Alternative drugs for the treatment of gonococcal infections: old and new
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
INTRODUCTION: 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.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Alternative drugs for the treatment of gonococcal infections: old and new
- Date Crossref
- 01/09/2024
- Éditeur
- Informa UK Limited
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.