Catherine Q Sun1, Prajna Lalitha2, N Venkatesh Prajna2, Rajarathinam Karpagam2, Manoharan Geetha2, Kieran S O'Brien1, Catherine E Oldenburg1, Kathryn J Ray1, Stephen D McLeod3, Nisha R Acharya3, Thomas M Lietman4. 1. F.I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California. 2. Aravind Eye Care System, Madurai, India. 3. F.I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California. 4. F.I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California. Electronic address: tom.lietman@ucsf.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the association between minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and clinical outcomes in a fungal keratitis clinical trial. DESIGN: Experimental study using data from a randomized comparative trial. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 323 patients enrolled in the trial, we were able to obtain MIC values from 221 patients with monocular fungal keratitis. METHODS: The Mycotic Ulcer Treatment Trial I was a randomized, double-masked clinical trial comparing clinical outcomes of monotherapy with topical natamycin versus voriconazole for the treatment of fungal keratitis. Speciation and determination of MIC to natamycin and voriconazole were performed according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. The relationship between MIC and clinical outcome was assessed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was 3-month best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. Secondary outcomes included 3-month infiltrate or scar size; corneal perforation and/or therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty; and time to re-epithelialization. RESULTS: A 2-fold increase in MIC was associated with a larger 3-month infiltrate or scar size (0.21 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10-0.31; P < 0.001) and increased odds of perforation (odds ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69; P = 0.02). No correlation was found between MIC and 3-month visual acuity. For natamycin-treated cases, an association was found between higher natamycin MIC with larger 3-month infiltrate or scar size (0.29 mm; 95% CI, 0.15-0.43; P < 0.001) and increased perforations (odds ratio, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.46-3.97; P < 0.001). Among voriconazole-treated cases, the voriconazole MIC did not correlate with any of the measured outcomes in the study. CONCLUSIONS: Decreased susceptibility to natamycin was associated with increased infiltrate or scar size and increased odds of perforation. There was no association between susceptibility to voriconazole and outcome.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To assess the association between minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and clinical outcomes in a fungal keratitis clinical trial. DESIGN: Experimental study using data from a randomized comparative trial. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 323 patients enrolled in the trial, we were able to obtain MIC values from 221 patients with monocular fungal keratitis. METHODS: The Mycotic Ulcer Treatment Trial I was a randomized, double-masked clinical trial comparing clinical outcomes of monotherapy with topical natamycin versus voriconazole for the treatment of fungal keratitis. Speciation and determination of MIC to natamycin and voriconazole were performed according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. The relationship between MIC and clinical outcome was assessed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was 3-month best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. Secondary outcomes included 3-month infiltrate or scar size; corneal perforation and/or therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty; and time to re-epithelialization. RESULTS: A 2-fold increase in MIC was associated with a larger 3-month infiltrate or scar size (0.21 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10-0.31; P < 0.001) and increased odds of perforation (odds ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69; P = 0.02). No correlation was found between MIC and 3-month visual acuity. For natamycin-treated cases, an association was found between higher natamycin MIC with larger 3-month infiltrate or scar size (0.29 mm; 95% CI, 0.15-0.43; P < 0.001) and increased perforations (odds ratio, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.46-3.97; P < 0.001). Among voriconazole-treated cases, the voriconazole MIC did not correlate with any of the measured outcomes in the study. CONCLUSIONS: Decreased susceptibility to natamycin was associated with increased infiltrate or scar size and increased odds of perforation. There was no association between susceptibility to voriconazole and outcome.
Authors: J H Rex; M A Pfaller; J N Galgiani; M S Bartlett; A Espinel-Ingroff; M A Ghannoum; M Lancaster; F C Odds; M G Rinaldi; T J Walsh; A L Barry Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 1997-02 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Michael A Thiel; Annelies S Zinkernagel; Jürgen Burhenne; Claude Kaufmann; Walter E Haefeli Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2006-10-23 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Prajna Lalitha; Catherine Q Sun; N Venkatesh Prajna; Rajarathinam Karpagam; Manoharan Geetha; Kieran S O'Brien; Vicky Cevallos; Stephen D McLeod; Nisha R Acharya; Thomas M Lietman Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2013-10-22 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Prajna Lalitha; Brett L Shapiro; Muthiah Srinivasan; Namperumalsamy Venkatesh Prajna; Nisha R Acharya; Annette W Fothergill; Jazmin Ruiz; Jaya D Chidambaram; Kathryn J Maxey; Kevin C Hong; Stephen D McLeod; Thomas M Lietman Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2007-06
Authors: G Atma Vemulakonda; Seenu M Hariprasad; William F Mieler; Randall A Prince; Gaurav K Shah; Russell N Van Gelder Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2008-01
Authors: C Lass-Flörl; G Kofler; G Kropshofer; J Hermans; A Kreczy; M P Dierich; D Niederwieser Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 1998-10 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: N Venkatesh Prajna; Prajna Lalitha; Revathi Rajaraman; Tiruvengada Krishnan; Anita Raghavan; Muthiah Srinivasan; Kieran S O'Brien; Michael Zegans; Stephen D McLeod; Nisha R Acharya; Jeremy D Keenan; Thomas M Lietman; Jennifer Rose-Nussbaumer Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2016-06-01 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: Seyed Ali Tabatabaei; Mohammad Soleimani; Seyed Mehdi Tabatabaei; Amir Houshang Beheshtnejad; Niloufar Valipour; Shahram Mahmoudi Journal: Int Ophthalmol Date: 2019-11-07 Impact factor: 2.031
Authors: S Z Tan; A Walkden; L Au; C Fullwood; A Hamilton; A Qamruddin; M Armstrong; A K Brahma; F Carley Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2017-04-28 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Simon Arunga; Tumu Mbarak; Abel Ebong; James Mwesigye; Dan Kuguminkiriza; Abeer H A Mohamed-Ahmed; Jeremy John Hoffman; Astrid Leck; Victor Hu; Matthew Burton Journal: BMJ Open Ophthalmol Date: 2021-07-05