BACKGROUND: Refractory diabetic foot ulcer (rDFU) and osteomyelitis (diabetic foot osteomyelitis [DFO]) are a major problem in people with diabetes. Often resulting from multidrug-resistant polymicrobial infection, these may result in amputation or nonhealing ulcers. In this nonrandomized open-label study, we looked at the outcome of treatment with rifampicin in patients with nonhealing diabetic foot ulcers.
METHODS: Patients with DFUs (n = 67, n = 55 with DFO) unresponsive to conventional antimicrobial therapy for >3 months (rDFU) were taken as the study group. All patients received rifampicin for a minimum of 3 months (maximum 6 months if DUFs did not heal after 3 months) in addition to standard antibiotics and compared with similar kind of DFUs (n = 68, n = 55 DFO) who formed the control group, treated with conventional antimicrobial therapy. Patients were followed up for 12 months. Healing of DFU at 6 months and amputation were primary endpoints of the study.
RESULTS: In total, 43 patients (64.2%) in the rifampicin group healed at 3 months and another 4 patients healed when rifampicin was continued for 6 months (n = 47, 70.1%). In the control group, 11 patients healed at 3 months (16.2%) and 25 patients healed at 6 months (36.8%). In total, 14 patients (20.9%) in the study group and 29 patients (42.6%) in the control group had to undergo minor amputation. Comparison between the rate of healing at 3 and 6 months and minor amputation between the study group and control group showed statistically significant results (P ≤ .00001, <.00001, and .008, respectively). In total, 6 and 8 patients despite healing of the primary ulcer had a subsequent recurrence of ulcer in the rifampicin and control group, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Rifampicin used in conjunction with other standard poly-microbial therapy in refractory complex diabetic foot ulcer unresponsive to standard antimicrobial therapy, can significantly improve wound healing as well as decrease the need for amputation in addition to standard of care.

Background: Recommended standard treatment for leprosy is multidrugtherapy (MDT/WHO), consisting Rifampicin+Dapsone+Clofazimine. Other medications are recommended in cases of resistance, adverse reactions and intolerances, including ROM regimen, Rifampicin+Ofloxacin+Minocycline. Therefore, pharmacovigilance is an important tool in understanding these adverse drug reactions (ADRs), supporting pharmacotherapy management and medication safety. This study seeks to evaluate ADRs comparing two therapeutic regimens, MDT and ROM, used in treatment of patients with leprosy, analyzing prognostic factors regarding risk and safety. Methods:A retrospective cohort study was performed by assessing medical records of 433 patients diagnosed with leprosy from 2010 to 2021 at a National Reference Center in Brazil. They were subject to 24 months or more of treatment with MDT or ROM regimens. ADR assessments were analyzed by two experienced researchers, who included clinical and laboratory variables, correlating them with temporality, severity and the causality criteria of Naranjo and WHO. Results: The findings observed an average of 1.3 reactions/patient. Out of individuals experiencing reactions, 67.0% (69/103) were utilizing MDT/MB, while 33.0% (34/103) were using ROM. The median time for ADR of 79 days for MDT and 179 days for ROM. In first reaction, Dapsone was the most frequently involved medication; the most affected system was hematopoietic. As compared to Clofazimine, results indicated that use of Dapsone was associated with 7% increased risk of ADR occurrence (HR: 1.07; p = 0.866). Additionally, Rifampicin was linked to 31% increased risk of ADRs (HR: 1.31; p = 0.602); and Ofloxacin showed 35% elevated risk (HR: 1.35; p = 0.653). Conversely, results for Minocycline indicated 44% reduction in the risk of ADRs (HR: 0.56; p = 0.527), although statistical significance was not reached. The use of MDT conferred 2.51 times higher risk of developing ADRs in comparison to ROM. Conclusion: The comparison between MDT and ROM revealed that MDT caused more ADRs, and these reactions were more severe, indicating less safety for patients. Dapsone was the most common medication causing ADRs, followed by Rifampicin. The combination with Clofazimine was associated with an additional risk of ADRs, warranting further studies to confirm this hypothesis. Given the high magnitude of ADRs, healthcare teams need to monitor patients undergoing leprosy treatment with focus on pharmacovigilance.

BACKGROUND: The optimal dosing strategy for rifampicin in treating drug-susceptible tuberculosis (TB) is still highly debated. In the phase 3 clinical trial Study 31/ACTG 5349 (NCT02410772), all participants in the control regimen arm received 600 mg rifampicin daily as a flat dose. Here, we evaluated relationships between rifampicin exposure and efficacy and safety outcomes.
METHODS: We analyzed rifampicin concentration time profiles using population nonlinear mixed-effects models. We compared simulated rifampicin exposure from flat- and weight-banded dosing. We evaluated the effect of rifampicin exposure on stable culture conversion at 6 months; TB-related unfavorable outcomes at 9, 12, and 18 months using Cox proportional hazard models; and all trial-defined safety outcomes using logistic regression.
RESULTS: Our model-derived rifampicin exposure ranged from 4.57 mg · h/L to 140.0 mg · h/L with a median of 41.8 mg · h/L. Pharmacokinetic simulations demonstrated that flat-dosed rifampicin provided exposure coverage similar to the weight-banded dose. Exposure-efficacy analysis (n = 680) showed that participants with rifampicin exposure below the median experienced similar hazards of stable culture conversion and TB-related unfavorable outcomes compared with those with exposure above the median. Exposure-safety analysis (n = 722) showed that increased rifampicin exposure was not associated with increased grade 3 or higher adverse events or serious adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: Flat-dosing of rifampicin at 600 mg daily may be a reasonable alternative to the incumbent weight-banded dosing strategy for the standard-of-care 6-month regimen. Future research should assess the optimal dosing strategy for rifampicin, at doses higher than the current recommendation.

UNASSIGNED: Globally, no trial data are available on head-to-head comparison between 10 mg/kg and 25/35 mg/kg rifampicin in treating pulmonary tuberculosis during study initiation.
UNASSIGNED: A multicentric, phase IIb randomized trial recruited 333 new culture-positive, drug-sensitive adult patients with pulmonary tuberculosis to compare safety and efficacy of high-dose rifampicin (R25/R35), against conventional dose (R10) given daily for 8 weeks followed by standard doses for 16 weeks. Main outcomes were treatment-emergent grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) and time-to-culture conversion in liquid media, assessed by division of AIDS system for grading the severity of adverse events division of AIDS criteria and Kaplan-Meier methods.
UNASSIGNED: In a modified intention-to-treat population of 323 patients (R10: 105/R25: 112/R35: 106), grade 3/4 AEs were reported in 34 patients (R10: 9.5% [10/105], R25: 9.8% [11/112], R35: 12.3% [13/106]) during the intensive phase. Among 23 patients (R10: 3.8% [4/105], R25: 6.3% [7/112], R35: 11.3% [12/106]) with grade 3/4 hepatotoxicity, 15 (R10: 1.9% [2/105], R25: 3.6% [4/112], R35: 8.5% [9/106]) had grade 3/4 hyperbilirubinemia and 9 patients (R10: 1.0% [1/105], R25: 0.9% [1/112], R35: 6.6% [7/106]) developed clinical jaundice. Significant differences observed only between R10 and R35 with hepatotoxicity (P = .039), hyperbilirubinemia (P = .031), clinical jaundice (P = .032), and treatment interruption (P = .039). Eighteen serious AEs and 6 deaths (R10: 3/R25: 1/R35: 2) occurred during study period. Time to stable culture conversion in liquid media was faster in R25 (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-2.31 [solid: 1.97; 95% CI, 1.46-2.67]) and R35 (1.81; 95% CI, 1.33-2.48 [solid: 2.24; 95% CI, 1.64-3.06]), than R10 (34 vs 44 days). R25 had no failure/relapse.
UNASSIGNED: Hepatotoxicity, clinical jaundice, and treatment interruptions occurred significantly higher with R35 than R10. Because R25 was comparably safe as R10 and also highly efficacious than R10, it may be considered for implementation. Clinical Trials Registration. CTRI/2017/12/010951.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of the combination of carotegrast methyl with rifampicin, a potent inhibitor of organic anion transporter polypeptide, on the pharmacokinetics (PKs), safety and tolerability of carotegrast methyl.
METHODS: In this 2 × 2 crossover study in 20 healthy Japanese adults, 10 subjects received carotegrast methyl 960 mg and rifampicin 600 mg on day 1 and received carotegrast methyl 960 mg on day 8. The subjects in the other sequence received the same treatments but in the opposite order. The 90% confidence interval (CI) of the geometric mean ratio of the Cmax and AUC0-t for carotegrast, the main active metabolite of carotegrast methyl, with/without rifampicin was calculated. If the 90% CI fell within the range of 0.80-1.25, this indicated the absence of any drug-drug interaction. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored.
RESULTS: The geometric mean ratios (90% CI) of the Cmax and AUC0-t for carotegrast with/without rifampicin were 4.78 (3.64-6.29) and 5.59 (4.60-6.79), respectively, indicating that carotegrast has a PK interaction with rifampicin. The combination with rifampicin increased the exposure of carotegrast and also that of its metabolites. The incidence of any AEs with/without rifampicin was five (25.0%) and one (5.0%), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Coadministration of carotegrast methyl with rifampicin significantly increased the exposure of carotegrast compared with carotegrast methyl administration alone. In this single dose study, the incidence of AEs of carotegrast methyl with rifampicin increased compared with carotegrast methyl alone, but the incidence of adverse drug reactions did not increase with combination administration.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy is an infectious disease with a slow decline in global annual caseload in the past two decades. Active case finding and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) with a single dose of rifampicin (SDR) are recommended by the World Health Organization as measures for leprosy elimination. However, more potent PEP regimens are needed to increase the effect in groups highest at risk (i.e., household members and blood relatives, especially of multibacillary patients). The PEP++ trial will assess the effectiveness of an enhanced preventive regimen against leprosy in high-endemic districts in India, Brazil, Bangladesh, and Nepal compared with SDR-PEP.
METHODS: The PEP++ study is a cluster-randomised controlled trial in selected districts of India, Brazil, Bangladesh, and Nepal. Sub-districts will be allocated randomly to the intervention and control arms. Leprosy patients detected from 2015 - 22 living in the districts will be approached to list their close contacts for enrolment in the study. All consenting participants will be screened for signs and symptoms of leprosy and tuberculosis (TB). In the intervention arm, eligible contacts receive the enhanced PEP++ regimen with three doses of rifampicin (150 - 600 mg) and clarithromycin (150 - 500 mg) administered at four-weekly intervals, whereas those in the control arm receive SDR-PEP. Follow-up screening for leprosy will be done for each individual two years after the final dose is administered. Cox\' proportion hazards analysis and Poisson regression will be used to compare the incidence rate ratios between the intervention and control areas as the primary study outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: Past studies have shown that the level of SDR-PEP effectiveness is not uniform across contexts or in relation to leprosy patients. To address this, a number of recent trials are seeking to strengthen PEP regimens either through the use of new medications or by increasing the dosage of the existing ones. However, few studies focus on the impact of multiple doses of chemoprophylaxis using a combination of antibiotics. The PEP++ trial will investigate effectiveness of both an enhanced regimen and use geospatial analysis for PEP administration in the study communities.
BACKGROUND: NL7022 on the Dutch Trial Register on April 12, 2018. Protocol version 9.0 updated on 18 August 2022 https://www.onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/23060.

Rifampicin (RIF) is an antibiotic used to treat tuberculosis and leprosy. Even though RIF is a market-available drug, it has a low aqueous solubility, hindering its bioavailability. Among the strategies for bioavailability improvement of poorly soluble drugs, coamorphous systems have been revealed as an alternative in the increase of the aqueous solubility of drug systems and at the same time also increasing the amorphous state stability and dissolution rate when compared with the neat drug. In this work, a new coamorphous form from RIF and tromethamine (TRIS) was synthesized by slow evaporation. Structural, electronic, and thermodynamic properties and solvation effects, as well as drug-coformer intermolecular interactions, were studied through density functional theory (DFT) calculations. Powder X-ray diffraction (PXRD) data allowed us to verify the formation of a new coamorphous. In addition, the DFT study indicates a possible intermolecular interaction by hydrogen bonds between the available amino and carbonyl groups of RIF and the hydroxyl and amino groups of TRIS. The theoretical spectra obtained are in good agreement with the experimental data, suggesting the main interactions occurring in the formation of the coamorphous system. PXRD was used to study the physical stability of the coamorphous system under accelerated ICH conditions (40 °C and 75% RH), indicating that the material remained in an amorphous state up to 180 days. The thermogravimetry result of this material showed a good thermal stability up to 153 °C, and differential scanning calorimetry showed that the glass temperature (Tg) was at 70.0 °C. Solubility studies demonstrated an increase in the solubility of RIF by 5.5-fold when compared with its crystalline counterpart. Therefore, this new material presents critical parameters that can be considered in the development of new coamorphous formulations.

Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus (S.) aureus (MSSA) bacteremia remains a global challenge, despite the availability of antibiotics. Primary treatments include β-lactam agents such as cefazolin and flucloxacillin. Ongoing discussions have focused on the potential synergistic effects of combining these agents with rifampicin or fosfomycin to combat infections associated with biofilm formation. Managing staphylococcal infections is challenging due to antibacterial resistance, biofilms, and S. aureus\'s ability to invade and replicate within host cells. Intracellular invasion shields the bacteria from antibacterial agents and the immune system, often leading to incomplete bacterial clearance and chronic infections. Additionally, S. aureus can assume a dormant phenotype, known as the small colony variant (SCV), further complicating eradication and promoting persistence. This study investigated the impact of antibiotic combinations on the persistence of S. aureus 6850 and its stable small colony variant (SCV strain JB1) focusing on intracellular survival and biofilm formation. The results from the wild-type strain 6850 demonstrate that β-lactams combined with RIF effectively eliminated biofilms and intracellular bacteria but tend to select for SCVs in planktonic culture and host cells. Higher antibiotic concentrations were associated with an increase in the zeta potential of S. aureus, suggesting reduced membrane permeability to antimicrobials. When using the stable SCV mutant strain JB1, antibiotic combinations with rifampicin successfully cleared planktonic bacteria and biofilms but failed to eradicate intracellular bacteria. Given these findings, it is reasonable to report that β-lactams combined with rifampicin represent the optimal treatment for MSSA bacteremia. However, caution is warranted when employing this treatment over an extended period, as it may elevate the risk of selecting for small colony variants (SCVs) and, consequently, promoting bacterial persistence.

UNASSIGNED: Previous studies demonstrated the efficacy of a rifampicin-based regimen in the treatment of acute staphylococcal periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) treated with surgical debridement. However, evidence is lacking to support the use of rifampicin in cases where the implant is exchanged during revision.
UNASSIGNED: We included all consecutive cases of staphylococcal PJIs treated from January 2013 to December 2018 with revision surgery in this international, retrospective, multicenter observational cohort study. PJI was defined according to the European Bone and Joint Infection Society diagnostic criteria. A relapse or reinfection during follow-up, the need for antibiotic suppressive therapy, the need for implant removal, and PJI-related death were defined as clinical failure. Cases without reimplantation or with follow-up <12 months were excluded.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 375 cases were included in the final analysis, including 124 1-stage exchanges (33.1%) and 251 2-stage exchanges (66.9%). Of those, 101 cases failed (26.9%). There was no statistically significant difference in failure of patients receiving rifampicin (22.5%, 42/187) and those not receiving rifampicin (31.4%, 59/188; P = .051). A subanalysis of chronic PJIs treated by 2-stage exchange arthroplasty demonstrated a lower failure rate in cases treated with rifampicin (15%) compared with the no-rifampicin group (35.5%; P = .005). In this subgroup, the use of rifampicin and an antibiotic holiday of >2 weeks were independent predictors of clinical success (odds ratio [OR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.88; and OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.90; respectively).
UNASSIGNED: Combination treatment with rifampicin increases treatment success in patients with chronic staphylococcal PJI treated with 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.

We evaluated dolutegravir pharmacokinetics in infants with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) receiving dolutegravir twice daily (BID) with rifampicin-based tuberculosis (TB) treatment compared with once daily (OD) without rifampicin.
Infants with HIV aged 1-12 months, weighing ≥3 kg, and receiving dolutegravir BID with rifampicin or OD without rifampicin were eligible. Six blood samples were taken over 12 (BID) or 24 hours (OD). Dolutegravir pharmacokinetic parameters, HIV viral load (VL) data, and adverse events (AEs) were reported.
Twenty-seven of 30 enrolled infants had evaluable pharmacokinetic curves. The median (interquartile range) age was 7.1 months (6.1-9.9), weight was 6.3 kg (5.6-7.2), 21 (78%) received rifampicin, and 11 (41%) were female. Geometric mean ratios comparing dolutegravir BID with rifampicin versus OD without rifampicin were area under curve (AUC)0-24h 0.91 (95% confidence interval, .59-1.42), Ctrough 0.95 (0.57-1.59), Cmax 0.87 (0.57-1.33). One infant (5%) receiving rifampicin versus none without rifampicin had dolutegravir Ctrough <0.32 mg/L, and none had Ctrough <0.064 mg/L. The dolutegravir metabolic ratio (dolutegravir-glucuronide AUC/dolutegravir AUC) was 2.3-fold higher in combination with rifampicin versus without rifampicin. Five of 82 reported AEs were possibly related to rifampicin or dolutegravir and resolved without treatment discontinuation. Upon TB treatment completion, HIV viral load was <1000 copies/mL in 76% and 100% of infants and undetectable in 35% and 20% of infants with and without rifampicin, respectively.
Dolutegravir BID in infants receiving rifampicin resulted in adequate dolutegravir exposure, supporting this treatment approach for infants with HIV-TB coinfection.