An updated systematic review of HIV‐associated cryptococcal meningitis treatment strategies

Background The purpose of this systematic review is to provide updated evidence on the preferred induction therapy for the treatment of HIV‐associated cryptococcal meningitis considering the most recent evidence available in order to inform the need for updates to WHO guidelines. Methods We searched...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:HIV medicine 2023-04, Vol.24 (4), p.507-512
Hauptverfasser: Shapiro, Adrienne E., Tenforde, Mark W., Chiller, Tom M., Ford, Nathan, Rajasingham, Radha
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background The purpose of this systematic review is to provide updated evidence on the preferred induction therapy for the treatment of HIV‐associated cryptococcal meningitis considering the most recent evidence available in order to inform the need for updates to WHO guidelines. Methods We searched Medline via PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials.gov for published or completed randomized clinical trials that evaluated induction treatment of first episode HIV‐associated cryptococcal meningitis from 9 July 2018 (date of last search) to 1 September 2021. Results One randomized clinical trial of 844 people with HIV‐associated cryptococcal meningitis met the inclusion criteria. Participants were randomized to: (1) amphotericin deoxycholate for 7 days, with flucytosine and fluconazole (control); or (2) a single dose of liposomal amphotericin 10 mg/kg with flucytosine and fluconazole (intervention). In the intention‐to‐treat analysis, 10‐week mortality was 24.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 20.7–29.3%] in the single‐dose liposomal amphotericin group compared with 28.7% (95% CI: 24.4–33.4%) in the control group. The absolute difference in 10‐week mortality was −3.9% with an upper one‐sided 95% CI of 1.2%, within the 10% pre‐specified non‐inferiority margin. Fewer participants had grade 3 and 4 adverse events in the intervention arm compared with the control arm (50.0% vs. 62.3%, p 
ISSN:1464-2662
1468-1293
1468-1293
DOI:10.1111/hiv.13412