It was a study that we evaluated the incidence of these pathogens on population that had done the molecular test to IST in a big laboratory in Brazil, this is only an epidemiological study. The microorganism have been chosen according availability of tests offered, so it was not evaluated the pathogenicity of each microorganism. Besides that our objective is only describe the profile of brazilian population, and did not correltated any data with clinical treatment. The molecular technology in Brazil is used as confirmatory of clinical diagnostic. The microorganism incidence in Brazil could be different from others countries due to characteristics of our population.
We read with interesting the recent report by Mwasakifwa and colleagues demonstrating that presence of mucopurulent ano-rectal discharge on clinical examination was associated with identification of a sexually transmitted organism by NAAT testing in men who have sex with men (MSM) with symptomatic proctitis.1 We also showed that sexually transmitted proctitis in MSM is often associated with more than one organism and that even with sensitive NAAT testing, there are a significant proportion of cases of MSM with proctitis with negative microbiology tests.2 We were however surprised that Mwasakifwa and colleagues did not identify any cases of syphilis in their analysis. This may have been because syphilis PCR testing was only conducted in a small proportion of cases? Ano-rectal syphilis was first described between 1945-1966 although most of these cases had anal ulceration with pain on defecation. Syphilis ‘proctitis’ was first described in 1975 from the USA in a man with rectal pain and discharge.3 In our series of MSM with proctitis, we reported 6/78(8%) cases of syphilis based upon PCR testing from the rectal mucosa during proctoscopy.2 The recent increase in infectious syphilis particularly in MSM is likely to increase the number of cases of ano-rectal syphilis. The clinical features of syphilis as the epidemic evolves may be changing and more MSM are presenting with painful lesions than was previously believed. We do agree that clinical examination of the ano-rectal area...
We read with interesting the recent report by Mwasakifwa and colleagues demonstrating that presence of mucopurulent ano-rectal discharge on clinical examination was associated with identification of a sexually transmitted organism by NAAT testing in men who have sex with men (MSM) with symptomatic proctitis.1 We also showed that sexually transmitted proctitis in MSM is often associated with more than one organism and that even with sensitive NAAT testing, there are a significant proportion of cases of MSM with proctitis with negative microbiology tests.2 We were however surprised that Mwasakifwa and colleagues did not identify any cases of syphilis in their analysis. This may have been because syphilis PCR testing was only conducted in a small proportion of cases? Ano-rectal syphilis was first described between 1945-1966 although most of these cases had anal ulceration with pain on defecation. Syphilis ‘proctitis’ was first described in 1975 from the USA in a man with rectal pain and discharge.3 In our series of MSM with proctitis, we reported 6/78(8%) cases of syphilis based upon PCR testing from the rectal mucosa during proctoscopy.2 The recent increase in infectious syphilis particularly in MSM is likely to increase the number of cases of ano-rectal syphilis. The clinical features of syphilis as the epidemic evolves may be changing and more MSM are presenting with painful lesions than was previously believed. We do agree that clinical examination of the ano-rectal area, including proctoscopy is a vital skill for sexual health clinicians and in the age of self-taken samples: we need to continue to teach and maintain this skill. Whether syphilis causes a true proctitis or ulceration of the anal canal remains debatable and is difficult to distinguish clinically, however we recommend that all MSM presenting with proctitis are tested for Syphilis using both PCR testing and serology.
1. Mwasakifwa GE, Nugent C, Varma R.Proctitis in gay and bisexual men. Are Microscopy and proctoscopy worthwhile? Sexually Transmitted Infections 2020 (online first)
2. Pinto Sander N, Fitzpatrick C, Parkes L, Richardson D. Sexually transmitted proctitis in men who have sex with men. Sexually Transmitted Infections 2019;95:471.
3. Nazemi MM, Musher DM, Schell RF, Milo S. Syphilitic proctitis in a homosexual JAMA 1975;231(4)389
We have read the interesting manuscript “Antimicrobial resistance in Mycoplasma genitalium sampled from the British general population”, from Pitt et al.1 In 56 M. genitalium-positive specimens, macrolide resistance was detected in 9 (16.1%). These results agree with the low rate of resistance (<20%) detected in studies carried out mainly in general population,2 but contrast with the higher rates (>40%) obtained in patients mainly attended in sexually transmitted infections units.3 These two scenarios (general versus core population) could be considered in the management of the M. genitalium infection.
In our context (80-90% general population), the macrolide resistance rate was 16.3% (43/263).2 After detection of macrolide resistance-associated mutations with rapid techniques, guided antibiotic therapy was prescribed (azithromycin 500 mg day 1 and 250 mg days 2-5, or moxifloxacin) , and sexual partners control and test of cure after 3 weeks recommended. Despite patients adhering to the antibiotic regimen initially indicated, treatment failure was 6%.
Recently, a resistance-guided sequential treatment with doxycycline followed with azithromycin or moxifloxacin has been proposed.3 In this study the macrolide resistance rate was 68% and the treatment failure 7%. In our opinion, this strategy could be appropriate in populations with high macrolide resistance rate (main conclusion of this study), and healthcare contexts in that guided ther...
We have read the interesting manuscript “Antimicrobial resistance in Mycoplasma genitalium sampled from the British general population”, from Pitt et al.1 In 56 M. genitalium-positive specimens, macrolide resistance was detected in 9 (16.1%). These results agree with the low rate of resistance (<20%) detected in studies carried out mainly in general population,2 but contrast with the higher rates (>40%) obtained in patients mainly attended in sexually transmitted infections units.3 These two scenarios (general versus core population) could be considered in the management of the M. genitalium infection.
In our context (80-90% general population), the macrolide resistance rate was 16.3% (43/263).2 After detection of macrolide resistance-associated mutations with rapid techniques, guided antibiotic therapy was prescribed (azithromycin 500 mg day 1 and 250 mg days 2-5, or moxifloxacin) , and sexual partners control and test of cure after 3 weeks recommended. Despite patients adhering to the antibiotic regimen initially indicated, treatment failure was 6%.
Recently, a resistance-guided sequential treatment with doxycycline followed with azithromycin or moxifloxacin has been proposed.3 In this study the macrolide resistance rate was 68% and the treatment failure 7%. In our opinion, this strategy could be appropriate in populations with high macrolide resistance rate (main conclusion of this study), and healthcare contexts in that guided therapy could not be rapidly applied. On the other hand, adherence and adverse events associated with antibiotics used should be keeping in mind: 89.9% with doxycycline versus 100% with azithromycin, and 15.2% versus 8.6% , respectively.3 Moreover, other authors have described a lower adherence to doxycycline (100 mg/12h, 7 days) in M. genitalium infections and a clinical response <50%.
We think sequential resistance-guided therapy results should be more studied in the real medical practice, taking in care the different contexts of the population studied (general population versus core groups with more previous antibiotic treatments), as well as non-compliance and secondary effects due to unnecessary overtreatment with doxycycline in macrolide susceptible infections.
References
1. Pitt R, Unemo M, Sonnenberg P, Alexander S, Beddows S, Cole MJ, Clifton S, Mercer CH, Johnson AM, Ison CA, Field N. Antimicrobial resistance in Mycoplasma genitalium sampled from the British general population. Sex Transm Infect. 2020. pii: sextrans-2019-054129. doi: 10.1136/sextrans-2019-054129.
2. Piñeiro L, Idigoras P, de la Caba I, López-Olaizola M, Cilla G. Guided antibiotic therapy for Mycoplasma genitalium infections: Analysis of mutations associated with resistance to macrolides and fluoroquinolones. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin. 2019;37(6):394-7.
3. Read TRH, Fairley CK, Murray GL, Jensen JS, Danielewski J, Worthington K, Doyle M, Mokany E, Tan L, Chow EPF, Garland SM, Bradshaw CS. Outcomes of Resistance-guided Sequential Treatment of Mycoplasma genitalium Infections: A Prospective Evaluation. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;68(4):554-60.
The Research Letter by Marinho FL and Zauli D (1) is interesting, but it raises several contentious issues. Understanding the prevalence of genital-tract micro-organisms that constitute the genital microbiome (2) is important (3) and the authors were concerned with this in respect of six micro-organisms that were detected by a molecular method (PCR). Whether they give them equal weight so far as pathogenicity is concerned is unclear because they did not relate them to any specific clinical disease. We appreciate that any micro-organism mentioned, including U. urealyticum, might have pathogenic potential under certain circumstances (4), but finding U. urealyticum as the most prevalent (62.47%) followed by M. hominis (9.31%) does not elevate their status as pathogens and raises clinically important questions of whether these micro-organisms, including U. parvum, should be tested for at all in a diagnostic procedure, unless part of a research programme, and, if tested, whether such positive results justify treatment. Admittedl the authors do not expressly state that, on the basis of a positive test result, patients would be treated automatically with antibiotics. Nevertheless, we must emphasize that the use of antibiotics in many such cases would seem inappropriate, not least because it might promote antibiotic resistance, sometimes in microbes of undoubted importance, such as N. gonorrhoeae and M. genitalium (6). Modern molecular technology is a boon, but it must not be al...
The Research Letter by Marinho FL and Zauli D (1) is interesting, but it raises several contentious issues. Understanding the prevalence of genital-tract micro-organisms that constitute the genital microbiome (2) is important (3) and the authors were concerned with this in respect of six micro-organisms that were detected by a molecular method (PCR). Whether they give them equal weight so far as pathogenicity is concerned is unclear because they did not relate them to any specific clinical disease. We appreciate that any micro-organism mentioned, including U. urealyticum, might have pathogenic potential under certain circumstances (4), but finding U. urealyticum as the most prevalent (62.47%) followed by M. hominis (9.31%) does not elevate their status as pathogens and raises clinically important questions of whether these micro-organisms, including U. parvum, should be tested for at all in a diagnostic procedure, unless part of a research programme, and, if tested, whether such positive results justify treatment. Admittedl the authors do not expressly state that, on the basis of a positive test result, patients would be treated automatically with antibiotics. Nevertheless, we must emphasize that the use of antibiotics in many such cases would seem inappropriate, not least because it might promote antibiotic resistance, sometimes in microbes of undoubted importance, such as N. gonorrhoeae and M. genitalium (6). Modern molecular technology is a boon, but it must not be allowed to foster unwanted outcomes.
References
1). Marinho FL, Zauli D. Cross-sectional study of patients tested for STIs using molecular methods in Brazil. Sex Transm Infect. Published
Online First: 26 Dec.2019. doi: 10.1136/sextrans-2019-054362
2). Taylor-Robinson D, Horner P, Pallecaros A. Understanding the terms we use: support for using 'Sexually Shared Microbiota' (SSM). Int J STD
& AIDS. 2020 Jan 16. doi. org/10.1177/09564624. 19885780
3). Taylor-Robinson D, Horner P, Pallecaros A. Diagnosis of some genital-tract infections: part 2. Molecular tests and the new challenges. Int J
STD & AIDS. In press
4). Beeton ML, Payne MS, Jones L. The role of Ureaplasma spp. in the development of nongonococcal urethritis and infertility among men. Clin
Microbiol Revs 2019; 32: 1-16
5). Horner P, Donders G, Cusini M, et al. Should we be testing for urogenital Mycoplasma hominis, Ureaplasma parvum and Ureaplasma urealyticum
in men and women? -- a position statement from the European STI Guidelines Editorial Board. J Eur Acad Dermatol
Venereol 2018; 32: 1845-1851. doi 10.1111/jdv.15146
6). Soni S, Horner P, Rayment M, et al. BASHH UK National Guideline for the Management of Infection with Mycoplasma genitalium. 2018.
We read with interest the informative Short Report by Wang et al. about Jarisch–Herxheimer reaction during therapy of congenital syphilis [1] and wish to make a few comments:
1. The authors included in their review all patients hospitalized between 1 January 2010 to 31 November 2015. However, no such date like 31 November 2015 actually exists.
2. Authors state that 'rapid pulse and breathing' were present in all 11/11 patients of Jarisch–Herxheimer reaction. However, they have not stated the age of these patients in the study. 'Pulse and breathing' are age-dependent variables, and in neonates pulse rate may be up to 120 to 160 beats per minute, and breathing up to 40 to 60 breaths per minute. Therefore, it is important to see how many of the Jarisch–Herxheimer reaction cases were neonates as in many of these case, pulse and respiratory may be within normal range.
3. The recommended duration of treatment for congenital syphilis is 10 days and not 14 days as followed in this study [2].
References:
1. Wang C, He S, Yang H, Liu Y, Zhao Y, Pang L. Unique manifestations and risk factors of Jarisch-Herxheimer reaction during treatment of child congenital syphilis. Sex Transm Infect. 2018 Dec;94(8):562-564.
We read with interest the informative Short Report by Wang et al. about Jarisch–Herxheimer reaction during therapy of congenital syphilis [1] and wish to make a few comments:
1. The authors included in their review all patients hospitalized between 1 January 2010 to 31 November 2015. However, no such date like 31 November 2015 actually exists.
2. Authors state that 'rapid pulse and breathing' were present in all 11/11 patients of Jarisch–Herxheimer reaction. However, they have not stated the age of these patients in the study. 'Pulse and breathing' are age-dependent variables, and in neonates pulse rate may be up to 120 to 160 beats per minute, and breathing up to 40 to 60 breaths per minute. Therefore, it is important to see how many of the Jarisch–Herxheimer reaction cases were neonates as in many of these case, pulse and respiratory may be within normal range.
3. The recommended duration of treatment for congenital syphilis is 10 days and not 14 days as followed in this study [2].
References:
1. Wang C, He S, Yang H, Liu Y, Zhao Y, Pang L. Unique manifestations and risk factors of Jarisch-Herxheimer reaction during treatment of child congenital syphilis. Sex Transm Infect. 2018 Dec;94(8):562-564.
Error in the calculation of person-time in the before-PrEP period by Beymer et al.
S.H. Hulstein, E. Hoornenborg, M.F. Schim van der Loeff
Department of Infectious Diseases, GGD Amsterdam
Studies on STI incidence and PrEP use are often hampered by the absence of STI incidence data in the period before PrEP; Beymer et al.1 set out to improve on this. They report on the STI incidence before and after initiation of PrEP in a cohort of men who have sex with men (MSM) at the Los Angeles LGBT Center, California, US. We fear that there are some flaws in the analysis, which may affect the conclusions.
The analysis was based on 275 men who were tested at least once in the period before PrEP was started, and at least once after PrEP was started. The reported persontime in the before- PrEP period was just over half the person-time after PrEP initiation (93.60 versus 168.93), but the numbers of tests before and after PrEP initiation were not very different: 755 and 908, respectively. This discrepancy could not be explained by differences in their frequency of STI testing, which were reported to be similar in the before- and after-PrEP period. An explanation is that the person-time before the first STI visit was not taken into account. This would mean that the person-time in the before-PrEP period was underestimated, in turn leading to an artificially high before-PrEP STI incidence....
Error in the calculation of person-time in the before-PrEP period by Beymer et al.
S.H. Hulstein, E. Hoornenborg, M.F. Schim van der Loeff
Department of Infectious Diseases, GGD Amsterdam
Studies on STI incidence and PrEP use are often hampered by the absence of STI incidence data in the period before PrEP; Beymer et al.1 set out to improve on this. They report on the STI incidence before and after initiation of PrEP in a cohort of men who have sex with men (MSM) at the Los Angeles LGBT Center, California, US. We fear that there are some flaws in the analysis, which may affect the conclusions.
The analysis was based on 275 men who were tested at least once in the period before PrEP was started, and at least once after PrEP was started. The reported persontime in the before- PrEP period was just over half the person-time after PrEP initiation (93.60 versus 168.93), but the numbers of tests before and after PrEP initiation were not very different: 755 and 908, respectively. This discrepancy could not be explained by differences in their frequency of STI testing, which were reported to be similar in the before- and after-PrEP period. An explanation is that the person-time before the first STI visit was not taken into account. This would mean that the person-time in the before-PrEP period was underestimated, in turn leading to an artificially high before-PrEP STI incidence. The observed decrease in incidence rates for all STIs (except syphilis) reported in Table 3 would thus be an artefact of the analysis, rather than a real phenomenon.
If the pre-test person-time would have been taken into account, the analyses might have shown that STI incidences in the after-PrEP period would have been similar or higher than in the before-PrEP period.
More studies are needed that examine whether the incidence rate of STIs increases after initiation of PrEP; appropriate analyses of such data are essential.
References
Beymer MR et al. Does HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis use lead to a higher incidence of sexually transmitted infections? A case-crossover study of men who have sex with men in Los Angeles, California. Sex Trans Infect Epub ahead of print. Doi:10.1136/sextrans.2017-053377
Correspondence to: Nicola Low, Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Mittelstrasse 43, 3012 Bern, Switzerland. nicola.low@ispm.unibe.ch; Tel: +41 31 631 30 92
Title: Research on Mycoplasma genitalium is more important than expanding testing
We are glad that Taylor-Robinson and Ong offer some support for the conclusion of our systematic review,1 that asymptomatic populations, in the community or in clinics, should not be tested routinely for M. genitalium. The first British Association of Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH) guideline about the management of Mycoplasma genitalium, published on 8th July 2018, supports this conclusion.2 We would like to clarify, however, that the absence of evidence for clinical and public health benefit of screening3 and the harm of inducing de novo mutations and spreading resistance to macrolide antimicrobials4 are more important than economic considerations.
Taylor-Robinson and Ong’s statement that “testing worldwide should continue to support or modify this conclusion”5 could lead to pro...
Correspondence to: Nicola Low, Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Mittelstrasse 43, 3012 Bern, Switzerland. nicola.low@ispm.unibe.ch; Tel: +41 31 631 30 92
Title: Research on Mycoplasma genitalium is more important than expanding testing
We are glad that Taylor-Robinson and Ong offer some support for the conclusion of our systematic review,1 that asymptomatic populations, in the community or in clinics, should not be tested routinely for M. genitalium. The first British Association of Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH) guideline about the management of Mycoplasma genitalium, published on 8th July 2018, supports this conclusion.2 We would like to clarify, however, that the absence of evidence for clinical and public health benefit of screening3 and the harm of inducing de novo mutations and spreading resistance to macrolide antimicrobials4 are more important than economic considerations.
Taylor-Robinson and Ong’s statement that “testing worldwide should continue to support or modify this conclusion”5 could lead to problems. Uncontrolled testing and treatment of different groups of people will also advance “the seemingly unstoppable march of MG to complete antibiotic resistance” because M. genitalium has an unusually high probability of developing de novo resistance during treatment with a single 1g dose of azithromycin. We found, in a mathematical modelling study, that an estimated probability of resistance of 12% (95% confidence interval 8 to 17%) can explain why 50% or more of detected M. genitalium infections are already resistant to macrolides in some countries.4
The rational use of new commercial molecular tests, for detection of both M. genitalium and its antimicrobial resistance determinants, should be promoted in the context of international programmes of research and surveillance. Experts have prioritised research to determine whether screening of asymptomatic populations will reduce important clinical disease outcomes.3 Systematic reviews can help, by synthesising the existing research literature and highlight gaps in the research base. A forthcoming systematic review, linked to the review of prevalence studies, will address the dynamics and natural history of M. genitalium (PROSPERO protocols CRD42015020420, CRD42015020405, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) and improve the knowledge base for future mathematical modelling studies. Taylor-Robinson and Ong highlight additional basic research questions about the immunology of M. genitalium and the respiratory pathogen M. pneumoniae.
In our view, diagnostic testing accompanied by testing for macrolide resistance should be limited to defined groups of symptomatic patients and treatment algorithms, such as those recommended in the BASHH guideline,2 must be evaluated in randomised controlled trials. The research community should do all it can to ensure that responsible use of testing for M. genitalium advances the objectives of research and public health, whilst mitigating the spread of antimicrobial resistance.
References
1. Baumann L, Cina M, Egli-Gany D, et al. Prevalence of Mycoplasma genitalium in different population groups: systematic review and meta-analysis. Sex Transm Infect 2018 doi: 10.1136/sextrans-2017-053384
2. Soni S, Horner P, Rayment M, et al. 2018 BASHH UK national guideline for the management of infection with Mycoplasma genitalium. 2018.
3. Martin DH, Manhart LE, Workowski KA. Mycoplasma genitalium From Basic Science to Public Health: Summary of the Results From a National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disesases Technical Consultation and Consensus Recommendations for Future Research Priorities. J Infect Dis 2017;216(suppl_2):S427-S30. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jix147
4. Cadosch R, Garcia V, Althaus CL, et al. De novo mutations drive the spread of macrolide resistant Mycoplasma genitalium: a mathematical modelling study. bioRxiv 2018:321216.
5. Taylor Robinson D, Ong J. Prevalence of Mycoplasma genitalium. Sexually Transmitted Infections 2018 15.06.2018. https://sti.bmj.com/content/94/4/255.responses (accessed 19.07.2018).
The work by Baumann et al.(1) is valuable because it indicates populations for which screening for Mycoplasma genitalium (MG)) is not worthwhile economically. However, as molecular detection tests are now available commercially, testing worldwide should continue to support or modify this conclusion and so help in the development of management guidelines and also provide data for MG modelling.
Another aspect of infection which requires more attention is the precise role of MG in balanoposthitis, epididymitis,, chronic prostatitis, reactive arthritis, and, of course, pelvic inflammatory disease, all of which, apart from chronic prostatitis, have some association with MG (2).
In addition, it is noteworthy that Mycoplasma pneumoniae (MP), which infects the respiratory tract, and is also responsible for some autoimmune side effects, does so in early childhood without causing disease. The latter usually occurs as an immunological response to reinfection later in life. MG is different genomically from MP but has much in common antigenically and might behave in a similar way to MP. Could asymptomatic MG infection, which is seen occasionally, be an example of this? Potentiation or even inhibition of MG infection in the genital tract by MP infection in the respiratory tract earlier in life is also possible. This idea is not supported by studies in mice, but the human situation might be quite different. In this regard, use of an existing specific serological test for MG m...
The work by Baumann et al.(1) is valuable because it indicates populations for which screening for Mycoplasma genitalium (MG)) is not worthwhile economically. However, as molecular detection tests are now available commercially, testing worldwide should continue to support or modify this conclusion and so help in the development of management guidelines and also provide data for MG modelling.
Another aspect of infection which requires more attention is the precise role of MG in balanoposthitis, epididymitis,, chronic prostatitis, reactive arthritis, and, of course, pelvic inflammatory disease, all of which, apart from chronic prostatitis, have some association with MG (2).
In addition, it is noteworthy that Mycoplasma pneumoniae (MP), which infects the respiratory tract, and is also responsible for some autoimmune side effects, does so in early childhood without causing disease. The latter usually occurs as an immunological response to reinfection later in life. MG is different genomically from MP but has much in common antigenically and might behave in a similar way to MP. Could asymptomatic MG infection, which is seen occasionally, be an example of this? Potentiation or even inhibition of MG infection in the genital tract by MP infection in the respiratory tract earlier in life is also possible. This idea is not supported by studies in mice, but the human situation might be quite different. In this regard, use of an existing specific serological test for MG might provide helpful data. In dealing with an infection where there is still much to seek and understand, the seemingly unstoppable march of MG to complete antibiotic resistance is the most worrying aspect. Although vaccination against MP infection has been only partially successful, it must be said again that this approach to prevention should receive urgent attention in the battle agaist MG infection (3).
David Taylor-Robinson (1), Jason J Ong (2)
(1) Section of Infectious Diseases, St Mary's Campus, imperial College London, UK
(2) Department of Clinical Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK
REFERENCES
1.Baumann L, Cina M, Egli-Gany D, et al. Prevalence of Mycoplasma genitalium in different population groups: systematic review and meta-analysis. Sex Transm Infect 2018; 94: 255-262.
2.Taylor-Robinson D, Jensen JS. Mycoplasma genitalium; from chrysalis to multicolored butterfly. Clin Microbiol Rev 2011; 24: 498-514.
3.Taylor-Robinson D. Diagnosis and antimicrobial treatment of Mycoplasma genitalium infection: sobering thoughts. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2014; 12: 715-722.
We read with interest the short report by van Aar et al. discussing potential implications of chlamydia expedited partner therapy (EPT) which entails patient delivered partner therapy.1 The authors highlight a number of factors which may influence the benefit-risk balance of providing EPT, many of which resonate with our experience of Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT).2 APT is an adaptation of EPT, which includes a telephone consultation between the sex partner and prescriber (to meet UK prescribing guidance), provision of a self-sampling kit for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV for a sex partner in addition to antibiotics and information on STIs and HIV. APT has been piloted among predominately heterosexual contacts of chlamydia and gonorrhoea.3
The authors report a chlamydia positivity rate of 34.2% among chlamydia-notified partners in the Netherlands and proposed that the use of EPT for all contacts risks exposing the majority of contacts to potentially unnecessary antimicrobial therapy. Furthermore, just over 1% of these contacts also had gonorrhoea, accounting for about 10% of all gonorrhoea infections detected during the study time period, raising additional concerns about inadequate therapy and antimicrobial resistance.
In England in 2016, chlamydia positivity among chlamydia contacts attending specialist sexual health services (SHS) was 40%, representing 19% of all chlamydia diagnoses made in SHS that year.4 This is...
We read with interest the short report by van Aar et al. discussing potential implications of chlamydia expedited partner therapy (EPT) which entails patient delivered partner therapy.1 The authors highlight a number of factors which may influence the benefit-risk balance of providing EPT, many of which resonate with our experience of Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT).2 APT is an adaptation of EPT, which includes a telephone consultation between the sex partner and prescriber (to meet UK prescribing guidance), provision of a self-sampling kit for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV for a sex partner in addition to antibiotics and information on STIs and HIV. APT has been piloted among predominately heterosexual contacts of chlamydia and gonorrhoea.3
The authors report a chlamydia positivity rate of 34.2% among chlamydia-notified partners in the Netherlands and proposed that the use of EPT for all contacts risks exposing the majority of contacts to potentially unnecessary antimicrobial therapy. Furthermore, just over 1% of these contacts also had gonorrhoea, accounting for about 10% of all gonorrhoea infections detected during the study time period, raising additional concerns about inadequate therapy and antimicrobial resistance.
In England in 2016, chlamydia positivity among chlamydia contacts attending specialist sexual health services (SHS) was 40%, representing 19% of all chlamydia diagnoses made in SHS that year.4 This is similar to the positivity reported by van Aar. A different pattern is seen in the 2016 English National Chlamydia Screening Programme audit, which is restricted to 15 to 24 year olds testing in any setting (health and non-healthcare). Positivity in contacts was 62% suggesting that in this age-group the majority would benefit from empirical treatment.5 Therefore, the appropriateness of EPT/APT within different populations (defined by age or by testing service type) may vary depending on chlamydia prevalence within the population group of interest, willingness to access testing and testing location. The time between exposure and testing is not reported by van Aar but could contribute to lower positivity among contacts if they test within two weeks of exposure.
A key difference between EPT and APT is the inclusion of self-sampling kit for STIs, including HIV, in addition to antibiotics and information. We agree with the authors that testing for partners is an essential component of clinical management and every effort should be made to link testing and treatment practices. This can facilitate further rounds of partner notification (PN) and ensure that those at risk of infections are tested for a range of STIs. The acceptability and uptake of self-sampling in general appears to be high and in the APT pilot, chlamydia and gonorrhoea self-sampling kits were returned by 55% of contacts receiving the APT intervention.3 6
The authors state that EPT should not be recommended ‘for sex partners with a migration background from STI/HIV endemic regions’ even if self-sampling kits were included, because their data showed high rates of coinfections and greater potential to miss STIs in these populations. This may assume that EPT would reach the same populations as patient referral. However, EPT and APT could offer opportunities to treat and test partners who may otherwise not be notified or would not attend healthcare settings – people who might otherwise be missed by traditional PN approaches. Nevertheless, we acknowledge that the acceptability and uptake of EPT/APT among sex partners and the index may potentially be influenced by socio-cultural norms and thereby, future studies should seek to explore the impact of these factors.
A large scale APT chlamydia PN randomised controlled trial will be starting in the UK in summer 2018 and will involve the index partners delivering an ‘APT pack’ to eligible partners.7 These packs will contain chlamydia treatment and self-sampling kits for chlamydia, gonorrhoea, HIV and syphilis in an attempt to increase testing among partners. This trial will provide evidence on the cost-effectiveness of APT in addition to greater understanding of sex partners’ readiness to provide samples for testing using self-sampling kits. Importantly, the APT intervention has been informed by a robust theoretical framework and behavioural change techniques. Further research on the feasibility of using EPT/APT among men who have sex with men is needed and will be conducted as part of this study.
If we are to improve PN outcomes, irrespective of how PN is delivered, a range of options will be required, tailored to meet the needs of patients and their partners. Thus EPT/APT are a valuable addition to PN strategies.
Acknowledgements
This article is written on behalf of the LUSTRUM team (www.lustrum.org.uk/co-investigators). The LUSTRUM Programme of Research is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme (Reference Number RP-PG-0614-20009). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. The funders had no involvement in the writing of this manuscript or the decision to submit for publication.
References
1. van Aar F, van Benthem BHB, van den Broek IVF, et al. STIs in sex partners notified for chlamydia exposure: implications for expedited partner therapy. Sex Transm Infect 2018.
2. Dombrowski JC, Golden MR. Accelerated partner therapy: a promising new partner treatment option. Sex Transm Infect 2012;88(1):2-3.
3. Estcourt C, Sutcliffe L, Cassell J, et al. Can we improve partner notification rates through expedited partner therapy in the UK? Findings from an exploratory trial of Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT). Sex Transm Infect 2012;88(1):21-6.
4. Public Health England. Table 7: STI diagnoses & partner notification, 2012 - 2016. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/fil....
5. Public Health England. Partner notification in chlamydia screening. National Audit Report. May 2016. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/fil....
6. Fajardo-Bernal L, Aponte-Gonzalez J, Vigil P, et al. Home-based versus clinic-based specimen collection in the management of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015(9):CD011317.
7. LUSTRUM. Limiting Undetected Sexually Transmitted Infections to Reduce Morbidity Study Website. https://www.lustrum.org.uk/ Last accessed 18th January 2018.
Impact of Expedited Partner Therapy (EPT) Implementation on Chlamydia Incidence in the USA
Letter to the Editor:
Assuming that a sexual partner has only one Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) is a dangerous practice and should be discouraged. The Expedient Partner Therapy implementation on Chlamydia is one such assumption. In a study conducted by (Zemouri, Wi, Kiarie, Seuc, Moqasale et.al 2016) they highlighted that Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) case management is one of the top priorities in controlling STIs to break the chain of infection and transmission. They further reiterated that Syndromic case management provides a standardized evidence-based approach using clinical management algorithms, and flowcharts that can be used consistently across providers. Clinicians that treat patients with STIs should be cognizant that Expedited Partner Treatment is inadequate because there is at least a third infected sexual partner other than the partner being treated.
Another factor that should be considered when administering Expedited Partner Therapy is the possibility, of the partner, manifesting other symptoms of a STI to be treated that has not yet been identified in the patient. It is useful to administer the risk score test which is a 6 point research base quiz to each patient being treated for STI. These questions can only be answered by the patient for it to be considered reliable. Each question has a number of points assigned to potential ans...
Impact of Expedited Partner Therapy (EPT) Implementation on Chlamydia Incidence in the USA
Letter to the Editor:
Assuming that a sexual partner has only one Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) is a dangerous practice and should be discouraged. The Expedient Partner Therapy implementation on Chlamydia is one such assumption. In a study conducted by (Zemouri, Wi, Kiarie, Seuc, Moqasale et.al 2016) they highlighted that Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) case management is one of the top priorities in controlling STIs to break the chain of infection and transmission. They further reiterated that Syndromic case management provides a standardized evidence-based approach using clinical management algorithms, and flowcharts that can be used consistently across providers. Clinicians that treat patients with STIs should be cognizant that Expedited Partner Treatment is inadequate because there is at least a third infected sexual partner other than the partner being treated.
Another factor that should be considered when administering Expedited Partner Therapy is the possibility, of the partner, manifesting other symptoms of a STI to be treated that has not yet been identified in the patient. It is useful to administer the risk score test which is a 6 point research base quiz to each patient being treated for STI. These questions can only be answered by the patient for it to be considered reliable. Each question has a number of points assigned to potential answers, and higher points mean higher STI risk (Coughlin, 2016). Implementing the expedient partner therapy negate retrieving pertinent information regarding a patient’s sexual behavior and habits.
In managing a patient with STI, health education and promotion should form an integral part of each patient’s management regime. The use of condoms cannot be overemphasized and should form the basis of all discussions when treating patients with STIs. Expedient Partner Therapy decreases the opportunity to give this valuable information to all affected partners.
Zemouri, C., Wi, TE., Kiarie, J., Seuc, A., Mogasale, V., Latif, A., & Broutet. N. (2016). The Performance of the Vaginal Discharge Syndromic Management in Treating Vaginal and Cervical Infection: A Systematic review and Meta-Analysis. https://www.ncbi.nim.nih.gov/pubmed/27706174
Dear David Taylor-Robinson,
We are very grateful with your contribution.
It was a study that we evaluated the incidence of these pathogens on population that had done the molecular test to IST in a big laboratory in Brazil, this is only an epidemiological study. The microorganism have been chosen according availability of tests offered, so it was not evaluated the pathogenicity of each microorganism. Besides that our objective is only describe the profile of brazilian population, and did not correltated any data with clinical treatment. The molecular technology in Brazil is used as confirmatory of clinical diagnostic. The microorganism incidence in Brazil could be different from others countries due to characteristics of our population.
Best regards.
Danielle Alves Gomes Zauli
We read with interesting the recent report by Mwasakifwa and colleagues demonstrating that presence of mucopurulent ano-rectal discharge on clinical examination was associated with identification of a sexually transmitted organism by NAAT testing in men who have sex with men (MSM) with symptomatic proctitis.1 We also showed that sexually transmitted proctitis in MSM is often associated with more than one organism and that even with sensitive NAAT testing, there are a significant proportion of cases of MSM with proctitis with negative microbiology tests.2 We were however surprised that Mwasakifwa and colleagues did not identify any cases of syphilis in their analysis. This may have been because syphilis PCR testing was only conducted in a small proportion of cases? Ano-rectal syphilis was first described between 1945-1966 although most of these cases had anal ulceration with pain on defecation. Syphilis ‘proctitis’ was first described in 1975 from the USA in a man with rectal pain and discharge.3 In our series of MSM with proctitis, we reported 6/78(8%) cases of syphilis based upon PCR testing from the rectal mucosa during proctoscopy.2 The recent increase in infectious syphilis particularly in MSM is likely to increase the number of cases of ano-rectal syphilis. The clinical features of syphilis as the epidemic evolves may be changing and more MSM are presenting with painful lesions than was previously believed. We do agree that clinical examination of the ano-rectal area...
Show MoreDear Editor,
We have read the interesting manuscript “Antimicrobial resistance in Mycoplasma genitalium sampled from the British general population”, from Pitt et al.1 In 56 M. genitalium-positive specimens, macrolide resistance was detected in 9 (16.1%). These results agree with the low rate of resistance (<20%) detected in studies carried out mainly in general population,2 but contrast with the higher rates (>40%) obtained in patients mainly attended in sexually transmitted infections units.3 These two scenarios (general versus core population) could be considered in the management of the M. genitalium infection.
Show MoreIn our context (80-90% general population), the macrolide resistance rate was 16.3% (43/263).2 After detection of macrolide resistance-associated mutations with rapid techniques, guided antibiotic therapy was prescribed (azithromycin 500 mg day 1 and 250 mg days 2-5, or moxifloxacin) , and sexual partners control and test of cure after 3 weeks recommended. Despite patients adhering to the antibiotic regimen initially indicated, treatment failure was 6%.
Recently, a resistance-guided sequential treatment with doxycycline followed with azithromycin or moxifloxacin has been proposed.3 In this study the macrolide resistance rate was 68% and the treatment failure 7%. In our opinion, this strategy could be appropriate in populations with high macrolide resistance rate (main conclusion of this study), and healthcare contexts in that guided ther...
The Research Letter by Marinho FL and Zauli D (1) is interesting, but it raises several contentious issues. Understanding the prevalence of genital-tract micro-organisms that constitute the genital microbiome (2) is important (3) and the authors were concerned with this in respect of six micro-organisms that were detected by a molecular method (PCR). Whether they give them equal weight so far as pathogenicity is concerned is unclear because they did not relate them to any specific clinical disease. We appreciate that any micro-organism mentioned, including U. urealyticum, might have pathogenic potential under certain circumstances (4), but finding U. urealyticum as the most prevalent (62.47%) followed by M. hominis (9.31%) does not elevate their status as pathogens and raises clinically important questions of whether these micro-organisms, including U. parvum, should be tested for at all in a diagnostic procedure, unless part of a research programme, and, if tested, whether such positive results justify treatment. Admittedl the authors do not expressly state that, on the basis of a positive test result, patients would be treated automatically with antibiotics. Nevertheless, we must emphasize that the use of antibiotics in many such cases would seem inappropriate, not least because it might promote antibiotic resistance, sometimes in microbes of undoubted importance, such as N. gonorrhoeae and M. genitalium (6). Modern molecular technology is a boon, but it must not be al...
Show MoreSir,
We read with interest the informative Short Report by Wang et al. about Jarisch–Herxheimer reaction during therapy of congenital syphilis [1] and wish to make a few comments:
1. The authors included in their review all patients hospitalized between 1 January 2010 to 31 November 2015. However, no such date like 31 November 2015 actually exists.
2. Authors state that 'rapid pulse and breathing' were present in all 11/11 patients of Jarisch–Herxheimer reaction. However, they have not stated the age of these patients in the study. 'Pulse and breathing' are age-dependent variables, and in neonates pulse rate may be up to 120 to 160 beats per minute, and breathing up to 40 to 60 breaths per minute. Therefore, it is important to see how many of the Jarisch–Herxheimer reaction cases were neonates as in many of these case, pulse and respiratory may be within normal range.
3. The recommended duration of treatment for congenital syphilis is 10 days and not 14 days as followed in this study [2].
References:
1. Wang C, He S, Yang H, Liu Y, Zhao Y, Pang L. Unique manifestations and risk factors of Jarisch-Herxheimer reaction during treatment of child congenital syphilis. Sex Transm Infect. 2018 Dec;94(8):562-564.
2. CDC 2015 Sexually Transmitted Diseases Treatment Guidelines. Congenital syphilis. Available at https://www.cdc.gov/std/tg2015/congenital.htm...
Show MoreError in the calculation of person-time in the before-PrEP period by Beymer et al.
S.H. Hulstein, E. Hoornenborg, M.F. Schim van der Loeff
Department of Infectious Diseases, GGD Amsterdam
Studies on STI incidence and PrEP use are often hampered by the absence of STI incidence data in the period before PrEP; Beymer et al.1 set out to improve on this. They report on the STI incidence before and after initiation of PrEP in a cohort of men who have sex with men (MSM) at the Los Angeles LGBT Center, California, US. We fear that there are some flaws in the analysis, which may affect the conclusions.
The analysis was based on 275 men who were tested at least once in the period before PrEP was started, and at least once after PrEP was started. The reported persontime in the before- PrEP period was just over half the person-time after PrEP initiation (93.60 versus 168.93), but the numbers of tests before and after PrEP initiation were not very different: 755 and 908, respectively. This discrepancy could not be explained by differences in their frequency of STI testing, which were reported to be similar in the before- and after-PrEP period. An explanation is that the person-time before the first STI visit was not taken into account. This would mean that the person-time in the before-PrEP period was underestimated, in turn leading to an artificially high before-PrEP STI incidence....
Show MorePrevalence of Mycoplasma genitalium
Response to: Taylor-Robinson D and Ong J
Authors: Nicola Low, Lukas Baumann, Manuel Cina, Myrofora Goutaki, Hammad Ali, Dianne Egli-Gany
Correspondence to: Nicola Low, Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Mittelstrasse 43, 3012 Bern, Switzerland. nicola.low@ispm.unibe.ch; Tel: +41 31 631 30 92
Title: Research on Mycoplasma genitalium is more important than expanding testing
We are glad that Taylor-Robinson and Ong offer some support for the conclusion of our systematic review,1 that asymptomatic populations, in the community or in clinics, should not be tested routinely for M. genitalium. The first British Association of Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH) guideline about the management of Mycoplasma genitalium, published on 8th July 2018, supports this conclusion.2 We would like to clarify, however, that the absence of evidence for clinical and public health benefit of screening3 and the harm of inducing de novo mutations and spreading resistance to macrolide antimicrobials4 are more important than economic considerations.
Taylor-Robinson and Ong’s statement that “testing worldwide should continue to support or modify this conclusion”5 could lead to pro...
Show MoreThe work by Baumann et al.(1) is valuable because it indicates populations for which screening for Mycoplasma genitalium (MG)) is not worthwhile economically. However, as molecular detection tests are now available commercially, testing worldwide should continue to support or modify this conclusion and so help in the development of management guidelines and also provide data for MG modelling.
Show MoreAnother aspect of infection which requires more attention is the precise role of MG in balanoposthitis, epididymitis,, chronic prostatitis, reactive arthritis, and, of course, pelvic inflammatory disease, all of which, apart from chronic prostatitis, have some association with MG (2).
In addition, it is noteworthy that Mycoplasma pneumoniae (MP), which infects the respiratory tract, and is also responsible for some autoimmune side effects, does so in early childhood without causing disease. The latter usually occurs as an immunological response to reinfection later in life. MG is different genomically from MP but has much in common antigenically and might behave in a similar way to MP. Could asymptomatic MG infection, which is seen occasionally, be an example of this? Potentiation or even inhibition of MG infection in the genital tract by MP infection in the respiratory tract earlier in life is also possible. This idea is not supported by studies in mice, but the human situation might be quite different. In this regard, use of an existing specific serological test for MG m...
Dear Editor,
We read with interest the short report by van Aar et al. discussing potential implications of chlamydia expedited partner therapy (EPT) which entails patient delivered partner therapy.1 The authors highlight a number of factors which may influence the benefit-risk balance of providing EPT, many of which resonate with our experience of Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT).2 APT is an adaptation of EPT, which includes a telephone consultation between the sex partner and prescriber (to meet UK prescribing guidance), provision of a self-sampling kit for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV for a sex partner in addition to antibiotics and information on STIs and HIV. APT has been piloted among predominately heterosexual contacts of chlamydia and gonorrhoea.3
The authors report a chlamydia positivity rate of 34.2% among chlamydia-notified partners in the Netherlands and proposed that the use of EPT for all contacts risks exposing the majority of contacts to potentially unnecessary antimicrobial therapy. Furthermore, just over 1% of these contacts also had gonorrhoea, accounting for about 10% of all gonorrhoea infections detected during the study time period, raising additional concerns about inadequate therapy and antimicrobial resistance.
In England in 2016, chlamydia positivity among chlamydia contacts attending specialist sexual health services (SHS) was 40%, representing 19% of all chlamydia diagnoses made in SHS that year.4 This is...
Show MoreImpact of Expedited Partner Therapy (EPT) Implementation on Chlamydia Incidence in the USA
Show MoreLetter to the Editor:
Assuming that a sexual partner has only one Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) is a dangerous practice and should be discouraged. The Expedient Partner Therapy implementation on Chlamydia is one such assumption. In a study conducted by (Zemouri, Wi, Kiarie, Seuc, Moqasale et.al 2016) they highlighted that Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) case management is one of the top priorities in controlling STIs to break the chain of infection and transmission. They further reiterated that Syndromic case management provides a standardized evidence-based approach using clinical management algorithms, and flowcharts that can be used consistently across providers. Clinicians that treat patients with STIs should be cognizant that Expedited Partner Treatment is inadequate because there is at least a third infected sexual partner other than the partner being treated.
Another factor that should be considered when administering Expedited Partner Therapy is the possibility, of the partner, manifesting other symptoms of a STI to be treated that has not yet been identified in the patient. It is useful to administer the risk score test which is a 6 point research base quiz to each patient being treated for STI. These questions can only be answered by the patient for it to be considered reliable. Each question has a number of points assigned to potential ans...
Pages