Protecting the tuberculosis drug pipeline: stating the case for the rational use of fluoroquinolones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of fluoroquinolones (FQs) to treat lower respiratory tract infections (LTRI) other than tuberculosis (TB) allows selection of FQ-resistant TB when TB is misdiagnosed. This study maps national guidelines on the use of FQs for LRTI in Europe and determines the risk of FQ-resistant TB upon FQ treatment before TB diagnosis. A questionnaire was developed to map existing national LRTI and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) guidelines. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to determine the risk of FQ-resistant TB if prescribed FQs prior to TB diagnosis. 15 (80%) out of 24 responding European Respiratory Society national delegates reported having national LRTI management guidelines, seven including recommendations on FQ use and one recommending FQs as the first-choice drug. 18 out of 24 countries had national CAP management guidelines, two recommending FQ as the drug of choice. Six studies investigating FQ exposure and the risk of FQ-resistant TB were analysed. TB patients had a three-fold higher risk of having FQ-resistant TB when prescribed FQs before TB diagnosis, compared to non FQ-exposed patients (OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.47-5.39). Although the majority of European countries hold national LRTI/CAP guidelines, our results suggest that a risk of developing FQ resistance exists. Further strengthening of, and adherence to, guidelines is needed to ensure rational use of FQs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".