to the FDA Anti-infective Drugs Advisory Committee. A search of abstracts from the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (2001-2004) also was performed.

RESULTS

The results of in vitro susceptibility studies suggest that telithromycin provides coverage against the key respiratory pathogens, both typical and atypical. In addition, telithromycin may be useful against multidrug-resistant strains of Streptococcus pneumoniae and against Haemophilus influenzae, irrespective of beta-lactamase production. In randomized, double-blind, comparative trials (against amoxicillin, amoxicillin/clavulanate, cefuroxime axetil, clarithromycin, moxifloxacin, or trovafloxacin), telithromycin had comparable efficacy to its comparators in the empiric treatment of CAP (4 studies), AECB (3 studies), and AMS (3 studies). Telithromycin is dosed at 800 mg (two 400-mg tablets) QD in community-acquired respiratory tract infections (RTIs). No dose adjustment is required in the elderly, patients with mild to moderate renal insufficiency, or patients with hepatic insufficiency. The majority of adverse events associated with telithromycin were mild to moderate, with gastrointestinal effects (diarrhea, nausea, vomiting) being the most commonly reported, followed by headache and dizziness. Telithromycin has been associated with elevations in hepatic transaminases and prolongation of the electrocardiographic QTc interval, although the significance of these findings is not known. Telithromycin is also a strong inhibitor of and substrate for the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 isozyme. Therefore, it is important to monitor for potential drug interactions with medications that prolong the QTc interval or are metabolized by the CYP system.

CONCLUSIONS

Telithromycin appears to be a useful option for the empiric treatment of community-acquired RTIs in adults. It may be particularly useful in the outpatient setting in areas with high rates of penicillin- and macrolide-resistant S pneumoniae; it may also be an alternative agent for patients who are allergic to beta-lactams and live in areas with a high prevalence of multidrug-resistant S pneumoniae or for those who have failed to respond to beta-lactam- or macrolide-based therapy.

Treatment of rhinosinusitis in the outpatient setting

Rhinosinusitis is one of the most common respiratory tract conditions seen by primary care physicians. Each year approximately 20 million cases of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) occur in the United States. Since diagnosis of ABRS relies on clinical evaluation, treatments are usually empirical and include an antibiotic treatment that covers the common bacteria associated with ABRS infection, Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae. The Council for Appropriate and Rational Antibiotic Therapy (CARAT) recommends that antimicrobial therapy for rhinosinusitis should combine high susceptibility, clinical effectiveness, safety, and tolerability. The most efficacious antibiotics for ABRS include the respiratory fluoroquinolones gatifloxacin, levofloxacin, and moxifloxacin, as well as ceftriaxone and amoxicillin-clavulanate. The use of fluoroquinolones or high-dose amoxicillin-clavulanate is recommended for patients with mild disease who have had recent antimicrobial therapy or for patients with moderate disease. These drugs are generally well tolerated with mild adverse effects. Resistance to fluoroquinolones in S pneumoniae and H influenzae has remained low in spite of their increased use. Recent studies indicate that short-course, high-dose treatment regimens may reduce total drug use, improve tolerability and adherence, prevent increases in resistance, and increase efficacy. The use of fluoroquinolones or amoxicillin-clavulanate in a short-course, high-dose regimen may represent an exciting new protocol in the treatment of rhinosinusitis.

An approach to the diagnosis and management of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis

The management of patients presenting with nasal congestion, rhinorrhea and facial pressure poses a challenge due to the nonspecific nature of these symptoms. A systematic approach to diagnosing acute bacterial rhinosinusitis is essential prior to offering therapies. This review offers an overview of current definitions, diagnostic algorithms and medical therapies available for the management of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis. Antimicrobial use for acute bacterial rhinosinusitis is substantial and carries a major impact on regional resistance patterns.

Telithromycin new product overview

Community-acquired respiratory tract infections (CARTIs), including community-acquired pneumonia, acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis, and acute bacterial sinusitis, contribute substantially to health care costs in the United States. Although many prescriptions for antibiotics are written each year for the treatment of CARTIs, most are prescribed on an empiric basis. Concerns about the increasing prevalence of antimicrobial resistance and the changing pattern of pathogens isolated from subjects with CARTIs have raised questions about the empiric treatment paradigm. When choosing appropriate antimicrobial therapy for CARTIs, physicians must consider not only the spectrum of activity of antibiotics but also the potential risk of resistance. Telithromycin is the first member of the ketolide class, a new family of antimicrobials structurally related to the macrolides, to be approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of CARTIs. The spectrum of activity of telithromycin includes common typical and atypical causative pathogens associated with community-acquired respiratory tract infections, including antibiotic-resistant strains of Streptococcus pneumoniae. Clinical trials have shown that telithromycin is as effective as traditionally used antimicrobial agents in the treatment of mild-to-moderate community-acquired pneumonia, acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis, and acute bacterial sinusitis.