ReviewDrugs2002
Treatment of sexually transmitted infections with single-dose therapy: a double-edged sword.
Review in Drugs, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chlamydia and gonorrhoea in pregnancy: effectiveness of diagnosis and treatment in Botswana.Sexually transmitted infections · 2004Trial
- Article
- [Therapy of syphilis].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2004Article
- Chlamydia Treatment Practices and Time to Treatment in Massachusetts: Directly Observed Therapy Versus Pharmacy Prescriptions.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the advent of the antimicrobial era, single-dose therapy has been a valuable tool in the management of genital infection. Most of the common sexually transmitted infections (STIs) such as gonorrhoea, syphilis, trichomoniasis and chancroid can be treated in this way, as can genital infections which are not sexually transmitted such as bacterial vaginosis and genital tract candidiasis. Until recently, treatment for Chlamydia trachomatis infection required a multi-dose regimen, but single-dose azithromycin has now been shown to be an effective and acceptable alternative to this. Unfortunately, eradicative therapy has proven to be elusive for the viral STIs such as genital herpes simplex infection, human papilloma virus infection and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. The main advantage of single-dose therapy lies in its convenience and in its ability to ensure virtually 100% compliance. This addresses the problems of reduced clinical efficacy and the difficulties in assessing the response to therapy which complicates poor treatment compliance. However, some single-dose regimens for STIs do have drawbacks, particularly in certain situations. This may be with respect to efficacy, for example in syphilis with single-dose benzathine penicillin therapy, particularly for pregnant women and individuals infected with HI. Alternatively, it may involve toxicity, for example with single-dose metronidazole therapy for trichomoniasis or bacterial vaginosis where a higher rate of gastrointestinal adverse effects may be expected than if a lower multi-dose regimen is used. In addition, single-dose therapy, for example with nevirapine, given to the mother in labour and to the baby after delivery significantly reduces the risk of mother to child HIV transmission, but resistance mutations are frequently detected in the viral genome after the brief exposure to the drug, which could jeopardise its future use. Single-dose therapy clearly has both advantages and disadvantages. We have reviewed a range of these in a variety of situations, focussing on their applications, effectiveness, compliance and toxicity, highlighting how single-dose therapy may be a double-edged sword.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.