2018
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciy477
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Outcomes of Resistance-guided Sequential Treatment ofMycoplasma genitaliumInfections: A Prospective Evaluation

Abstract: In the context of high levels of antimicrobial resistance, switching from azithromycin to doxycycline for presumptive treatment of M. genitalium, followed by resistance-guided therapy, cured ≥92% of infections, with infrequent selection of macrolide resistance.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
139
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 161 publications
(150 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
7
139
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Treatment strategies to maintain the use of existing antimicrobials are now being evaluated since resistance to second line treatment with moxifloxacin is already increasing (Murray et al, 2017). In an observational study, resistance-guided therapy for symptomatic M. genitalium, with initial treatment with doxycycline followed by 2.5 g azithromycin over three days for macrolide susceptible infections and sitafloxacin for resistant infections resulted in an incidence of de novo macrolide resistance of 2.6% (95% CI [0.3-9.2]%) (Read et al, 2019). Randomized controlled trials are now needed to evaluate different treatment algorithms and new antimicrobials or combination therapy that might have a lower propensity for the emergence of de novo resistance (Bradshaw, Jensen & Waites, 2017).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Treatment strategies to maintain the use of existing antimicrobials are now being evaluated since resistance to second line treatment with moxifloxacin is already increasing (Murray et al, 2017). In an observational study, resistance-guided therapy for symptomatic M. genitalium, with initial treatment with doxycycline followed by 2.5 g azithromycin over three days for macrolide susceptible infections and sitafloxacin for resistant infections resulted in an incidence of de novo macrolide resistance of 2.6% (95% CI [0.3-9.2]%) (Read et al, 2019). Randomized controlled trials are now needed to evaluate different treatment algorithms and new antimicrobials or combination therapy that might have a lower propensity for the emergence of de novo resistance (Bradshaw, Jensen & Waites, 2017).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This strategy has been recommended [1,2] given the poor clinical response of M. genitalium to doxycycline (30-40%) [20][21][22], although this antibiotic has recently been recommended for the empirical treatment of non-gonococcal urethritis (of unknown aetiology) due to growing resistance to macrolides in M. genitalium, attributable to the widespread use of azithromycin 1 g for the treatment of C. trachomatis infection [23]. Recently, resistance-guided sequential treatment (doxycycline initially followed by azithromycin or sitafloxacin depending on the resistance test) has shown good efficacy, eradicating the infection and limiting the selection of antibiotic resistance [24]. This strategy could be a possibility in the context of high macrolide resistance rates and/or when guided therapy cannot be applied rapidly.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1A, data, including sex, age, sample type, and sample load (determined by retrospective analysis, as described in the following section) were extracted for samples (n ϭ 531; 319 urine samples, 63 anal/rectal swabs, 89 cervical/endocervical swabs, 54 vaginal swabs, and 6 urethral swabs) testing positive for M. genitalium between 16 June 2016 to 30 January 2017. Estimates of load were previously determined for a subset of 499 samples using a validated M. genitalium-specific 16S rRNA quantitative PCR method (not used for routine clinical care; published limit of detection, 6 copies of 16S rRNA gene) (2,11). These data were used for a comparison of quantitation methods and also for analysis of load by sample type.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%