ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Long-Term Macrolides in Chronic Respiratory Diseases: Dusk or a New Dawn? A Narrative Review.
Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical features, misdiagnosis, and treatment of clinically diagnosed complete Kartagener syndrome: A three-case series for primary care.SAGE open medical case reports · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Macrolides-especially azithromycin-have been increasingly investigated in chronic respiratory diseases for their combined antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, and immunomodulatory properties. Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated significant reductions in exacerbation frequency in selected patient populations with bronchiectasis, COPD, and asthma, although benefits on lung function and quality of life are variable. Beyond these advantages, concerns remain regarding antimicrobial resistance and uncertainties about long-term safety. Different guidelines across various diseases therefore recommend cautious and selective use of macrolides, with attention to phenotype selection, while alternative or emerging options such as biologics and novel anti-inflammatory agents are reshaping the therapeutic landscape. In this narrative review, we analyze the evidence for macrolide therapy across major chronic respiratory diseases, highlighting both the enduring clinical relevance and the limitations of long-term macrolide therapy, and discussing whether these drugs are approaching their therapeutic dusk or could still open a new dawn for selected patients. To this end we researched EMBASE and PubMed for articles published in English between 2000 and 2020 with restrictions to original articles, and freely between 2021 and 2025.
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.