Observational studyBMC infectious diseases2016
High recurrence rate supports need for secondary prophylaxis in non-HIV patients with disseminated mycobacterium avium complex infection: a multi-center observational study.
Observational study in BMC infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- DisseminatedJournal of general and family medicine · 2017Article
- Rituximab Restores IFN-γ-STAT1 Function and Ameliorates Disseminated Mycobacterium avium Infection in a Patient with Anti-Interferon-γ Autoantibody.Journal of clinical immunology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLong-term outcomes in non-HIV immunocompromised patients with disseminated Mycobacterium avium complex (dMAC) infections are unknown and the need for post-treatment secondary prophylaxis against MAC is uncertain in this setting. The objective of this study was to determine the need of continuing secondary anti-MAC prophylaxis in non-HIV patients after completing treatment of the primary dMAC episode.
methodsWe conducted a ten-year multi-center analysis of non-HIV immunosuppressed patients with dMAC infections in Hong Kong.
resultsWe observed sixteen patients with dMAC during the study period of which five (31 %) were non-HIV immunosuppressed patients. In the non-HIV immunosuppressed group, three patients completed a treatment course without secondary prophylaxis, one patient received azithromycin-based secondary prophylaxis and one patient was still receiving therapy for the first dMAC episode. All the three patients who completed treatment without being given secondary prophylaxis developed recurrent dMAC infection requiring retreatment.
conclusionsIn view of the high rate of dMAC infection recurrence in non-HIV immunocompromised patients following treatment completion, our data support long-term anti-MAC suppression therapy after treatment of the first dMAC infection episode in immunocompromised non-HIV patients, as is recommended for patients with advanced HIV. Tests of cell mediated immune function need to be evaluated to guide prophylaxis discontinuation in non-HIV patients.
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.