治疗淋球菌感染的替代药物:新旧药物。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy Pub Date : 2024-09-10 DOI:10.1080/14787210.2024.2401560
Susannah Franco, Margaret R Hammerschlag
{"title":"治疗淋球菌感染的替代药物:新旧药物。","authors":"Susannah Franco, Margaret R Hammerschlag","doi":"10.1080/14787210.2024.2401560","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The rise in antibiotic resistance to <i>N. gonorrhoeae</i> poses a substantial threat to effective gonorrhea treatment. Historical progression of resistance from sulfonamides to the more recent declines in efficacy of fluoroquinolones and susceptibilities of ceftriaxone highlight the urgent need for novel therapeutic approaches, necessitating the examination of alternative and new antibiotics.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>This review examines the potential of repurposing older antibiotics for gonorrhea treatment with a focus on their efficacy and limitations. These include aztreonam, ertapenem, and fosfomycin. New oral drugs zoliflodacin and gepotidacin are in late clinical development, but there are concerns regarding their effectiveness for extragenital infections and the development of resistance.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>While ceftriaxone remains the best treatment for gonorrhea across all anatomic sites, resistance may eventually limit its use. Among older antibiotics, ertapenem shows the most potential as an alternative but shares the same administrative drawbacks as ceftriaxone. New oral drugs zoliflodacin and gepotidacin initially appeared promising, but their efficacy for pharyngeal infections and potential for resistance development are concerning. Phase 3 trial results have not been made available except through press releases, which perpetuates concerns. Understanding pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of antibiotics will be key in optimizing future treatment recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":12213,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alternative drugs for the treatment of gonococcal infections: old and new.\",\"authors\":\"Susannah Franco, Margaret R Hammerschlag\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14787210.2024.2401560\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The rise in antibiotic resistance to <i>N. gonorrhoeae</i> poses a substantial threat to effective gonorrhea treatment. Historical progression of resistance from sulfonamides to the more recent declines in efficacy of fluoroquinolones and susceptibilities of ceftriaxone highlight the urgent need for novel therapeutic approaches, necessitating the examination of alternative and new antibiotics.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>This review examines the potential of repurposing older antibiotics for gonorrhea treatment with a focus on their efficacy and limitations. These include aztreonam, ertapenem, and fosfomycin. New oral drugs zoliflodacin and gepotidacin are in late clinical development, but there are concerns regarding their effectiveness for extragenital infections and the development of resistance.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>While ceftriaxone remains the best treatment for gonorrhea across all anatomic sites, resistance may eventually limit its use. Among older antibiotics, ertapenem shows the most potential as an alternative but shares the same administrative drawbacks as ceftriaxone. New oral drugs zoliflodacin and gepotidacin initially appeared promising, but their efficacy for pharyngeal infections and potential for resistance development are concerning. Phase 3 trial results have not been made available except through press releases, which perpetuates concerns. Understanding pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of antibiotics will be key in optimizing future treatment recommendations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12213,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2024.2401560\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2024.2401560","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:淋球菌对抗生素耐药性的上升对淋病的有效治疗构成了巨大威胁。从磺胺类药物耐药性的历史演变到近期氟喹诺酮类药物疗效和头孢曲松敏感性的下降,都凸显了对新型治疗方法的迫切需求,因此有必要对替代抗生素和新型抗生素进行研究:本综述探讨了将旧抗生素重新用于淋病治疗的潜力,重点关注其疗效和局限性。这些抗生素包括:阿曲南、厄他培门和磷霉素。新的口服药物唑氟达嗪和格泊他嗪正处于临床开发后期,但人们担心它们对生殖器外感染的疗效以及耐药性的产生:专家观点:虽然头孢曲松仍是治疗所有解剖部位淋病的最佳药物,但耐药性可能最终会限制其使用。在老式抗生素中,厄他培南是最有潜力的替代品,但与头孢曲松一样存在用药缺陷。新型口服药物唑氟达嗪和盖泊他星最初似乎很有前景,但它们对咽部感染的疗效和产生耐药性的可能性令人担忧。除新闻稿外,第三阶段试验结果尚未公布,这让人们更加担忧。了解抗生素的药代动力学和药效学特征是优化未来治疗建议的关键。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Alternative drugs for the treatment of gonococcal infections: old and new.

Introduction: The rise in antibiotic resistance to N. gonorrhoeae poses a substantial threat to effective gonorrhea treatment. Historical progression of resistance from sulfonamides to the more recent declines in efficacy of fluoroquinolones and susceptibilities of ceftriaxone highlight the urgent need for novel therapeutic approaches, necessitating the examination of alternative and new antibiotics.

Areas covered: This review examines the potential of repurposing older antibiotics for gonorrhea treatment with a focus on their efficacy and limitations. These include aztreonam, ertapenem, and fosfomycin. New oral drugs zoliflodacin and gepotidacin are in late clinical development, but there are concerns regarding their effectiveness for extragenital infections and the development of resistance.

Expert opinion: While ceftriaxone remains the best treatment for gonorrhea across all anatomic sites, resistance may eventually limit its use. Among older antibiotics, ertapenem shows the most potential as an alternative but shares the same administrative drawbacks as ceftriaxone. New oral drugs zoliflodacin and gepotidacin initially appeared promising, but their efficacy for pharyngeal infections and potential for resistance development are concerning. Phase 3 trial results have not been made available except through press releases, which perpetuates concerns. Understanding pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of antibiotics will be key in optimizing future treatment recommendations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
66
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Anti-Infective Therapy (ISSN 1478-7210) provides expert reviews on therapeutics and diagnostics in the treatment of infectious disease. Coverage includes antibiotics, drug resistance, drug therapy, infectious disease medicine, antibacterial, antimicrobial, antifungal and antiviral approaches, and diagnostic tests.
期刊最新文献
Could the next "disease X" be a pandemic of virus-induced encephalitis? What should our first medical response be? The opportunities and challenges of epigenetic approaches to manage herpes simplex infections. Potential activity of nanomaterials to combat SARS-CoV-2 and mucormycosis ‎coinfection‎. Clinical effectiveness of oral antivirals for non-hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients aged 18-60 years. Is self-medication with antibiotics among the public a global concern: a mixed-methods systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1