Treatment of American tegumentary leishmaniasis in special populations: a summary of evidence

We aimed to assess and synthesize the information available in the literature regarding the treatment of American tegumentary leishmaniasis in special populations. We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, LILACS, SciELO, Scopus, Cochrane Library and mRCT databases to identify clinical trials and observational studies that assessed the pharmacological treatment of the following groups of patients: pregnant women, nursing mothers, children, the elderly, individuals with chronic diseases and individuals with suppressed immune systems. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. The available evidence suggests that the treatments of choice for each population or disease entity are as follows: nursing mothers and children (meglumine antimoniate or pentamidine), patients with renal disease (amphotericin B or miltefosine), patients with heart disease (amphotericin B, miltefosine or pentamidine), immunosuppressed patients (liposomal amphotericin), the elderly (meglumine antimoniate), pregnant women (amphotericin B) and patients with liver disease (no evidence available). The quality of evidence is low or very low for all groups. Accurate controlled studies are required to fill in the gaps in evidence for treatment in special populations. Post-marketing surveillance programs could also collect relevant information to guide treatment decision-making.

Rifapentine for latent tuberculosis infection treatment in the general population and human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients: summary of evidence

AbstractLatent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-coinfection are challenges in the control of tuberculosis transmission. We aimed to assess and summarize evidence available in the literature regarding the treatment of LTBI in both the general and HIV-positive population, in order to support decision making by the Brazilian Tuberculosis Control Program for LTBI chemoprophylaxis. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Embase, LILACS, SciELO, Trip database, National Guideline Clearinghouse, and the Brazilian Theses Repository to identify systematic reviews, randomized clinical trials, clinical guidelines, evidence-based synopses, reports of health technology assessment agencies, and theses that investigated rifapentine and isoniazid combination compared to isoniazid monotherapy. We assessed the quality of evidence from randomized clinical trials using the Jadad Scale and recommendations from other evidence sources using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. The available evidence suggests that there are no differences between rifapentine + isoniazid short-course treatment and the standard 6-month isoniazid therapy in reducing active tuberculosis incidence or death. Adherence was better with directly observed rifapentine therapy compared to self-administered isoniazid. The quality of evidence obtained was moderate, and on the basis of this evidence, rifapentine is recommended by one guideline. Available evidence assessment considering the perspective of higher adherence rates, lower costs, and local peculiarity context might support rifapentine use for LTBI in the general or HIV-positive populations. Since novel trials are ongoing, further studies should include patients on antiretroviral therapy.