Respiratory medicine · 2020
Macrolide resistant Mycobacterium avium complex pulmonary disease following clarithromycin and ethambutol combination therapy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ito Yasuhiro, Miwa Seiichi, Shirai Masahiro, Kanai Miho, Fujita Kaoru, Ohba Hisano, Iwaizumi Eriko, Oshima Tomoko, Kojima Suguru, Suda Takafumi, Hayakawa Hiroshi
Аннотация
RATIONALE: Whether two-drug therapy (clarithromycin and ethambutol) for Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) pulmonary disease contributes to the development of macrolide-resistant MAC is unclear.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of macrolide-resistant MAC between patients treated with two-drug therapy (clarithromycin and ethambutol) and the standard three-drug therapy (clarithromycin, ethambutol, and rifampicin) for MAC pulmonary disease.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 147 patients with treatment-naive MAC pulmonary disease who had received two-drug therapy (n = 47) or three-drug therapy (n = 100) between 1997 and 2016 at National Hospital Organization, Tenryu Hospital, Hamamatsu, Japan. The risk of development of macrolide-resistant MAC was evaluated by calculating the cumulative incidence rate using Gray's test.
RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 74.5 months. During the follow-up period, one of the 47 patients (2.1%) in the two-drug group developed macrolide-resistant MAC, compared to 12 of the 100 patients (12.0%) in the three-drug group. The cumulative incidence rate of macrolide-resistant MAC was lower in the two-drug group than in the three-drug group (0.0023; 95% confidence interval, 0.002 to 0.107 versus 0.200; 95% confidence interval, 0.100 to 0.324, p = 0.0593).
CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that two-drug treatment with clarithromycin and ethambutol for MAC pulmonary disease does not lead to a higher incidence of resistance acquisition to clarithromycin than the standard three-drug treatment.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of macrolide-resistant MAC between patients treated with two-drug therapy (clarithromycin and ethambutol) and the standard three-drug therapy (clarithromycin, ethambutol, and rifampicin) for MAC pulmonary disease.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 147 patients with treatment-naive MAC pulmonary disease who had received two-drug therapy (n = 47) or three-drug therapy (n = 100) between 1997 and 2016 at National Hospital Organization, Tenryu Hospital, Hamamatsu, Japan. The risk of development of macrolide-resistant MAC was evaluated by calculating the cumulative incidence rate using Gray's test.
RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 74.5 months. During the follow-up period, one of the 47 patients (2.1%) in the two-drug group developed macrolide-resistant MAC, compared to 12 of the 100 patients (12.0%) in the three-drug group. The cumulative incidence rate of macrolide-resistant MAC was lower in the two-drug group than in the three-drug group (0.0023; 95% confidence interval, 0.002 to 0.107 versus 0.200; 95% confidence interval, 0.100 to 0.324, p = 0.0593).
CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that two-drug treatment with clarithromycin and ethambutol for MAC pulmonary disease does not lead to a higher incidence of resistance acquisition to clarithromycin than the standard three-drug treatment.