SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2009
Interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
71 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 206 citations in OpenAlex.
- The cure rate after different treatments for mucosal leishmaniasis in the Americas: A systematic review.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2022Pooled it
- Clinical characterization of Lassa fever: A systematic review of clinical reports and research to inform clinical trial design.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Pooled it
- Interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Efficacy of miltefosine compared with glucantime for the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Epidemiology and health · 2019Pooled it
- Interventions to treat cutaneous leishmaniasis in children: A systematic review.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2018Pooled it
- Interventions for Old World cutaneous leishmaniasis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Interventions for Old World cutaneous leishmaniasis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Efficacy of azole therapy for tegumentary leishmaniasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Treatment of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Caused by Leishmania aethiopica: A Systematic Review.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2016Pooled it
- The Cure Rate after Placebo or No Therapy in American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Vector and reservoir control for preventing leishmaniasis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Systematic review of biomarkers to monitor therapeutic response in leishmaniasis.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2015Pooled it
- Efficacy of thermotherapy to treat cutaneous leishmaniasis: a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials.PloS one · 2015Pooled it
- Species-directed therapy for leishmaniasis in returning travellers: a comprehensive guide.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2014Pooled it
- Interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis: a systematic review update.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial: Oral Miltefosine and Pentavalent Antimonials Associated With Pentoxifylline for the Treatment of American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Randomized, double-blinded, phase 2 trial of WR 279,396 (paromomycin and gentamicin) for cutaneous leishmaniasis in Panama.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2013Trial
- Trial
- Efficacy of miltefosine for the treatment of American cutaneous leishmaniasis.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2010Trial
11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPentavalent antimonial drugs are the most prescribed treatment for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis. Other drugs have been used with varying success.
objectivesTo assess the effects of therapeutic interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register (January 2009), the Register of Controlled Clinical Trials in The Cochrane Library (Issue 1,2009), MEDLINE (2003 to January 2009), EMBASE (2005 to January 2009), LILACS (from inception to January 2009), CINAHL (1982-May 2007) and other databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing treatments for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN
resultsWe included 38 trials involving 2728 participants. Results are based on individual studies or limited pooled analyses. There was good evidence in:Leishmania braziliensis and L. panamensis infections:Intramuscular (IM) meglumine antimoniate (MA) was better than oral allopurinol for 28 days (1RCT n=127, RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.26, 0.58). Intravenous (IV)MA for 20-days was better than 3-day and 7-day IVMA plus 15% paromomycin plus 12% methylbenzethonium chloride (PR-MBCL) or 7-day IVMA (1RCT n= 150, RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.11, 0.50; RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.53, 0.90; RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.44, 0.92 respectively). Oral allopurinol plus antimonials was better than IV antimonials (2RCT n= 168, RR 1.90; 95% CI 1.40, 2.59; I(2)=0%).L. braziliensis infections:Oral pentoxifylline plus IV sodium stibogluconate (SSG) was better than IVSSG (1RCT n= 23, RR 1.66; 95% CI 1.03, 2.69); IVMA was better than IM aminosidine sulphate (1RCT n= 38, RR 0.05; 95% CI 0.00, 0.78) and better than IV pentamidine isethionate (1RCT n= 80, RR 0.45; 95% CI 0.29, 0.71). Intramuscular MA was better than Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (1RCT n= 93, RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.32, 0.65).L .panamensis infections:Oral allopurinol was better than IVMA (1RCT n= 58, RR 2.20; 95% CI 1.34, 3.60). Aminosidine sulphate at doses of 12 mg/kg/day and 18 mg/kg/day for 14 days were better than aminosidine sulphate 12 mg/kg/day for 7 days (1RCT n= 60, RR 0.23; 95% CI 0.07, 0.73; RR 0.23; 95% CI 0.07, 0.73 respectively). Oral ketoconazole for 28 days, oral miltefosine and topical PR-MBCL were better than placebo. AUTHORS'
conclusionsMost trials have been designed and reported so poorly that they are inconclusive. There is a need for large well conducted studies that evaluate long-term effects of current therapies to improve quality and standardization of methods.
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.