Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9935275›Full record

ReviewDrug safety1999

Comparative tolerability of erythromycin and newer macrolide antibacterials in paediatric patients.

N Principi, S Esposito

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Genetic Variations and Antibiotic-Related Adverse Events.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  5. Drug-Induced Hepatitis in an Adolescent During Concomitant Use of Azithromycin and Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Azithromycin-induced cholestatic hepatitis.Oxford medical case reports · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Hepatic safety of antibiotics used in primary care.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2011
    Review
  20. Acute Chlamydia trachomatis respiratory infection in infants.Journal of global infectious diseases · 2011
    Article
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

2 authors.

N PrincipiPaediatric Department IV, University of Milan, L. Sacco Hospital, Italy.
S Esposito

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The macrolides are a well established group of antibacterials frequently used in general practice. The most frequently used macrolides in paediatric patients are erythromycin, a naturally occurring compound, and clarithromycin and azithromycin, recently developed macrolides. Overall adverse effect rates of 7 to 26% for erythromycin, 14 to 26% for clarithromycin, and 6 to 27% for azithromycin have been described in children. Adverse gastrointestinal effects, including nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and abdominal cramps, are the most common problems in children. Allergic reactions, hepatotoxicity, ototoxicity and adverse effects involving the central and peripheral nervous systems have also been observed in children. Stevens-Johnson, Schonlein-Henoch and Churg-Strauss syndromes have been rarely described in children. Treatment-related laboratory abnormalities have been recorded in 2 to 4% of erythromycin- and in 0 to 1% of both clarithromycin- and azithromycin-treated children. Elevation in liver function tests was the most common abnormality cited. Increased macrolide use in children in recent years has resulted in a growing potential for drug interactions between them and other pharmacologically active agents via the inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP) microsomal enzymes. Drug interactions with theophylline, cyclosporin, carbamazepine, terfenadine and warfarin limit erythromycin use. Clarithromycin is a weak inducer of CYP and exhibits fewer drug-drug interactions than erythromycin. However, its use with theophylline, carbamazepine and terfenadine is contraindicated. In contrast, no significant interactions have been reported with azithromycin to date. Macrolides have been proven to be well tolerated in the treatment of upper and lower respiratory tract infections, skin and soft tissue infections, and also in less frequent infections occurring in paediatric patients. In addition, clarithromycin and azithromycin have shown good tolerability profiles in immunocompromised paediatric patients. In conclusion, macrolides antibacterials have proven to be well tolerated in paediatric patients. Although the incidence of adverse effects is similar with the use of erythromycin and the newer macrolides, drug interactions occur significantly less when clarithromycin or azithromycin are administered.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAzithromycinBacterial InfectionsChildClarithromycinDrug HypersensitivityDrug InteractionsErythromycinHumansLiver Function TestsAnti-Bacterial AgentsAzithromycinClarithromycinErythromycin

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.