The effect of combining antibiotics on resistance: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 6.4 1区生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY

eLife Pub Date : 2024-12-20 DOI:10.7554/eLife.93740

Berit Siedentop, Viacheslav N Kachalov, Christopher Witzany, Matthias Egger, Roger D Kouyos, Sebastian Bonhoeffer

{"title":"The effect of combining antibiotics on resistance: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Berit Siedentop, Viacheslav N Kachalov, Christopher Witzany, Matthias Egger, Roger D Kouyos, Sebastian Bonhoeffer","doi":"10.7554/eLife.93740","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Under which conditions antibiotic combination therapy decelerates rather than accelerates resistance evolution is not well understood. We examined the effect of combining antibiotics on within-patient resistance development across various bacterial pathogens and antibiotics.Methods: We searched CENTRAL, EMBASE, and PubMed for (quasi)-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published from database inception to 24 November 2022. Trials comparing antibiotic treatments with different numbers of antibiotics were included. Patients were considered to have acquired resistance if, at the follow-up culture, a resistant bacterium (as defined by the study authors) was detected that had not been present in the baseline culture. We combined results using a random effects model and performed meta-regression and stratified analyses. The trials' risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool.Results: 42 trials were eligible and 29, including 5054 patients, qualified for statistical analysis. In most trials, resistance development was not the primary outcome and studies lacked power. The combined odds ratio for the acquisition of resistance comparing the group with the higher number of antibiotics with the comparison group was 1.23 (95% CI 0.68-2.25), with substantial between-study heterogeneity (I2=77%). We identified tentative evidence for potential beneficial or detrimental effects of antibiotic combination therapy for specific pathogens or medical conditions.Conclusions: The evidence for combining a higher number of antibiotics compared to fewer from RCTs is scarce and overall compatible with both benefit or harm. Trials powered to detect differences in resistance development or well-designed observational studies are required to clarify the impact of combination therapy on resistance.Funding: Support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant 310030B_176401 (SB, BS, CW), grant 32FP30-174281 (ME), grant 324730_207957 (RDK)) and from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID, cooperative agreement AI069924 (ME)) is gratefully acknowledged.","PeriodicalId":11640,"journal":{"name":"eLife","volume":"13 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"eLife","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.93740","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Under which conditions antibiotic combination therapy decelerates rather than accelerates resistance evolution is not well understood. We examined the effect of combining antibiotics on within-patient resistance development across various bacterial pathogens and antibiotics.

Methods: We searched CENTRAL, EMBASE, and PubMed for (quasi)-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published from database inception to 24 November 2022. Trials comparing antibiotic treatments with different numbers of antibiotics were included. Patients were considered to have acquired resistance if, at the follow-up culture, a resistant bacterium (as defined by the study authors) was detected that had not been present in the baseline culture. We combined results using a random effects model and performed meta-regression and stratified analyses. The trials' risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool.

Results: 42 trials were eligible and 29, including 5054 patients, qualified for statistical analysis. In most trials, resistance development was not the primary outcome and studies lacked power. The combined odds ratio for the acquisition of resistance comparing the group with the higher number of antibiotics with the comparison group was 1.23 (95% CI 0.68-2.25), with substantial between-study heterogeneity (I²=77%). We identified tentative evidence for potential beneficial or detrimental effects of antibiotic combination therapy for specific pathogens or medical conditions.

Conclusions: The evidence for combining a higher number of antibiotics compared to fewer from RCTs is scarce and overall compatible with both benefit or harm. Trials powered to detect differences in resistance development or well-designed observational studies are required to clarify the impact of combination therapy on resistance.

Funding: Support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant 310030B_176401 (SB, BS, CW), grant 32FP30-174281 (ME), grant 324730_207957 (RDK)) and from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID, cooperative agreement AI069924 (ME)) is gratefully acknowledged.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

eLife BIOLOGY-

CiteScore

12.90

自引率

3.90%

发文量

3122

审稿时长

17 weeks

期刊介绍： eLife is a distinguished, not-for-profit, peer-reviewed open access scientific journal that specializes in the fields of biomedical and life sciences. eLife is known for its selective publication process, which includes a variety of article types such as: Research Articles: Detailed reports of original research findings. Short Reports: Concise presentations of significant findings that do not warrant a full-length research article. Tools and Resources: Descriptions of new tools, technologies, or resources that facilitate scientific research. Research Advances: Brief reports on significant scientific advancements that have immediate implications for the field. Scientific Correspondence: Short communications that comment on or provide additional information related to published articles. Review Articles: Comprehensive overviews of a specific topic or field within the life sciences.