z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Cryptogenic organizing pneumonia—Results of treatment with clarithromycin versus corticosteroids—Observational study
Author(s) -
E Radzikowska,
Elżbieta Wiatr,
Renata Langfort,
Iwona Bestry,
Agnieszka Skoczylas,
Ewa Szczepulska−Wójcik,
Dariusz Gawryluk,
Piotr Rudziński,
Joanna ChorostowskaWynimko,
Kazimierz RoszkowskiŚliż
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0184739
Subject(s) - clarithromycin , observational study , medicine , pneumonia , intensive care medicine , helicobacter pylori
Background Cryptogenic organizing pneumonia (COP) is a clinicopathological syndrome of unknown origin. Corticosteroids are the standard treatment, but clarithromycin (CAM) is also effective. The aim of this observational retrospective study was to compare the results of CAM versus prednisone (PRE) treatment in patients with biopsy-proven OP without respiratory insufficiency. Material and methods In a 15-year period, 40 patients were treated with CAM (500 mg twice daily orally for 3 months) and 22 with PRE (mean initial dose of 0.67 ± 0.24 mg/kg/d for a mean of 8.59 ± 3.05 months). Results The clinical presentation, laboratory, and radiological findings did not differ markedly between patients treated with CAM and PRE, with the exception of a higher frequency of sweats (55% vs. 23%; p < 0.015), ground glass opacities (95% vs. 50%; p <0.0001) and nodular lesions (45% vs. 18%; p = 0.036) in the CAM group. A complete response was achieved in 35(88%) patients treated with CAM and in all treated with PRE. Patients treated with PRE relapsed more frequently than those treated with CAM (54.5% vs. 10%; p < 0.0001). Corticosteroid-related adverse events were noticed in 8(6.5%) patients (with one death), but CAM caused only one (2.5%) allergic reaction. A FVC >80% identified patients who might be successfully treated with CAM with a sensitivity of 60% and a specificity of 88.57% (AUC 0.869; 95% CI 0.684–1; p = 0.008); the figures for the FEV1 were >70%, a sensitivity of 60%, and a specificity of 91.43% (AUC 0.809; 95%CI 0.609–1; p = 0.027). Conclusions CAM can be used to treat COP patients in whom the pulmonary function parameters are within normal limits. Such therapy is shorter, better tolerated, and associated with fewer adverse events and relapses than is PRE. However, the therapy is ineffective in some patients.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here