ライフサイエンスコーパス: co-trimoxazole

1 ars of follow-up (8128 [57%] person-years on co-trimoxazole).

2 ART in sub-Saharan Africa could discontinue co-trimoxazole.

3 ignificant effect on mortality or receipt of co-trimoxazole.

4 a with high rates of bacterial resistance to co-trimoxazole.

5 (34%) of 29 isolates that were resistant to co-trimoxazole.

6 esistant to ampicillin, chloramphenicol, and co-trimoxazole.

7 ome than patients with the mutant when given co-trimoxazole.

8 come among bacteraemic children treated with co-trimoxazole.

9 dime, meropenem, imipenem, co-amoxiclav, and co-trimoxazole.

10 signed (1:1) to receive co-trimoxazole or no co-trimoxazole.

11 intramuscular streptomycin followed by oral co-trimoxazole.

12 gin weekly chloroquine, or discontinue daily co-trimoxazole.

13 usual care), and to co-trimoxazole versus no co-trimoxazole.

14 iaquine, SP+piperaquine, SP+chloroquine, and co-trimoxazole.

15 because of a low likelihood of benefit with co-trimoxazole.

16 bility to chloramphenicol, tetracycline, and co-trimoxazole.

17 ite locally reported bacterial resistance to co-trimoxazole.

18 n Botswana were randomly assigned to receive co-trimoxazole (100 mg/20 mg once daily until age 6 mont

19 ciprofloxacin 25.8%, chloramphinicol 25.8%, co-trimoxazole 25.8%, and ampicillin 19.4% were resistan

20 s were randomly assigned to stop or continue co-trimoxazole (382 and 376 participants, respectively),

21 cin (17% of 10,618 isolates, 95% CI: 11-25), co-trimoxazole (63% of 10,561 isolates, 95% CI: 52-73),

22 xicillin or penicillin, chloramphenicol, and co-trimoxazole; 68.3% of Gram-negative and 6.6% of Gram-

23 tibiotics against Burkholderia infections is co-trimoxazole, a cocktail of trimethoprim and sulfameth

24 t no co-trimoxazole is not inferior to daily co-trimoxazole among breastfed HIV-exposed, HIV-uninfect

25 The efficacy of daily co-trimoxazole, an antifolate used for malaria chemoprev

26 ourses of antibiotics, which usually include co-trimoxazole and amikacin.

27 inue daily co-trimoxazole, discontinue daily co-trimoxazole and begin weekly chloroquine, or disconti

28 Co-trimoxazole and chloroquine prophylaxis effectively p

29 We argue that co-trimoxazole and isoniazid should also be combined int

30 llow-up among participants randomized to the co-trimoxazole and placebo groups were 0.45 (84/186) and

31 sistance (ie, resistance to chloramphenicol, co-trimoxazole, and ampicillin) was common in Blantyre (

32 ors, such as immune disruption, prophylactic co-trimoxazole, and antiretroviral therapy, may influenc

33 terruptions of supply of other drugs such as co-trimoxazole, and suspension of HIV testing would all

34 r more drugs (erythromycin, chloramphenicol, co-trimoxazole, and tetracycline) and expressed serotype

35 n-years) in the 46 children assigned to stop co-trimoxazole at age 2 years (incidence rate ratio 0.53

36 zole in the HIV-exposed children who stopped co-trimoxazole at age 2 years, but incidence increased s

37 ficantly in HIV-exposed children who stopped co-trimoxazole at age 4 years (odds ratio 1.78, 95% CI 1

38 enefits of continued prophylaxis and whether co-trimoxazole can be stopped following immune reconstit

39 As co-trimoxazole (CMX) protects children and HIV-positive

40 We studied the effectiveness of co-trimoxazole compared with that of amoxycillin in pneu

41 Daily co-trimoxazole consisted of one tablet of 160 mg sulfame

42 hort of rural Ugandan HIV patients receiving co-trimoxazole (CTX) prophylaxis.

43 Some countries are still using oral co-trimoxazole, despite a World Health Organization reco

44 moderate or severe IPF, treatment with oral co-trimoxazole did not reduce a composite outcome of tim

45 50/mm3 and randomized them to continue daily co-trimoxazole, discontinue daily co-trimoxazole and beg

46 In contrast, co-trimoxazole, doxycycline, antifungals, and antivirals

47 -6 weeks; however, the risks and benefits of co-trimoxazole during infancy are unclear.

48 Co-trimoxazole (fixed-dose trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole

49 WHO recommends daily co-trimoxazole for children born to HIV-infected mothers

50 ot receiving ART before the study, and daily co-trimoxazole for prevention of opportunistic infection

51 ned to discontinue (n=46) or continue (n=45) co-trimoxazole from age 2 years to age 4 years.

52 le group versus 498 (25%) children in the no co-trimoxazole group (1.01, 0.89-1.15; p=0.85) had had o

53 events] vs 17.8 per 100 person-years in the co-trimoxazole group [25 events]) and infants (45.4 per

54 136 (22%) infants in the co-trimoxazole group and 139 (23%) infants in the no co-

55 There were 92 (23%) therapy failures in the co-trimoxazole group and 30 (15%) in the amoxycillin gro

56 orded among 57 (3%) children; 31 (2%) in the co-trimoxazole group and 32 (2%) in the placebo group (i

57 sation); therefore, 611 (50%) infants in the co-trimoxazole group and 608 (50%) infants in the no co-

58 led, 611 (50%) were randomly assigned to the co-trimoxazole group and 609 (50%) were randomly assigne

59 ) children were lost to follow-up (76 in the co-trimoxazole group and 77 in the placebo group), and 2

60 xazole group and 139 (23%) infants in the no co-trimoxazole group did not complete the 12-month study

61 bservation, 122 (14%) of 887 children in the co-trimoxazole group died, compared with 135 (15%) of 89

62 Patients in the co-trimoxazole group had 696 adverse events (nausea [n =

63 The risk difference (no co-trimoxazole group minus co-trimoxazole group) was -0.

64 s around 3 percentage points lower in the no co-trimoxazole group on the additive scale.

65 ade 3-4 neutropenia was more frequent in the co-trimoxazole group than in the placebo group (8.1% vs

66 s seen in children aged 3 or 6 months in the co-trimoxazole group than in the placebo group (p=0.001

67 14 (95% CI 0.076 to 0.147; 49 events) in the co-trimoxazole group versus 0.0795 (0.044 to 0.115; 39 e

68 1.07; p=0.40), and 500 (25%) children in the co-trimoxazole group versus 498 (25%) children in the no

69 (adjusted HR, 1.15 [95% CI 0.68-1.95] in the co-trimoxazole group vs 0.82 [95% CI, 0.46-1.47] in the

70 ital admissions between groups (12.5% in the co-trimoxazole group vs 17.4% in the placebo group, p=0.

71 One (<1%) infant in the no co-trimoxazole group was excluded from the analysis of t

72 xazole group and 608 (50%) infants in the no co-trimoxazole group were included in the final intentio

73 sk difference (no co-trimoxazole group minus co-trimoxazole group) was -0.0319 (-0.075 to 0.011), mea

74 s), neutropenia (grade 4, more common in the co-trimoxazole group), and anaemia (both grades equally

75 rimoxazole group; 90 [15%] infants in the no co-trimoxazole group).

76 he two study groups: 30 children died in the co-trimoxazole group, compared with 34 in the placebo gr

77 In the co-trimoxazole group, infants received the drug until al

78 d 609 (50%) were randomly assigned to the no co-trimoxazole group.

79 0.0795 (0.044 to 0.115; 39 events) in the no co-trimoxazole group.

80 f loss to follow-up (93 [15%] infants in the co-trimoxazole group; 90 [15%] infants in the no co-trim

81 therefore believe that WHO should revise the co-trimoxazole guidelines for HIV-exposed, HIV-uninfecte

82 moxazole versus 163 (8%) who did not receive co-trimoxazole had died (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.86-1.32; p=0.

83 Participants who stopped co-trimoxazole had higher rates of hospitalization or de

84 line antibiotics such as chloramphenicol and co-trimoxazole have significantly decreased for both org

85 the standard of care with daily unsupervised co-trimoxazole in areas of high antifolate resistance su

86 stopping versus continuing daily open-label co-trimoxazole in children and adolescents in Uganda and

87 , benefits and risks, and clinical trials of co-trimoxazole in developing countries.

88 ia infection than monthly placebo plus daily co-trimoxazole in pregnant women living with HIV.

89 rebound in the year after discontinuation of co-trimoxazole in the HIV-exposed children who stopped c

90 Co-trimoxazole is an inexpensive, broad-spectrum antimic

91 severe, life-threatening pneumonia, however, co-trimoxazole is less likely than amoxycillin to be eff

92 thly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine to daily co-trimoxazole is more effective at preventing malaria i

93 We can conclude that no co-trimoxazole is not inferior to daily co-trimoxazole a

94 Daily co-trimoxazole is recommended for African adults living

95 Co-trimoxazole is widely used in treatment of paediatric

96 U children were randomly assigned to receive co-trimoxazole (n=1423) or placebo (n=1425).

97 tients were randomly assigned on a 2:1 basis co-trimoxazole (n=398) or amoxycillin (n=197) in standar

98 For patients initially given co-trimoxazole, nine (14%) of 66 with DHPS mutant died,

99 The preventive effect of co-trimoxazole on the primary endpoint was 22% (95% CI:

100 We compared a dose of 480 mg co-trimoxazole once a day with one of 960 mg co-trimoxaz

101 co-trimoxazole once a day with one of 960 mg co-trimoxazole once a day.

102 y reduction was not accounted for by time on co-trimoxazole or current CD4 cell count.

103 iopathic pulmonary fibrosis, the addition of co-trimoxazole or doxycycline to usual care, compared wi

104 ants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive co-trimoxazole or no co-trimoxazole.

105 us with survival and response of patients to co-trimoxazole or other drugs.

106 were randomly assigned (1:1) to discontinue co-trimoxazole or to continue taking it up to age 2 year

107 r serious adverse events than placebo, daily co-trimoxazole, or monthly SP.

108 women were enrolled and randomly assigned to co-trimoxazole plus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (n=44

109 was reported by 29 (7%) of 446 women in the co-trimoxazole plus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group

110 uring pregnancy or delivery was lower in the co-trimoxazole plus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group

111 elivery was 25.4 per 100 person-years in the co-trimoxazole plus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group

112 in mothers (17.7 per 100 person-years in the co-trimoxazole plus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group

113 5 (99%) contributed to the primary analysis (co-trimoxazole plus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, n=44

114 known positive vs newly diagnosed), to daily co-trimoxazole plus monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaqui

115 piperaquine given daily for 3 days) or daily co-trimoxazole plus monthly placebo.

116 us dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (n=448) or co-trimoxazole plus placebo (n=456), of whom 895 (99%) c

117 droartemisinin-piperaquine group than in the co-trimoxazole plus placebo group (31 [7%] of 443 women

118 roup versus 77.3 per 100 person-years in the co-trimoxazole plus placebo group (incidence rate ratio

119 ine group versus 12 (3%) of 445 women in the co-trimoxazole plus placebo group.

120 plus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, n=443; co-trimoxazole plus placebo, n=452).

121 cute pyelonephritis, bacterial resistance to co-trimoxazole predicts treatment failure, but the clona

122 Co-trimoxazole prevented a composite of death plus WHO H

123 The role of co-trimoxazole preventive therapy (CPT) in reducing lead

124 Co-trimoxazole preventive therapy started before or with

125 HIV-positive participants were offered daily co-trimoxazole prophylaxis (800 mg trimethoprim, 160 mg

126 pants (1:1) to 6 months of either daily oral co-trimoxazole prophylaxis (given as water-dispersible t

127 Continuing co-trimoxazole prophylaxis after 96 weeks of ART was ben

128 rimary endpoint was the preventive effect of co-trimoxazole prophylaxis against death or World Health

129 48 HIV-infected children who took continuous co-trimoxazole prophylaxis and 100 HIV-unexposed uninfec

130 1778 eligible children to treatment (887 to co-trimoxazole prophylaxis and 891 to placebo).

131 d trials and observational studies including co-trimoxazole prophylaxis and a comparator group.

132 re additional outcomes for the comparison of co-trimoxazole prophylaxis and intermittent preventive t

133 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis can reduce mortality from unt

134 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis continuation after ART-induce

135 Daily co-trimoxazole prophylaxis did not reduce mortality in c

136 ho immune reconstituted on ART and continued co-trimoxazole prophylaxis experienced fewer deaths and

137 HO guidelines, which now recommend long-term co-trimoxazole prophylaxis for adults and children in se

138 d provide strong motivation for provision of co-trimoxazole prophylaxis for at least 72 weeks for all

139 WHO guidelines recommend co-trimoxazole prophylaxis for HIV-exposed, HIV-uninfect

140 pplement versus iron and folate treatment or co-trimoxazole prophylaxis improved 6-month survival.

141 oxazole prophylaxis is inferior to receiving co-trimoxazole prophylaxis in the resulting incidence of

142 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis is a readily available, effec

143 we aimed to investigate whether receiving no co-trimoxazole prophylaxis is inferior to receiving co-t

144 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis is recommended for HIV-expose

145 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis is used to reduce morbidity a

146 We aimed to assess the efficacy of daily co-trimoxazole prophylaxis on survival in children witho

147 A dose of 480 mg co-trimoxazole prophylaxis once a day did not reduce tre

148 efore antiretroviral therapy (ART) scale-up, co-trimoxazole prophylaxis reduced morbidity and mortali

149 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis reduced rates of death (hazar

150 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis reduces anaemia and improves

151 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis reduces early mortality by 58

152 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis reduces mortality among HIV-i

153 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis should be given with ART in p

154 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis should be provided irrespecti

155 s and lack of routine viral load monitoring, co-trimoxazole prophylaxis should continue in adults on

156 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis started at higher than 350 ce

157 tematically reviewed three topics related to co-trimoxazole prophylaxis to update WHO guidelines: ini

158 protective efficacy and safety of prolonging co-trimoxazole prophylaxis until age 4 years in HIV-expo

159 rted on the effectiveness of continuation of co-trimoxazole prophylaxis up to age 2 years in these ch

160 nce in diarrhoeal pathogens were high (76%), co-trimoxazole prophylaxis was associated with a 46% red

161 Daily co-trimoxazole prophylaxis was associated with reduced m

162 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis was non-inferior to IPTp with

163 Co-trimoxazole prophylaxis was not routinely used or ran

164 At age 2 years, children who continued co-trimoxazole prophylaxis were randomly assigned (1:1)

165 91 HIV-exposed children who had remained on co-trimoxazole prophylaxis were randomly assigned to dis

166 ugs in pregnant women and young children, of co-trimoxazole prophylaxis, and of pneumococcal vaccinat

167 admission to hospital are prevented by daily co-trimoxazole prophylaxis, despite locally reported bac

168 All participants were provided with co-trimoxazole prophylaxis.

169 Co-trimoxazole provided effective therapy in non-severe

170 Co-trimoxazole provides ongoing protection against malar

171 Pregnant women with HIV in Africa should use co-trimoxazole rather than IPTp to prevent malaria compl

172 onal group A (CGA; responsible for 38-51% of co-trimoxazole resistance in acute cystitis), including

173 More co-trimoxazole resistance in commensal Escherichia coli

174 A is broadly disseminated and contributes to co-trimoxazole resistance in pyelonephritis as well as i

175 n Staphylococcus aureus, and beta-lactam and co-trimoxazole resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae wi

176 occurred in isolates from 29 (8%) patients, co-trimoxazole resistance occurred in 239 (66%), erythro

177 therapy, and assessed the clinical impact of co-trimoxazole resistance.

178 INTERPRETATION: Prophylactic co-trimoxazole seems to offer no survival benefit among

179 and folate, and 1922 (96%) of 1994 assigned co-trimoxazole started treatment.

180 3 days in 14 intervention clusters and oral co-trimoxazole suspension (8 mg trimethoprim/kg and 40 m

181 fluconazole treatment if CrAg-positive, and co-trimoxazole to prevent bacterial infections.

182 are now assessing the ability of adjunctive co-trimoxazole to reduce mortality in children after sev

183 Antimicrobials included co-trimoxazole (trimethoprim 160 mg/sulfamethoxazole 800

184 previous studies have suggested benefit with co-trimoxazole (trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole).

185 Prophylaxis with co-trimoxazole (trimethoprim-sulphamethoxazole) is recom

186 ts were randomized to receive 960 mg of oral co-trimoxazole twice daily (n = 170) or matched placebo

187 45 HIV-exposed children assigned to continue co-trimoxazole until age 4 years compared with 503 episo

188 nd 9 months of age and prescribed them daily co-trimoxazole until breastfeeding cessation and HIV-sta

189 y assigned to stop (n=87) or continue (n=98) co-trimoxazole up to age 2 years.

190 ch is needed to inform dose optimisation and co-trimoxazole use in the context of expanded ART in dif

191 Time-dependent predictors of co-trimoxazole use were current CD4 cell count, haemoglo

192 V disease along with high antiretroviral and co-trimoxazole use.

193 0.79-1.21; p=0.81) and 172 (9%) who received co-trimoxazole versus 163 (8%) who did not receive co-tr

194 lone at treatment doses (usual care), and to co-trimoxazole versus no co-trimoxazole.

195 ect of the prespecified antimicrobial agent (co-trimoxazole vs doxycycline) on the primary end point

196 illin (MIC, 1 microgram/ml), cefotaxime, and co-trimoxazole was common.

197 Resistance to co-trimoxazole was the most frequently predicted resista

198 Co-trimoxazole was well tolerated with rare (<2% per per

199 Antibiotic resistance loci to co-trimoxazole were found to be prevalent (pre-PCV10 78%