Cotrimoxazole for prophylaxis or treatment of opportunistic infections of HIV/AIDS in patients with previous history of hypersensitivity to cotrimoxazole
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Opportunistic infections continue to cause a significant amount of morbidity and mortality worldwide in patients infected with HIV. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (cotrimoxazole) is used in the treatment and prophylaxis of several opportunistic infections. In patients with HIV/AIDS, cotrimoxazole use can cause a higher rate of adverse drug reactions than in the general population. Given the cost-effectiveness of cotrimoxazole, the management of these adverse reactions has included continuing the drug (treating-through) and reintroducing the drug at a later date, either using dose-escalation (desensitization), or rechallenge at full dose. This systematic review is the first to examine the differences in patient outcomes between these strategies. OBJECTIVES: To compare the rate of discontinuation of cotrimoxazole and adverse reactions among the three strategies of treating-through, desensitization, and rechallenge in patients living with HIV who previously had an adverse reaction to cotrimoxazole. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, The Cochrane Library, Meeting Abstracts, AIDSTRIALS, ACTIS, Current Controlled Trials, The National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry, and CenterWatch (search date May 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing treating-through, rechallenge, or desensitization of cotrimoxazole treatment or prophylaxis in adults (age 18 years or over) and/or children (age 17 years or under). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial eligibility and quality, and extracted data. Where data were incomplete or unclear, a third reviewer resolved conflicts and/or trial authors were contacted for further details. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials that examined cotrimoxazole prophylaxis and involving 268 adults were included. Meta-analysis of these studies found a beneficial effect of using a desensitization protocol over a rechallenge protocol at six months of follow-up for preventing discontinuation of cotrimoxazole (number needed to treat (NNT) 7.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.0-33.0), and for lower incidence of overall hypersensitivity (NNT 4.55, 95% CI 3.03-9.09). No severe hypersensitivity reactions occurred for either protocol in the three studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In the small trials included in this review, when compared to cotrimoxazole rechallenge for prophylaxis of opportunistic infections, cotrimoxazole desensitization resulted in fewer treatment discontinuations and overall adverse reactions in HIV-infected patients with a previous history of mild or moderate hypersensitivity to cotrimoxazole. Paediatric data and trials in resource-poor settings are urgently required. Further randomised controlled trials are also needed for the treatment of opportunistic infections, treating-through, adjunctive medications, and different desensitization-dosing schedules.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,011 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».