Detection of anorectal and cervicovaginal Chlamydia trachomatis infections following azithromycin treatment: prospective cohort study with multiple time-sequential measures of rRNA, DNA, quantitative load and symptoms

Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers, Arjen G C L Speksnijder, Servaas A Morré, Petra F G Wolffs, Marianne A B van der Sande, Antoinette A T P Brink, Ingrid V F van den Broek, Marita I L S Werner, Christian J P A Hoebe, Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers, Arjen G C L Speksnijder, Servaas A Morré, Petra F G Wolffs, Marianne A B van der Sande, Antoinette A T P Brink, Ingrid V F van den Broek, Marita I L S Werner, Christian J P A Hoebe

Abstract

Background: Determination of Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct) treatment success is hampered by current assessment methods, which involve a single post-treatment measurement only. Therefore, we evaluated Ct detection by applying multiple laboratory measures on time-sequential post-treatment samples.

Methods: A prospective cohort study was established with azithromycin-treated (1000 mg) Ct patients (44 cervicovaginal and 15 anorectal cases). Each patient provided 18 self-taken samples pre-treatment and for 8 weeks post-treatment (response: 96%; 1,016 samples). Samples were tested for 16S rRNA (TMA), bacterial load (quantitative PCR; Chlamydia plasmid DNA) and type (serovar and multilocus sequence typing). Covariates (including behavior, pre-treatment load, anatomic site, symptoms, age, and menstruation) were tested for their potential association with positivity and load at 3-8 weeks using regression analyses controlling for repeated measures.

Findings: By day 9, Ct positivity decreased to 20% and the median load to 0.3 inclusion-forming units (IFU) per ml (pre-treatment: 170 IFU/ml). Of the 35 cases who reported no sex, sex with a treated partner or safe sex with a new partner, 40% had detection, i.e. one or more positive samples from 3-8 weeks (same Ct type over time), indicating possible antimicrobial treatment failure. Cases showed intermittent positive detection and the number of positive samples was higher in anorectal cases than in cervicovaginal cases. The highest observed bacterial load between 3-8 weeks post-treatment was 313 IFU/ml, yet the majority (65%) of positive samples showed a load of ≤ 2 IFU/ml. Pre-treatment load was found to be associated with later load in anorectal cases.

Conclusions: A single test at 3-8 weeks post-treatment frequently misses Ct. Detection reveals intermittent low loads, with an unknown risk of later complications or transmission. These findings warrant critical re-evaluation of the clinical management of single dose azithromycin-treated Ct patients and fuel the debate on defining treatment failure. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01448876.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. Flow diagram participants from recruitment…
Figure 1. Flow diagram participants from recruitment to analyses.
Figure 2. Study sampling frame for anorectal…
Figure 2. Study sampling frame for anorectal and cervicovaginal swabs and questionnaires.
Figure 3. Chlamydia trachomatis positivity and load…
Figure 3. Chlamydia trachomatis positivity and load among cases of cervicovaginal (C) and anorectal (A) infections in female and male (M) patients by sexual behavior.
Figure 4. Chlamydia trachomatis positivity and load…
Figure 4. Chlamydia trachomatis positivity and load pre-treatment and 1–51 days post-azithromycin treatment; 15 anorectal (white bars) and 44 cervicovaginal (gray/black bars) infections.
a. Proportion positive (%) (Chlamydial rRNA and/or DNA). b. Quantitative Chlamydial DNA load (boxplot; IFU/ml).

References

    1. Wang SA, Papp JR, Stamm WE, Peeling RW, Martin DH, et al. (2005) Evaluation of Antimicrobial Resistance and Treatment Failures for Chlamydia trachomatis: A Meeting Report. J Infect Dis 2005 191 (6): 917–923 10.1086/428290
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2010) STD Treatment Guidelines. MMWR Recomm Rep 59: 45.
    1. British Association for Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH) (2010) Chlamydia trachomatis UK Testing Guidelines. Clinical Effectiveness Group. 2010 Update to Chlamydia testing. Available: and . Accessed 2013 Mar01.).
    1. Dukers-Muijrers NHTM, Morré SA, Speksnijder AGCL, Sande van der MAB, Hoebe CJPA (2012) Chlamydia trachomatis test of cure following treatment can not be based on a single highly sensitive laboratory test after 3 weeks. Plos one 7(3): e34108 10.1371/journal.pone.0034108
    1. Horner P (2006) The case for further treatment studies of uncomplicated genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection. Sex Transm Infect 82(4): :340–3. Review.
    1. Suchland RJ, Sandoz KM, Jeffrey BM, Stamm WE, Rockey DD (2009) Horizontal Transfer of Tetracycline Resistance among Chlamydia spp. In Vitro. Antimicrob agents and chemother 4604–4611.
    1. Handsfield H (2011) Questioning Azithromycin for Chlamydial Infection. Sex Trans Dis 38 (11) . DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e318227a366
    1. Lau C-Y, Qureshi AK (2002) Azithromycin versus doxycycline for genital chlamydial infections: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Sex Transm Dis 29: 497–502.
    1. Batteiger BE, Tu W, Ofner S, van der Pol B, Stothard DR, et al. (2010) Repeated Chlamydia trachomatis genital infections in adolescent women. J Infect Dis201: 42e51.
    1. Golden MR, Whittington WL, Handsfield HH, Hughes JP, Stamm WE, et al. (2005) Effect of expedited treatment of sex partners on recurrent or persistent gonorrhea or chlamydial infection. N Engl J Med 352: 676e85.
    1. Schwebke JR, Rompalo A, Taylor S, Sena AC, Martin DH, et al. (2011) Re-evaluating the treatment of nongonococcal urethritis: Emphasizing emerging pathogens–a randomized clinical trial. Clin Infect Dis 52: 163–170.
    1. Kissinger PJ, Reilly KM, Taylor SN, Leichliter JS, Rosenthal S, et al. (2009) Early repeat Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections among heterosexual men. Sex Transm Dis 36: 498e500.
    1. Stamm WE, Batteiger BE, McCormack WM, Totten PA, Stemlicht A, et al. (2007) A randomized, double-blind study comparing single dose rifalazil with single-dose azithromycin for the empirical treatment of nongonococcal urethritis in men. Sex Transm Dis 34: 545e52.
    1. Steedman NM, McMillan A (2009) Treatment of asymptomatic rectal Chlamydia trachomatis: is single-dose azithromycin effective? Int J STD AIDS 20: 168.
    1. Drummond F, Ryder N, Wand H, Guy R, Read P, et al. (2011) Is azithromycin adequate treatment for asymptomatic rectal Chlamydia? Int J STD AIDS 22: 478e80.
    1. Hathorn E, Opie C, Goold P (2012) What is the appropriate treatment for the management of rectal Chlamydia trachomatis in men and women? Sex Transm Infect 88: 352e354 10.1136/sextrans-2011-050466
    1. Manhart LE, Gillespie CW, Lowens MS, Khosropour CM, Colombara DV, et al. (2013) Standard treatment regimens for nongonococcal urethritis have similar but declining cure rates: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis 56(7): 934–42 10.1093/cid/cis1022.Epub2012Dec7
    1. Horner PJ (2012) Azithromycin antimicrobial resistance and genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection: duration of therapy may be the key to improving efficacy. Sex Transm Infect 88(3): 154–6 10.1136/sextrans-2011-050385
    1. Hogan RJ, Mathews SA, Mukhopadhyay S, Summersgill JT, Timms Pl (2004) Chlamydial persistence: beyond the biphasic paradigm. Infect Immun 72: 1843–55.
    1. van Liere GA, Hoebe CJ, Niekamp AM, Koedijk FD, Dukers-Muijrers NHTM (2013) Standard Symptom- and Sexual History-Based Testing Misses Anorectal Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae Infections in Swingers and Men Who Have Sex With Men. Sex Transm Dis. 40(4): 285–9 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e31828098f8
    1. Catsburg A, Savelkoul PMH, Vliet A, Algra J, Vandenbroucke-Grauls CMJE, et al.., 2006) Eleventh International Symposium on Human Chlamydial Infections. June 18–23 , Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario, Canada, Pages: 521–524
    1. van der Helm JJ, Sabajo LO, Grunberg AW, Morré SA, Speksnijder AG, et al. (2012) Point-of-care test for detection of urogenital chlamydia in women shows low sensitivity. A performance evaluation study in two clinics in Suriname. Plos one 7(2): e32122 10.1371/journal.pone.0032122.Epub2012Feb29
    1. Quint KD, van Doorn LJ, Kleter B, de Koning MN, van den Munckhof HA, et al.. (2007) A highly sensitive, multiplex broad-spectrum PCR-DNA-enzyme immunoassay and reverse hybridization assay for rapid detection and identification of Chlamydia trachomatis serovars. J Mol Diagn 9(5): :631–8.Epub 2007 Sep 14.
    1. Bom RJ, Christerson L, Schim van der Loeff MF, Coutinho RA, Herrmann B, et al. (2011) Evaluation of high-resolution typing methods for Chlamydia trachomatis in samples from heterosexual couples. J Clin Microbiol 49(8): 2844–53 10.1128/JCM.00128-11.Epub2011Jun8
    1. Sandoz KM, Rockey DD (2010) Antibiotic resistance in Chlamydiae Future Microbiol. 5(9): 1427–42.
    1. Geisler WM, Koltun WD, Abdelsayed N, Burigo J, Mena L, et al. (2012) Safety and efficacy of WC2031 versus vibramycin for the treatment of uncomplicated urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infection: a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, multicenter trial. Clin Infect Dis 55(1): 82–8 10.1093/cid/cis291.Epub2012Mar19
    1. Dukers-Muijrers NHTM, van Liere GA, Hoebe CJ (2013) Re-screening Chlamydia trachomatis positive subjects: a comparison of practices between an STI clinic, general practitioners and gynaecologists. Sex Transm Infect 89(1): 25–7 10.1136/sextrans-2011-050467.Epub2012Sep1

Source: PubMed

3
Abonner