ArticleInfectious diseases and therapy2026
Immediate Treatment Versus Watchful Waiting in Mycobacterium avium Complex Pulmonary Disease: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis.
Article in Infectious diseases and therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe optimal timing for initiating antibiotic therapy in Mycobacterium avium complex pulmonary disease (MAC-PD) remains controversial. While previous studies advocate for "watchful waiting" in some cases, specific criteria to prioritize immediate treatment over observation are not well defined.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 592 treatment-naïve patients with MAC-PD diagnosed between 2003 and 2021. Propensity score matching was used to balance baseline characteristics between patients receiving immediate treatment (initiated ≤ 2 months [60 days] of diagnosis) and those undergoing watchful waiting. Primary outcomes were all-cause and respiratory mortality; secondary outcomes included culture conversion and adverse events.
resultsAfter matching, 102 pairs were analyzed. Immediate treatment was associated with significantly faster culture conversion [hazard ratio (HR) 3.07; 95% CI 1.68-5.61] but a higher incidence of adverse events (64.7% vs. 41.2%; P = 0.001). In the overall matched population, immediate treatment did not improve all-cause (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.53-1.61) or respiratory mortality (HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.19-1.14). However, in the subgroup of patients with moderate-to-severe disease (BACES score ≥ 2), immediate treatment was significantly associated with reduced all-cause (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.30-0.96) and respiratory mortality (HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.14-0.90).
conclusionsImmediate treatment accelerates culture conversion but increases AEs without improving overall survival, supporting watchful waiting for mild cases. However, patients with a BACES score ≥ 2 derive significant survival benefit from immediate therapy, suggesting the BACES score is an effective tool for guiding treatment timing. Regardless of the initial treatment decision, close and regular monitoring remains essential, as some patients will ultimately require treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42704595What 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.