Explore the vast range of titles available.

Aim To compare efficacy (intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction) and safety of preservative-free latanoprost (T2345) to benzalkonium chloride (BAK)-preserved latanoprost (BPL; Xalatan) in ocular hypertension (OHT) or primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) patients. Methods Prospective, international, multicentre, randomised, investigator-masked, parallel–group trial. After a wash-out period, POAG or OHT patients, previously managed by BPL monotherapy, randomly received T2345 or BPL (one drop into the affected eye(s)) once daily from D0 to D84. Change in IOP was measured at 09:00 (±1 h) from D0 to D84 in the worse eye. Results Mean IOP reduction (D0–D84) was −8.6±2.6 mm Hg (−36%) on T2345 and −9.0±2.4 mm Hg (−38%) on BPL, confirming non-inferiority of T2345 to BPL. Non-inferiority of T2345 was observed from D15. The most frequent ocular adverse event, drug intolerance, was reported in 1 (0.5%) patient on T2345 versus 4 (2.1%) patients on BPL. Moderate to severe conjunctival hyperaemia was less frequent on T2345 than on BPL at D42 (20.2% vs 30.6%; p=0.003) and D84 (21.4% vs 29.1%; p=0.02). Upon instillation, the global subjective ocular symptom score was significantly lower on T2345 than BPL on D42 (0.15 vs 0.41; p=0.001) and D84 (0.18 vs 0.46; p=0.001). Conclusions Preservative-free latanoprost has the same efficacy as BPL, with improved local tolerance.

Objective To determine the efficacy and safety of azithromycin 1.5% eye drops in a paediatric population with purulent bacterial conjunctivitis. Patients and methods This was a multicentre, international, randomised, investigator-masked study in 286 children with purulent discharge and bulbar conjunctival injection. Patients received either azithromycin 1.5% eye drops (twice daily for 3 days) or tobramycin 0.3% eye drops (every 2 h for 2 days, then four times daily for 5 days). Clinical signs were evaluated on day (D) 0, 3 and 7, and cultures on D0 and D7. The primary variable was the clinical cure (absence of bulbar conjunctival injection and discharge) on D3 in the worse eye for patients with positive cultures on D0. Results 286 patients (mean age 3.2 years; range 1 day–17 years) were included; 203 had positive cultures on D0. Azithromycin was superior to tobramycin in clinical cure rate on D3 (47.1% vs 28.7%, p=0.013) and was non-inferior to tobramycin on D7 (89.2% vs 78.2%, respectively). Azithromycin treatment eradicated causative pathogens, including resistant species, with a similar resolution rate to tobramycin (89.8% vs 87.2%, respectively). These results were confirmed in a subgroup of patients younger than 24 months old. Conclusions Azithromycin 1.5% eye drops provided a more rapid clinical cure than tobramycin 0.3% eye drops in the treatment of purulent bacterial conjunctivitis in children, with a more convenient twice-a-day dosing regimen.

Aims: Efficacy and safety of a short-duration treatment of azithromycin 1.5% eye drops versus oral azithromycin to treat active trachoma. Methods: Randomised, controlled, double-masked, double-dummy, non-inferiority explanatory study including 670 children from Guinea Conakry and Pakistan if: 1–10 years old; active trachoma (TF+TI0 or TF+TI+ on simplified World Health Organisation (WHO) scale). Three groups received either: azithromycin 1.5% eye drops twice daily for 2 days, for 3 days or azithromycin single 20 mg/kg oral dose. Patients’ contacts were treated whenever possible. Clinical evaluation was performed using a binocular loupe. Primary efficacy variable was the cure (no active trachoma (TF0)) at day 60. Non-inferiority margin for difference between cure rates was 10%. Results: Cure rate in per protocol set was as follows: 93.0%, 96.3% and 96.6% in 2-day group 3-day group, and oral treatment group, respectively. Azithromycin 1.5% groups were non-inferior to oral azithromycin. The intend to treat (ITT) analysis supported the results. Clinical re-emergence rate was low: 4.2%. Ocular tolerance was similar for all groups. No treatment related adverse events were reported. Logistic regression analyses found prognostic factors such as: country (p<0.001) and trachoma severity (p = 0.003). Conclusions: In active trachoma, azithromycin eye drops twice daily for 2 or 3 days are as efficient as the WHO’s reference treatment and represent an innovative alternative to oral azithromycin.

Aim: To compare the efficacy and safety of Azyter, azithromycin 1.5% eye drops, for 3 days with tobramycin 0.3% for 7 days to treat purulent bacterial conjunctivitis. Methods: This was a multicentre, randomised, investigator-masked study including 1043 children and adults with purulent bacterial conjunctivitis. Patients received either azithromycin 1.5% twice-daily for 3 days or tobramycin 0.3%, 1 drop every two hours for 2 days, then four times daily for 5 days. Clinical signs were evaluated and cultures obtained at D0, D3 and D9 (where D refers to “day”). Primary variable was the clinical cure at the Test-of-Cure (TOC)-visit (D9±1), for patients with D0-positive cultures. The cure was defined as: bulbar conjunctival injection and discharge scores of 0. Results: Among 471 patients with D0-positivity in the per protocol set, 87.8% of the azithromycin 1.5% group and 89.4% of the tobramycin group were clinically cured at the TOC-visit. Azithromycin was non-inferior to tobramycin for clinical and bacteriological cure. Clinical cure was significantly higher with azithromycin 1.5% at D3. The safety profile of azithromycin was satisfactory with a good patient and investigator’s acceptability. Conclusions: Azithromycin 1.5% for 3 days was as effective and as safe as tobramycin for 7 days. Furthermore, more azithromycin than tobramycin patients presented an early clinical cure at Day 3. Due to its twice daily dosing regimen for 3 days, azithromycin represents a step forward in the management of purulent bacterial conjunctivitis, especially in children.

Objectives:Investigating the relationship between occupational exposure to pesticides and the risk of lymphoid neoplasms (LNs) in men.Methods:A hospital-based case-control study was conducted in six centres in France between 2000 and 2004. The cases were incident cases with a diagnosis of LN aged 18–75 years. During the same period, controls of the same age and sex as the cases were recruited in the same hospital, mainly in the orthopaedic and rheumatological departments. Exposures to pesticides were evaluated through specific interviews and case-by-case expert reviews. Four hundred and ninety-one cases (244 cases of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), 87 of Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL), 104 of lymphoproliferative syndromes (LPSs) and 56 of multiple myeloma (MM) cases) and 456 controls were included in the analyses. The odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI were estimated using unconditional logistic regressions.Results:Positive associations between HL and occupational exposure to triazole fungicides and urea herbicides were observed (OR = 8.4 (2.2 to 32.4), 10.8 (2.4 to 48.1), respectively). Exposure to insecticides, fungicides and herbicides were linked to a threefold increase in MM risk (OR = 2.8 (1.2 to 6.5), 3.2 (1.4 to 7.2), 2.9 (1.3 to 6.5)). For LPS subtypes, associations restricted to hairy-cell leukaemia (HCL) were evidenced for exposure to organochlorine insecticides, phenoxy herbicides and triazine herbicides (OR = 4.9 (1.1 to 21.2), 4.1 (1.1 to 15.5), 5.1 (1.4 to 19.3)), although based on small numbers. Lastly, despite the increased ORs for organochlorine and organophosphate insecticides, carbamate fungicides and triazine herbicides, no significant associations were evidenced for NHL.Conclusions:The results, based on case-by-case expert review of occupation-specific questionnaires, support the hypothesis that occupational pesticide exposures may be involved in HL, MM and HCL and do not rule out a role in NHL. The analyses identified specific pesticides that deserve further investigation and the findings were consistent with those of previous studies.

Rationale and objectivesIntroduction of post-mortem imaging has helped improve sudden unexpected death in infancy (SUDI) management in Europe. French guidelines were issued in 2007 to homogenise SUDI investigations including imaging. The aim of this study was to evaluate current imaging management of SUDI in France.Material and methodsBetween January 2022 and July 2022, all 35 SUDI French referral centres were invited to answer an e-mailed online survey including 29 questions divided into four different sections covering imaging practices for SUDI including radiology department organisation, imaging modalities performed, methods of reading, and current training resources. Partial responses were secondarily completed by a personal call to the SUDI imaging consultant. The current implementation of the 2007 recommendations was compared with a previous evaluation from 2015 and with current North American practices.ResultsThe participation rate of centres performing SUDI imaging was 100% (35/35). Imaging was systematically performed in 94.3% (33/35) of the centres: 74.3% (26/35) using radiography; 5.7% (2/35) using ultrasound; 94.3% (33/35) using computed tomography (CT), including 89% (31/35) whole-body CT and 5.7% (2/35) brain CT; and 20% (7/35) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Two centres (5.7%, 2/35) did not systematically perform brain imaging. One (2.9%, 1/35) used ultrasound-guided biopsy. In comparison with 2015, rates of brain imaging increased by 25.4% (P=0.008). There was no significant difference in the number of forensic MRIs performed between France and North America (P=0.663).ConclusionDespite improvements since 2015, full compliance with French guidelines for SUDI investigations remains incomplete. The use of imaging, particularly CT and brain imaging, has increased. Further efforts are needed to standardise imaging practices for optimal SUDI investigations.