Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27662556›Full record

Trial reportAIDS (London, England)2016

Reduced bacterial skin infections in HIV-infected African children randomized to long-term cotrimoxazole prophylaxis.

Andrew J Prendergast, Mutsa Bwakura-Dangarembizi, Peter Mugyenyi, Joseph Lutaakome, Adeodata Kekitiinwa, Margaret J Thomason, Diana M Gibb, A Sarah Walker, ARROW Trial Team

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in AIDS (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Andrew J PrendergastaQueen Mary University of London bMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK cUniversity of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe dJoint Clinical Research Centre, Kampala, Uganda eMedical Research Council/Uganda Virus Research Institute Uganda Research Unit on AIDS, Entebbe fPaediatric Infectious Diseases Clinic/Baylor - Uganda, Mulago Hospital, Kampala, Uganda.
Mutsa Bwakura-Dangarembizi
Peter Mugyenyi
Joseph Lutaakome
Adeodata Kekitiinwa
Margaret J Thomason
Diana M Gibb
A Sarah Walker
ARROW Trial Team
MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL · GBJoint Clinical Research Centre · UGCatholic University of Zimbabwe · ZWQueen Mary University of London · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_EX_G0300400Wellcome Trust 108065/Z/15/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate whether cotrimoxazole prophylaxis prevents common skin conditions in HIV-infected children.

designOpen-label randomized controlled trial of continuing versus stopping daily cotrimoxazole (post-hoc analysis).

settingThree sites in Uganda and one in Zimbabwe.

participantsA total of 758 children aged more than 3 years receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) for more than 96 weeks in the ARROW trial were randomized to stop (n = 382) or continue (n = 376) cotrimoxazole after median (interquartile range) 2.1(1.8, 2.2) years on ART.

interventionContinuing versus stopping daily cotrimoxazole.

main outcome measuresNurses screened for signs/symptoms at 6-week visits. This was a secondary analysis of ARROW trial data, with skin complaints categorized blind to randomization as bacterial, fungal, or viral infections; dermatitis; pruritic papular eruptions (PPEs); or others (blisters, desquamation, ulcers, and urticaria). Proportions ever reporting each skin complaint were compared across randomized groups using logistic regression.

resultsAt randomization, median (interquartile range) age was 7 (4, 11) years and CD4 was 33% (26, 39); 73% had WHO stage 3/4 disease. Fewer children continuing cotrimoxazole reported bacterial skin infections over median 2 years follow-up (15 versus 33%, respectively; P < 0.001), with similar trends for PPE (P = 0.06) and other skin complaints (P = 0.11), but not for fungal (P = 0.45) or viral (P = 0.23) infections or dermatitis (P = 1.0). Bacterial skin infections were also reported at significantly fewer clinic visits (1.2 versus 3.0%, P < 0.001). Independent of cotrimoxazole, bacterial skin infections were more common in children aged 6-8 years, with current CD4 cell count less than 500 cells/μl, WHO stage 3/4, less time on ART, and lower socio-economic status.

conclusionLong-term cotrimoxazole prophylaxis reduces common skin complaints, highlighting an additional benefit for long-term prophylaxis in sub-Saharan Africa.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansIncidenceMaleSkin Diseases, BacterialTreatment OutcomeTrimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug CombinationUgandaZimbabweAnti-Bacterial AgentsTrimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination

Identifiers

PMID27662556
PMCPMC5976221
OpenAlexW2522754726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.