Xin Zhang1, Matthew E Falagas1, Konstantinos Z Vardakas1, Rui Wang1, Rong Qin1, Jin Wang1, Youning Liu1. 1. 1 Department of Respiratory Medicine, General Hospital of Chinese People's Liberation Army, Beijing 100853, China ; 2 Outpatient Department of Navy Headquarters, Beijing 100841, China ; 3 Alfa Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Athens, Greece ; 4 Department of Clinical Pharmacology, General Hospital of Chinese People's Liberation Army, Beijing 100853, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Linezolid containing regimens have been proposed as potentially valuable alternatives for the treatment of patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) or extensively drug-resistant TB (XDR-TB). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of linezolid for drug-resistant TB (DR-TB) treatment. We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trial Registry, PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), database up to May 2014 to identify studies providing data of the use of linezolid for the treatment of DR-TB. RESULTS: The search yielded 15 studies (367 patients) including one randomized controlled trial (RCT), covering 239 patients who could be evaluated for effectiveness; 83% [95% confidence interval (CI), 75-90%; I(2)=62.8%] had a favorable outcome, defined as either cure or treatment completion. The pooled rate of culture conversion was 89% (95% CI, 83-95%; I(2)=49.6%). Between the group receiving daily linezolid doses of ≤600 or >600 mg, the mortality was considerably lower in patients treated with less than 600 mg/day (P value <0.001). Of 367 patients for whom data on safety was available, peripheral neuropathy (31%, 95% CI, 19-42%; I(2)=81.7%) and anemia (25%, 95% CI, 15-34%; I(2)=76.6%) were the main adverse effects. Patients receiving less than 600 mg/day were more likely to experience nervous system adverse events (P value <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence suggests that linezolid could be considered as a promising option as treatment of MDR/XDR TB. Randomized trials are warranted to define the dose and frequency of administration.
BACKGROUND:Linezolid containing regimens have been proposed as potentially valuable alternatives for the treatment of patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) or extensively drug-resistant TB (XDR-TB). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of linezolid for drug-resistant TB (DR-TB) treatment. We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trial Registry, PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), database up to May 2014 to identify studies providing data of the use of linezolid for the treatment of DR-TB. RESULTS: The search yielded 15 studies (367 patients) including one randomized controlled trial (RCT), covering 239 patients who could be evaluated for effectiveness; 83% [95% confidence interval (CI), 75-90%; I(2)=62.8%] had a favorable outcome, defined as either cure or treatment completion. The pooled rate of culture conversion was 89% (95% CI, 83-95%; I(2)=49.6%). Between the group receiving daily linezolid doses of ≤600 or >600 mg, the mortality was considerably lower in patients treated with less than 600 mg/day (P value <0.001). Of 367 patients for whom data on safety was available, peripheral neuropathy (31%, 95% CI, 19-42%; I(2)=81.7%) and anemia (25%, 95% CI, 15-34%; I(2)=76.6%) were the main adverse effects. Patients receiving less than 600 mg/day were more likely to experience nervous system adverse events (P value <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence suggests that linezolid could be considered as a promising option as treatment of MDR/XDR TB. Randomized trials are warranted to define the dose and frequency of administration.
Authors: K F Laserson; L E Thorpe; V Leimane; K Weyer; C D Mitnick; V Riekstina; E Zarovska; M L Rich; H S F Fraser; E Alarcón; J P Cegielski; M Grzemska; R Gupta; M Espinal Journal: Int J Tuberc Lung Dis Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: G B Migliori; B Eker; M D Richardson; G Sotgiu; J-P Zellweger; A Skrahina; J Ortmann; E Girardi; H Hoffmann; G Besozzi; N Bevilacqua; D Kirsten; R Centis; C Lange Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2009-03-12 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Sooraj Baijnath; Adeola Shobo; Linda A Bester; Sanil D Singh; Gert Kruger; Per I Arvidsson; Tricia Naicker; Thavendran Govender Journal: J Mol Histol Date: 2016-06-21 Impact factor: 2.611
Authors: L Mikiashvili; M Kipiani; M C Schechter; Z Avaliani; N Kiria; R R Kempker Journal: Int J Tuberc Lung Dis Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: Elise D Pieterman; Lindsey H M Te Brake; Gerjo J de Knegt; Aart van der Meijden; Jan-Willem C Alffenaar; Hannelore I Bax; Rob E Aarnoutse; Jurriaan E M de Steenwinkel Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2018-08-27 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Zhiyi Lan; Nafees Ahmad; Parvaneh Baghaei; Linda Barkane; Andrea Benedetti; Sarah K Brode; James C M Brust; Jonathon R Campbell; Vicky Wai Lai Chang; Dennis Falzon; Lorenzo Guglielmetti; Petros Isaakidis; Russell R Kempker; Maia Kipiani; Liga Kuksa; Christoph Lange; Rafael Laniado-Laborín; Payam Nahid; Denise Rodrigues; Rupak Singla; Zarir F Udwadia; Dick Menzies Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2020-03-17 Impact factor: 30.700