Abstract

The use of inhaled therapies for chronic respiratory infections in cystic fibrosis represents a substantive treatment burden to patients. In this paper, we review the evidence supporting two commonly used inhaled antibiotic regimens for chronic respiratory infections - continuous vs. intermittent (28 days on followed by 28 days off) therapy. We included trials of good methodological quality and excluded those in which the primary intent was eradication. In total, we included 13 trials (5 of intermittent therapy and 8 of continuous therapy) and summarized their main findings, placing particular emphasis on change in FEV(1), emergence of resistance and patient adherence. What is evident from our review is that both continuous and intermittent inhaled therapies work. Although an intermittent regimen would be intuitively "better" in terms of cost savings and patient tolerability, there is currently a lack of head-to-head trials that compare the same drugs (and dosages) using the two different regimens to make such a recommendation based on robust clinical evidence.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.