Dataset Information

The use of antivirals in the treatment of human monkeypox outbreaks: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Human monkeypox virus (MPXV) infection is a recently declared public health emergency of international concern by the World Health Organization. Besides, there is scant literature available on the use of antivirals in MPXV infection. This systematic review compiles all evidence of various antivirals used on their efficacy and safety and summarizes their mechanisms of action.

Methods

A review was done of all original studies mentioning individual patient data on the use of antivirals in patients with MPXV infection.

Results

Of the total 487 non-duplicate studies, 18 studies with 71 individuals were included. Tecovirimat was used in 61 individuals, followed by cidofovir in seven and brincidofovir (BCV) in three individuals. Topical trifluridine was used in four ophthalmic cases in addition to tecovirimat. Of the total, 59 (83.1%) were reported to have complete resolution of symptoms; one was experiencing waxing and waning of symptoms, only one (1.8%) had died, and the others were having a resolution of symptoms. The death was thought unrelated to tecovirimat. Elevated hepatic panels were reported among all individuals treated with BCV (leading to treatment discontinuation) and five treated with tecovirimat.

Conclusion

Tecovirimat is the most used and has proven beneficial in several aggravating cases. No major safety concerns were detected upon its use. Topical trifluridine was used as an adjuvant treatment option along with tecovirimat. BCV and cidofovir were seldom used, with the latter often being used due to the unavailability of tecovirimat. BCV was associated with treatment discontinuation due to adverse events.

SUBMITTER: Shamim MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9719850 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The use of antivirals in the treatment of human monkeypox outbreaks: a systematic review.

Shamim Muhammad Aaqib MA Padhi Bijaya Kumar BK Satapathy Prakasini P Veeramachaneni Sai D SD Chatterjee Chandrima C Tripathy Snehasish S Akhtar Naushaba N Pradhan Anindita A Dwivedi Pradeep P Mohanty Aroop A Rodriguez-Morales Alfonso J AJ Sah Ranjit R Al-Tammemi Ala'a B AB Al-Tawfiq Jaffar A JA Nowrouzi-Kia Behdin B Chattu Vijay Kumar VK

International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases 20221205

<h4>Objectives</h4>Human monkeypox virus (MPXV) infection is a recently declared public health emergency of international concern by the World Health Organization. Besides, there is scant literature available on the use of antivirals in MPXV infection. This systematic review compiles all evidence of various antivirals used on their efficacy and safety and summarizes their mechanisms of action.<h4>Methods</h4>A review was done of all original studies mentioning individual patient data on the use ...[more]

PMID: 36470502

Similar Datasets

Project description:Monkeypox is a vesicular-pustular illness that carries a secondary attack rate in the order of 10% in contacts unvaccinated against smallpox. Case fatality rates range from 1 to 11%, but scarring and other sequelae are common in survivors. It continues to cause outbreaks in remote populations in Central and West Africa, in areas with poor access and weakened or disrupted surveillance capacity and information networks. Recent outbreaks in Nigeria (2017-18) and Cameroon (2018) have occurred where monkeypox has not been reported for over 20 years. This has prompted concerns over whether there have been changes in the biology and epidemiology of the disease that may in turn have implications for how outbreaks and cases should best be managed. A systematic review was carried out to examine reported data on human monkeypox outbreaks over time, and to identify if and how epidemiology has changed. Published and grey literature were critically analysed, and data extracted to inform recommendations on outbreak response, use of case definitions and public health advice. The level of detail, validity of data, geographical coverage and consistency of reporting varied considerably across the 71 monkeypox outbreak documents obtained. An increase in cases reported over time was supported by literature from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Data were insufficient to measure trends in secondary attack rates and case fatality rates. Phylogenetic analyses consistently identify two strains of the virus without evidence of emergence of a new strain. Understanding of monkeypox virulence with regard to clinical presentation by strain is minimal, with infrequent sample collection and laboratory analysis. A variety of clinical and surveillance case definitions are described in the literature: two definitions have been formally evaluated and showed high sensitivity but low specificity. These were specific to a Congo-Basin (CB) strain-affected area of the DRC where they were used. Evidence on use of antibiotics for prophylaxis against secondary cutaneous infection is anecdotal and limited. Current evidence suggests there has been an increase in total monkeypox cases reported by year in the DRC irrespective of advancements in the national Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) system. There has been a marked increase in number of individual monkeypox outbreak reports, from outside the DRC in between 2010 and 2018, particularly in the Central African Republic (CAR) although this does not necessarily indicate an increase in annual cases over time in these areas. The geographical pattern reported in the Nigeria outbreak suggests a possible new and widespread zoonotic reservoir requiring further investigation and research. With regards to outbreak response, increased attention is warranted for high-risk patient groups, and nosocomial transmission risks. The animal reservoir remains unknown and there is a dearth of literature informing case management and successful outbreak response strategies. Up-to-date complete, consistent and longer-term research is sorely needed to inform and guide evidence-based response and management of monkeypox outbreaks.

Project description:BackgroundSystematic reviews of randomized, controlled trials in patients with influenza suggest a lack of evidence about the effects of antiviral therapy on several patient-important outcomes of influenza.PurposeTo systematically review observational studies for benefits and harms of oseltamivir, zanamivir, amantadine, or rimantadine in the treatment of influenza.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, SIGLE, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Panteleimon, and LILACS up to November 2010; contact with pharmaceutical companies; and reference lists.Study selectionObservational studies in any language that compared single antiviral therapy with no therapy or other antiviral therapy, or that had no comparator, for influenza or influenza-like illness.Data extractionTwo independent investigators extracted data. Confidence in the estimates of the obtained effects (quality of evidence) was assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.Data synthesis74 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses of the few studies providing effects with adjustment for confounders suggest that, in high-risk populations, oral oseltamivir may reduce mortality (odds ratio, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.13 to 0.43]; low-quality evidence), hospitalization (odds ratio, 0.75 [CI, 0.66 to 0.89]; low-quality evidence), and duration of symptoms (33 hours [CI, 21 to 45 hours]; very low-quality evidence) compared with no treatment. Earlier treatment with oseltamivir was generally associated with better outcomes. Inhaled zanamivir may lead to shorter symptom duration (23 hours [CI, 17 to 28 hours]; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer hospitalizations (odds ratio, 0.66 [CI, 0.37 to 1.18]) but more complications than no treatment. Direct comparison of oral oseltamivir and inhaled zanamivir suggests no important differences in key outcomes. Data from 1 study suggest that oral amantadine may reduce mortality and pneumonia associated with influenza A. No included study evaluated rimantadine.LimitationsMortality was assessed in high-risk patients, and generalizability is limited. The overall body of evidence is limited by risk for confounding and selection, reporting, and publication bias.ConclusionTherapy with oral oseltamivir and inhaled zanamivir may provide a net benefit over no treatment of influenza. However, as with the randomized trials, the confidence in the estimates of the effects for decision making is low to very low. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCES: World Health Organization and McMaster University.

Project description:During the COVID-19 pandemic, the increase in reports of human monkeypox virus infection cases spreading in many countries outside Africa is a major cause for concern. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the evidence of antiviral pharmacotherapy available for the treatment of adult patients with monkeypox. A scoping review of the literature was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and CENTRAL databases until 12 September 2022. The key search terms used were "monkeypox" and "treatment". A total of 1927 articles were retrieved using the search strategy. After removing duplicates (n = 1007) and examining by title, abstract, and full text, 11 studies reporting case reports of monkeypox with antiviral treatment were included, detailing the number of monkeypox cases, clinical manifestations, number of participants with antiviral treatment, history of sexually transmitted diseases, method of diagnosis, location of skin lesions, drugs used in antiviral treatment, route of administration, and outcome. A total of 1281 confirmed cases of monkeypox have been reported, of which 65 monkeypox cases had antiviral treatment distributed most frequently in the United States (n = 30), the United Kingdom (n = 6), and Spain (n = 6). Of the total cases, 1269 (99.1%) were male with an age range of 18 to 76 years, and 1226 (95.7%) had a sexual behavior of being men who have sex with men. All confirmed cases of monkeypox were diagnosed by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The most frequent clinical manifestations were skin lesions, fever, lymphadenopathy, headache, fatigue, and myalgia. The most frequent locations of the lesions were perianal, genital, facial, and upper and lower extremities. The most commonly used drugs for antiviral treatment of monkeypox were: tecovirimat, cidofovir, and brincidofovir. All patients had a complete recovery. According to current evidence, the efficacy and safety of antiviral drugs against monkeypox is of low quality and scarce.

Project description:BackgroundPsittacosis outbreak investigations require rapid identification of cases in order to trace possible sources and perform public health risk assessments. In recent outbreaks in the Netherlands, such investigations were hampered by the non-specificity of laboratory testing methods to identify human Chlamydia psittaci infections.MethodA systematic search of PubMed and Scopus databases of literature published between 01 January, 1986 and 03 July, 2017 was done to find best practices of laboratory-testing methods used in psittacosis outbreaks of two or more human cases. Reference lists of included articles were hand searched to identify additional articles.ResultsThirty-seven eligible articles were identified, describing 44 human psittacosis outbreaks in 12 countries. Laboratory tests performed were PCR (with various targets), serologic tests (complement binding reactions, ELISA's, immunofluorescence tests and immuno-peroxidase tests) and culture, in various combinations. The literature provided no 'gold standard' laboratory testing strategy to identify recent human C. psittaci infections. In most psittacosis outbreaks, for a considerable number of cases (or tested individuals in an exposed cohort), C. psittaci infection could not be confirmed, nor excluded as causative pathogen. None of the testing strategies was found to be suitable for (nearly) full case finding.ConclusionPCR enables rapid identification of human psittacosis patients and helps source finding by genotyping but has the disadvantage that sensitivity is high only in the acute phase. In outbreak situations, there is often a time delay and therefore, there is a need for new serologic testing methods next to PCR, with good specificity and sensitivity. Moreover, serum is easier to collect than the preferred diagnostic materials for PCR. A serologic test that can reliably confirm infection status without the necessity of convalescent serum sampling would enhance case finding, source tracing, identification of risk factors and assessment of burden of disease in various settings.

Dataset Information

The use of antivirals in the treatment of human monkeypox outbreaks: a systematic review.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The use of antivirals in the treatment of human monkeypox outbreaks: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets