Cargando…
Comparison of efficacy of treatments for early syphilis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies
BACKGROUND: Parenteral penicillin is the first-line regimen for treating syphilis, but unsuitable for some patients due to penicillin allergy and lacking health resources. Unfortunately, the efficacy of penicillin alternatives remains poorly understood. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of cef...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5489196/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28658325 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180001 |
_version_ | 1783246764097142784 |
---|---|
author | Liu, Hong-ye Han, Yan Chen, Xiang-sheng Bai, Li Guo, Shu-ping Li, Li Wu, Peng Yin, Yue-ping |
author_facet | Liu, Hong-ye Han, Yan Chen, Xiang-sheng Bai, Li Guo, Shu-ping Li, Li Wu, Peng Yin, Yue-ping |
author_sort | Liu, Hong-ye |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Parenteral penicillin is the first-line regimen for treating syphilis, but unsuitable for some patients due to penicillin allergy and lacking health resources. Unfortunately, the efficacy of penicillin alternatives remains poorly understood. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of ceftriaxone and doxycycline/tetracycline in treating early syphilis relative to that of penicillin, and thereby to determine which antibiotic is a better replacement for penicillin. METHOD: By searching literature from PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, the Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov and systematically screening relevant studies, eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies on treatments with penicillin, doxycycline/tetracycline, and ceftriaxone for early syphilis were identified and combined in this systematic review. Estimated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were utilized to compare their serological response and treatment failure rates. At 12-month follow up, serological response rates were compared by a direct meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA), while treatment failure rates were compared with a direct meta-analysis. RESULT: Three RCTs and seven cohort studies were included in this research. The results of NMA demonstrated that no significant differences existed in serological response rate at 12-month follow-up between any two of the three treatments (doxycycline/tetracycline vs. penicillin RR = 1.01, 95%CI 0.89–1.14; ceftriaxone vs. penicillin RR = 1.00, 95%CI 0.89–1.13; ceftriaxone vs. doxycycline/tetracycline RR = 0.99, 95%CI 0.96–1.03), which was consistent with the outcomes of the direct meta-analysis. In addition, the direct meta-analysis indicated that, at 12-month follow-up, penicillin and ceftriaxone treatment groups had similar treatment failure rates (RR = 0.92, 95%CI 0.12–6.93), while treatment failure rate was significantly lower among penicillin recipients than among doxycycline/tetracycline recipients (RR = 0.58, 95%CI 0.38–0.89). CONCLUSION: Ceftriaxone is as effective as penicillin in treating early syphilis with regard to serological response and treatment failure rate. Compared with doxycycline/tetracycline, ceftriaxone appears to be a better choice as the substitution of penicillin. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5489196 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54891962017-07-11 Comparison of efficacy of treatments for early syphilis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies Liu, Hong-ye Han, Yan Chen, Xiang-sheng Bai, Li Guo, Shu-ping Li, Li Wu, Peng Yin, Yue-ping PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Parenteral penicillin is the first-line regimen for treating syphilis, but unsuitable for some patients due to penicillin allergy and lacking health resources. Unfortunately, the efficacy of penicillin alternatives remains poorly understood. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of ceftriaxone and doxycycline/tetracycline in treating early syphilis relative to that of penicillin, and thereby to determine which antibiotic is a better replacement for penicillin. METHOD: By searching literature from PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, the Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov and systematically screening relevant studies, eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies on treatments with penicillin, doxycycline/tetracycline, and ceftriaxone for early syphilis were identified and combined in this systematic review. Estimated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were utilized to compare their serological response and treatment failure rates. At 12-month follow up, serological response rates were compared by a direct meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA), while treatment failure rates were compared with a direct meta-analysis. RESULT: Three RCTs and seven cohort studies were included in this research. The results of NMA demonstrated that no significant differences existed in serological response rate at 12-month follow-up between any two of the three treatments (doxycycline/tetracycline vs. penicillin RR = 1.01, 95%CI 0.89–1.14; ceftriaxone vs. penicillin RR = 1.00, 95%CI 0.89–1.13; ceftriaxone vs. doxycycline/tetracycline RR = 0.99, 95%CI 0.96–1.03), which was consistent with the outcomes of the direct meta-analysis. In addition, the direct meta-analysis indicated that, at 12-month follow-up, penicillin and ceftriaxone treatment groups had similar treatment failure rates (RR = 0.92, 95%CI 0.12–6.93), while treatment failure rate was significantly lower among penicillin recipients than among doxycycline/tetracycline recipients (RR = 0.58, 95%CI 0.38–0.89). CONCLUSION: Ceftriaxone is as effective as penicillin in treating early syphilis with regard to serological response and treatment failure rate. Compared with doxycycline/tetracycline, ceftriaxone appears to be a better choice as the substitution of penicillin. Public Library of Science 2017-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5489196/ /pubmed/28658325 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180001 Text en © 2017 Liu et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Liu, Hong-ye Han, Yan Chen, Xiang-sheng Bai, Li Guo, Shu-ping Li, Li Wu, Peng Yin, Yue-ping Comparison of efficacy of treatments for early syphilis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies |
title | Comparison of efficacy of treatments for early syphilis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies |
title_full | Comparison of efficacy of treatments for early syphilis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies |
title_fullStr | Comparison of efficacy of treatments for early syphilis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of efficacy of treatments for early syphilis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies |
title_short | Comparison of efficacy of treatments for early syphilis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies |
title_sort | comparison of efficacy of treatments for early syphilis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5489196/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28658325 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180001 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liuhongye comparisonofefficacyoftreatmentsforearlysyphilisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandobservationalstudies AT hanyan comparisonofefficacyoftreatmentsforearlysyphilisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandobservationalstudies AT chenxiangsheng comparisonofefficacyoftreatmentsforearlysyphilisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandobservationalstudies AT baili comparisonofefficacyoftreatmentsforearlysyphilisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandobservationalstudies AT guoshuping comparisonofefficacyoftreatmentsforearlysyphilisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandobservationalstudies AT lili comparisonofefficacyoftreatmentsforearlysyphilisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandobservationalstudies AT wupeng comparisonofefficacyoftreatmentsforearlysyphilisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandobservationalstudies AT yinyueping comparisonofefficacyoftreatmentsforearlysyphilisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandobservationalstudies |