Skip Navigation LinksHome > August 2002 - Volume 29 - Issue 8 > A Randomized, Comparative Pilot Study of Azithromycin Versus...
Sexually Transmitted Diseases:
Article

A Randomized, Comparative Pilot Study of Azithromycin Versus Benzathine Penicillin G for Treatment of Early Syphilis

HOOK, EDWARD W. III, MD*†; MARTIN, DAVID H. MD‡§; STEPHENS, JOAN RN†; SMITH, BARBARA S. RNP‡§; SMITH, KIM MT (ASCP)*

Free Access
Article Outline
Collapse Box

Author Information

From *The University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine and

†Jefferson County Department of Health, Birmingham, Alabama; the

‡Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans; and

§Delgado Clinic, New Orleans Health Department, New Orleans, Louisiana

The authors thank Dr. Michael St. Louis and Mr. Jack Spencer of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for their support and advice in the initiation of the study; clinicians and disease intervention specialists at the Jefferson County and New Orleans Health Departments for referral of study participants; Laura H. Bachmann, MD, MPH, David Brown, PhD, Charity M. Richey, MPH, and Marga Jones, MSHI, for data management and statistical support; Dr. Raymond Johnson of Pfizer Global Research and Development for assistance in obtaining medications and review of the manuscript; Jane R. Schwebke, MD, for advice in manuscript preparation; and Carol Laningham and Sharron Hagy for assistance in manuscript preparation.

Supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention through grants to the Alabama and Louisiana State Health Departments and by donations of medication by Pfizer, Inc., and Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceuticals. Drs. Hook and Martin have each received research grant support and honoraria from Pfizer.

Reprint requests: Edward W. Hook, III, MD, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, 703 19th Street South, 242 Zeigler Research Building, Birmingham, AL 35294-0007. E-mail: ehook@uab.edu

Received for publication August 28, 2001,

revised November 16, 2001, and accepted November 20, 2001.

Collapse Box

Abstract

Background: Penicillin is the only medication currently recommended for treatment of early syphilis in non-penicillin-allergic patients. Preliminary data suggest that azithromycin may be effective for syphilis therapy.

Study Design: This was a randomized, comparative pilot study of intramuscular injections of benzathine penicillin G and two oral azithromycin regimens for treatment of syphilis.

Methods: We randomly assigned patients with early syphilis to treatment with either intramuscular injections of 2.4 million units of benzathine penicillin G or azithromycin administered orally, either as a single 2.0-g dose or as two 2.0-g doses given 1 week apart. Serological response to therapy was evaluated at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months following therapy. Participants whose rapid plasma reagin (RPR) test became nonreactive or whose RPR titer decreased ≥2 dilutions were classified as responding to therapy. When serological tests did not show a response to therapy, the treatment was classified as a failure if RPR titers increased ≥2 dilutions. Nonresponders were those whose serologic titers remained within ±1 dilution of the initial RPR titer.

Results: Cumulative response rates were as follows: benzathine penicillin G, 86% (12 of 14); azithromycin, 2.0-g single dose, 94% (16 of 17); and azithromycin, two 2.0-g doses given 1 week apart, 83% (24 of 29). Therapy failed for one patient treated with benzathine penicillin and one patient treated with the two-dose azithromycin regimen, whereas in six patients the clinical manifestations of infection resolved but there was no serological response.

Conclusion: Oral therapy with 2.0 g of azithromycin as a single dose or as two doses 1 week apart is a promising alternative to therapy with benzathine penicillin G for syphilis and should be studied further.

DESPITE A MORE THAN 80% DECREASE in cases since 1990, 1 in the United States early (primary, secondary, and early latent) syphilis continues to be among the top 10 reportable infectious diseases and is more common than in most other developed nations. In October 1999, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Atlanta, GA) announced a campaign to eliminate syphilis transmission in the United States by the year 2005. 2,3 Key elements of this campaign include enhanced disease surveillance, efforts to strengthen partnerships with involved communities, rapid interventional responses to new and continuing outbreaks, health promotion, and expanded clinical and laboratory services.

New, easy to use, effective therapeutic agents could also assist in syphilis control efforts. At present, only intramuscular injections of benzathine penicillin G or (for patients who are allergic to penicillin) a 14-day course of oral doxycycline or tetracycline is recommended for treatment of early syphilis. 4,5 The recommended penicillin regimen has the advantage of being single-dose therapy, but it requires injection of a relatively large volume (4 ml) of medication and may not be used for the nearly 10% of patients who report penicillin allergy. 6,7 For penicillin-allergic patients the doxycycline and tetracycline regimens may be less effective than penicillin, create concerns about compliance with the medication, and are not recommended for treatment of pregnant patients.

Azithromycin is an azalide antimicrobial agent with a long (68-hour) half-life that has been used as oral single-dose therapy for sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) including chlamydial infections, 8 nongonococcal urethritis, 9 chancroid, 10 and gonorrhea. 11 The drug has been shown to be effective in multiple doses for treatment of experimental syphilis in rabbits 12 and in a small number of patients with early syphilis. 13 In addition, a pilot study suggests that a single 1.0 g oral dose may be effective for syphilis prevention in persons recently exposed to infected sex partners (incubating syphilis). 14

To begin to address the continuing need for alternatives to currently recommended therapy, we performed a pilot study evaluating 2.0 g of azithromycin, administered orally as either a single dose or as two doses one week apart for treatment of patients with early syphilis.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Methods

Patients with early syphilis at STD clinics in Birmingham, Alabama, and New Orleans, Louisiana, were referred to the investigators for evaluation and possible enrollment in the study. They were eligible for study participation if they had early (primary, secondary, or early latent) syphilis.

For this study, primary syphilis was defined on the basis of positive dark-field microscopy for Treponema pallidum on lesion exudate. Secondary syphilis was defined as a clinically typical or dark-field-positive cutaneous eruption and rapid plasma reagin (RPR) titer ≥1:8, and a reactive microhemagglutination T pallidum (MHA-TP)test or fluorescent treponemal antibody–absorption (FTA-ABS) test. Early latent syphilis was defined as a reactive RPR test, a reactive MHA-TP or FTA-ABS test, and either a clear history of clinical manifestations typical of primary or secondary syphilis within the past year, health department documentation of exposure to a known case of primary or secondary syphilis diagnosed within the past year, or a negative syphilis serological test within the past year. 4 Additional enrollment criteria included age of ≥18 years and willingness to return for study-related follow-up visits for 1 year.

Exclusion criteria for the study were pregnancy; breast-feeding; allergy to β-lactam or macrolide antibiotics; history of intravenous drug abuse; history of use of antibiotics active against T pallidum or use of an investigational drug in the 30 days preceding enrollment (use of quinolone, sulfonamide, trimethoprim, metronidazole, and spectinomycin antibiotics was allowed); known or suspected coexistent STDs requiring treatment with drugs effective against T pallidum; advanced HIV infection manifested by a history of opportunistic infection; known severe liver or renal disease; and unreliability (as considered likely by the investigators) for participating in the study procedures and prompt follow-up.

This study was reviewed and approved by the institutional review boards of the University of Alabama at Birmingham and Louisiana State University.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Treatment and Follow-Up

Following provision of written informed consent, participants were randomly allocated by means of a computer-generated randomization code to receive one of three treatment regimens: azithromycin, 2.0 g administered as a single oral dose; two 2.0-g oral doses of azithromycin, administered 6 to 8 days apart; or benzathine penicillin G, administered as either 2.4 million units intramuscularly once in Birmingham or twice, 7 days apart, in New Orleans (the latter was the standard treatment for early syphilis in the New Orleans Health Department STD clinics at the time of this study).

Participants were seen at 7 and 14 days after initiation of treatment and then 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after initiation of therapy. At each visit patients provided an interval history of sexual exposure, were clinically evaluated for persistent or recurrent syphilis, and had a serum specimen obtained for syphilis serological testing. Consenting patients who were initially HIV-seronegative were retested for HIV at 6 and 12 months. Urine pregnancy tests were performed for all women at the initial visit.

After therapy, individual participants underwent locally performed serological testing for syphilis, which provided results soon after each visit. For study-related evaluation of therapeutic response, sera were stored frozen and shipped to Birmingham, where all sera for each patient were tested at the same time by a technician masked to all clinical data in order to minimize any potential effect of day-to-day variation in serological test performance. Participants received payment at the time of each study visit to reimburse them for their efforts related to study participation.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Analysis

For evaluation of response to therapy, aliquots of sera were stored, and all serum specimens obtained from each patient over the duration of the study were tested at a single time using RPR (Macro-Vue; Becton Dickinson, Cockeysville, MD) and FTA-ABS tests according to standard procedures. 15 The highest titer measured on day 0, 7, or 14 was used as the baseline titer for evaluation of response to therapy. Response to therapy was determined with use of RPR titer data from the visits in month 3, 6, 9, and 12.

Therapeutic response was defined as follows. Cure was resolution of all signs and symptoms of syphilis, including all suspicious lesions present at baseline, and either a negative RPR titer or a ≥4-fold decrease in RPR titer. Clinical response/serological nonresponse (serofast status) was resolution of signs and symptoms of syphilis present at baseline and either no change in RPR titer or a twofold (one-dilution) decrease or increase in RPR titer. Failure was the appearance of new diagnostic (i.e., dark-field-positive) lesions or a greater than fourfold (two-dilution) increase in RPR titer, without a definite history of interval exposure to an infected sexual partner.

Data were analyzed using SAS (version 8; SAS Institute, Cary, NC), and dichotomous variables were compared using Fisher exact test. For evaluation of differences in the distribution of baseline characteristics or side effects between groups, P values were computed as two-tailed. For evaluation of response to therapy, participants in each treatment group were dichotomously classified as response/nonresponse, and relative risks and 95% CIs were reported as measures of association, with evaluation of the difference between treatment regimens. One-sided P values were calculated for these analyses. For all calculations, P values ≤0.05 were considered significant.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Results

From October 1995 through December 1997, 74 patients with early syphilis were enrolled in the study (Table 1). The average age of participants was 30 years (range, 18–56). Forty-one participants (55%) were male and 69 (93%) were black. At enrollment, 30 patients (41%) had primary syphilis, 24 (32%) had secondary-stage syphilis, and 20 (27%) had early latent syphilis. Seventy-three (97%) of 74 participants had reactive RPR and FTA-ABS tests; a single patient whose RPR/FTA-ABS tests were nonreactive and who was positive for primary syphilis by dark-field microscopy was enrolled. There were no significant differences among the patients in each of the three treatment groups in terms of age, sex, race/ethnicity, and stage of syphilis. Only three study participants (4%) were HIV-seropositive, two of whom received benzathine penicillin G therapy and one of whom received two 2.0-g doses of azithromycin 1 week apart.

Table 1
Table 1
Image Tools

Sixty patients (81%) were followed up for ≥3 months and could be evaluated for response to therapy (benzathine penicillin, 14; azithromycin, single dose, 17; azithromycin, two doses, 29). Seven (33%) of 21 patients treated with benzathine penicillin were nonevaluable because they did not return for follow-up (4 patients) or because of intercurrent use of antibiotics between the time of enrollment and the 3-month follow-up visit (3 patients). Seven (13%) of 53 patients treated with one of the azithromycin regimens were withdrawn from the study before the 3-month follow-up visit: 4 (19%) of 21 in the single-dose azithromycin group and 3 (9%) of 32 in the two-dose azithromycin group. Of these seven azithromycin recipients who were dropped before the 3-month follow-up visit, six were dropped because of failure to keep scheduled follow-up appointments and one was dropped because the tentative diagnosis of early latent syphilis at enrollment could not be verified.

In general, both therapeutic agents were well tolerated. Jarisch–Herxheimer reactions were reported by five (24%) of the penicillin-treated participants and nine (17%) of the azithromycin-treated participants (P = 0.52). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the azithromycin treatment groups. Among participants who returned for at least one follow-up visit, 1 vomited about 45 minutes after his single-dose treatment with azithromycin (this patient remained in the study and was followed for 3 months after therapy, responding with a 5-dilution decrease in RPR titer), and nausea was reported by 7 (13%) of 52 patients who returned for 1- or 2-week follow-up visits; self-limited diarrhea was reported by 5 (10%) of these 52 patients. In contrast, only 1 (5%) of 19 participants who were treated with penicillin and returned for 1- or 2-week follow-up visits reported a gastrointestinal adverse event (nausea). Although patients receiving azithromycin were nearly five times more likely than penicillin recipients to report gastrointestinal side effects, the differences were not significant (relative risk [RR] = 4.75; 95% CI, 0.67–33.9;P = 0.09). In all instances, these adverse events were classified by participants as mild to moderate in severity.

All patients with clinical manifestations of syphilis such as chancres, rashes, or condylomata lata demonstrated clear improvement of lesions at the first follow-up visit, 1 week after therapy. No participant experienced the onset of new or recurrent syphilitic lesions or rashes after therapy. No seroconversions to HIV-1 were noted.

The proportion of patients with serological response to therapy was similar in all three treatment groups. Serological response rates for evaluable participants at each specified follow-up visit are shown in Table 2. When overall response rates for the three groups were tabulated, using the last evaluable date to define response, serological responses were also similar; the majority of patients who did not respond to therapy were classified in the clinical response/serological nonresponse category. Thus, using the last evaluable clinic visits, the overall response rate among benzathine penicillin–treated patients was 86% (12 of 14). One patient dropped from the study after 3 months of follow-up had not achieved a serological response at the time he was dropped, and another patient had a two-dilution increase in RPR titer at the 6-month follow-up visit and was classified as a treatment failure.

Table 2
Table 2
Image Tools

Of the participants treated with azithromycin (2.0 g) on a single occasion, 94% (16 of 17) were found to have attained a serological response to therapy at the time of their last follow-up, a rate not significantly different from the cure rate for the benzathine penicillin treatment group (RR = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.74–1.27;P = 0.75). One participant evaluable through 6 months of therapy did not have a serological response to therapy. Among participants treated with two 2.0-g doses of azithromycin separated by a 1-week interval, 83% (24 of 29) had serologically responded to therapy at the time of their last study follow-up visit (RR for cumulative cure rate in comparison with that for benzathine penicillin: 0.88; 95% CI, 0.72–1.08;P = 0.95).

Of the five participants who did not respond serologically to treatment, four (whose last study visits were in months 3, 6, and 12 [two patients] after initiation of therapy) were classified in the serological nonresponse category, and the fifth was classified in the treatment failure category on the basis of a two-dilution increase in the RPR titer. Both patients classified as treatment failures were retreated with benzathine penicillin G when the serological treatment failure was noted.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Discussion

Penicillin has been the therapy of choice for syphilis since its introduction, and for >30 years the administration of long-acting benzathine penicillin has been the preferred therapy for early syphilis. 5 Single administrations of benzathine penicillin G overcome potential problems related to poor adherence with multiple-dose therapy. In addition, the drug is readily affordable, and it can be utilized for treatment of pregnant women. The discomfort associated with the relatively large-volume, deep intramuscular injection and the relatively high prevalence of self-reported penicillin allergy 6,7 may compromise its use in some settings. The tetracycline and doxycycline regimens recommended for penicillin-allergic patients are somewhat less effective. 4 There is no recommended alternative to penicillin for treatment of syphilis in pregnant women. 4

This pilot study suggests that single-dose oral treatment with 2.0 g of azithromycin may be as effective as benzathine penicillin injections for treatment of early syphilis. In relatively few patients, the outcome of treatment with a single 2.0-g dose of azithromycin or two 2.0-g doses given 1 week apart was not significantly different from the outcome of treatment with benzathine penicillin G in a comparable group of patients. In addition, the serological responses seen in this study were similar to those in a large multicenter syphilis treatment trial in which the same dose of benzathine penicillin was used. 16 Furthermore, there was no significant difference in response rates between patients treated with single doses of azithromycin and those who received two doses of medication a week apart.

Our treatment results are also consistent with those in previous animal studies, 12 in a small study of multiple-dose azithromycin therapy for early syphilis, 13 and in a small randomized trial of azithromycin versus benzathine penicillin for prevention of syphilis in exposed patients. 14 Taken in combination, these results suggest that further evaluation of single doses of azithromycin for syphilis treatment is warranted.

In this study azithromycin therapy was also relatively well tolerated: although 13% of participants noted nausea and 10% reported loose bowel movements following therapy, these difficulties were classified by patients as mild to moderate in severity. Furthermore, none of the 32 participants randomized to receive two 2.0-g doses of azithromycin was hesitant to take the second dose of medication because of previously experienced side effects. Given anecdotal reports that the gastrointestinal side effects associated with azithromycin vary with the formulation of drug ingested (i.e., greater side effects with the sachet formulation than with capsules, which in turn are less-well-tolerated than the currently available tablet formulation), both the rate of gastrointestinal side effects and formulation of drug utilized should be further evaluated in future studies.

Although our results are encouraging, a number of limitations of this pilot study should be acknowledged and considered in future studies. In a study utilizing a rabbit model of early syphilis, 12 similar cure rates were noted for penicillin- and azithromycin-treated rabbits, but experimental syphilitic chancres resolved somewhat more slowly in the azithromycin-treated rabbits. Lesion-resolution rates were only subjectively evaluated in this study and appeared comparable. Nonetheless, careful measurement of lesion resolution should be included in future studies. In addition, although syphilis is associated with increased HIV seroprevalence in the United States, only 3 (4%) of 74 participants in this trial were known to be HIV-coinfected. Thus, further evaluation of azithromycin for treatment of syphilis in patients with HIV infection is also warranted.

It might also be argued that the patients receiving treatment with the different benzathine penicillin regimens used in Birmingham and New Orleans during the time the study was conducted should be considered two comparison groups rather than one. Because no significant differences in penicillin response rates were noted between the two cities (data not shown), we chose to combine the results to increase the size of the comparison group.

Finally, definition of cure is difficult in any study of the treatment of syphilis in humans because of imprecise monitoring of serological response to therapy. Overall, 40 (87%) of the 46 patients in this trial treated with azithromycin had a two-dilution decrease in the syphilis serological test (RPR) titer, the level utilized by the CDC to define therapeutic response. 4 This response rate is comparable to that noted by Rolfs et al. 16 in the only large evaluation of benzathine penicillin as therapy for syphilis in the past 30 years.

That approximately 15% of treated patients do not have meaningful changes in serological test titers for up to 1 year after treatment is troublesome to clinicians. In addition, this relatively high nonresponse rate suggests the need for larger sample sizes in studies designed to have sufficient power to demonstrate that therapeutic regimens are comparable. Although rising serological test titers likely indicate treatment failure, the clinical significance of serological test titers that neither rise nor fall but remain unchanged is unclear and is worthy of further study.

In summary, in this pilot study the response to treatment of early syphilis with azithromycin, 2.0 g, given by mouth as either a single dose or two doses 1 week apart, appeared similar to response rates with recommended doses of benzathine penicillin G. If its efficacy is verified by further study, azithromycin may be the first new agent effective for single-dose treatment of syphilis in >30 years. As such, it has the potential to contribute to the ongoing efforts to eliminate endemic syphilis within the United States.

Back to Top | Article Outline

References

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Primary and secondary syphilis: United States, 1998. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1999; 48: 873–878.

2. Hook EW III. Is elimination of endemic syphilis transmission a realistic goal for the USA? Lancet 1998; 351: 19–21.

3. St. Louis ME, Wasserheit JN. Elimination of syphilis in the United States. Science 1998; 281: 35–36.

4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1998 Guidelines for treatment of sexually transmitted diseases. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1998; 47 (RR-1):1–116.

5. Hook EW III, Marra CM. Acquired syphilis in adults. N Engl J Med 1992; 326: 1060–1069.

6. Lentz JW, Nicholas L. Penicilloyl-polylysine intradermal testing for penicillin hypersensitivity. Br J Vener Dis 1970; 46: 457–460.

7. Gadde J, Spence M, Wheeler B, Adkinson NF. Clinical experience with penicillin skin testing in a large inner-city STD clinic. JAMA 1993; 270: 2456–2463.

8. Martin DH, Mroczkowski TF, Dalu ZA, et al. A controlled trial of a single dose of azithromycin for the treatment of chlamydial urethritis and cervicitis. N Engl J Med 1992; 327: 921–925.

9. Stamm WE, Hicks CB, Martin DH, et al. Azithromycin for empirical treatment of the nongonococcal urethritis syndrome in men: a randomized double-blinded study. JAMA 1995; 274: 545–549.

10. Martin DH, Sargent SJ, Wendel GD, McCormack WM, Spier NA, Johnson RB. Comparison of azithromycin and ceftriaxone for the treatment of chancroid. Clin Infect Dis 1995; 20: 409–414.

11. Handsfield HH, Dalu AZ, Martin DH, et al. Multicenter trial of single-dose azithromycin vs. ceftriaxone in the treatment of uncomplicated gonorrhea. Sex Transm Dis 1994; 21: 107–111.

12. Lukehart SA, Fohn MJ, Baker-Zander SA. Efficacy of azithromycin for therapy of active syphilis in the rabbit model. J Antimicrob Chemother 1990; 25: 91–99.

13. Verdon MS, Handsfield HH, Johnson RB. Pilot study of azithromycin for treatment of primary and secondary syphilis. Clin Infect Dis 1994; 19: 486–488.

14. Hook EW III, Stephens J, Ennis DM. Azithromycin compared with penicillin G benzathine for treatment of incubating syphilis. Ann Intern Med 1999; 131: 434–437.

15. Larsen SA, Pope V, Johnson RE, Kennedy EJ, eds. A Manual of Tests for Syphilis. 9th ed. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association, 1998.

16. Rolfs RT, Joesoef MR, Hendershot EF, et al. A randomized trial of enhanced therapy for early syphilis in patients with and without human immunodeficiency virus infection. N Engl J Med 1997; 337: 307–314.

Cited By:

This article has been cited 49 time(s).

Journal of Clinical Microbiology
Detection of the A2058G and A2059G 23S rRNA Gene Point Mutations Associated with Azithromycin Resistance in Treponema pallidum by Use of a TaqMan Real-Time Multiplex PCR Assay
Chen, CY; Chi, KH; Pillay, A; Nachamkin, E; Su, JR; Ballard, RC
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 51(3): 908-913.
10.1128/JCM.02770-12
CrossRef
Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association
Brief report: Azithromycin treatment failures in syphilis infections - San Francisco, California, 2002-2003 (Reprinted from MMWR, vol 53, pg 197-198, 2004)
Klausner, JD; Engelman, J; Lukehart, SA; Berman, SM; Mitchell, SJ
Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association, 291(): 1692-1693.

Hautarzt
Syphilis treatment. German and international guidelines - a comparison
Schofer, H
Hautarzt, 56(2): 141-150.
10.1007/s00105-004-0870-9
CrossRef
Clinical Microbiology Reviews
Biological basis for syphilis
LaFond, RE; Lukehart, SA
Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 19(1): 29-+.
10.1128/CMR.19.1.29-49.2006
CrossRef
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
Global Challenge of Antibiotic-Resistant Treponema pallidum
Stamm, LV
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 54(2): 583-589.
10.1128/AAC.01095-09
CrossRef
Annals of Emergency Medicine
Update on emerging infections: News from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Chen, JC
Annals of Emergency Medicine, 44(3): 232-233.
10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.06.002
CrossRef
Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association
Update on genital lesions
Rosen, T
Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association, 290(8): 1001-1005.

Sexually Transmitted Diseases
The acceptability and behavioral effects of antibiotic prophylaxis for syphilis prevention
Farley, TA; Cohen, DA; Kahn, RH; Lolis, S; Johnson, G; Martin, DH
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 30(): 844-849.
10.1097/01.OLQ.0000086604.54282.F2
CrossRef
American Family Physician
Screening for syphilis infection: Recommendation statement
Calonge, N
American Family Physician, 70(): 1959-1962.

Journal of Medical Microbiology
Macrolide treatment failure in a case of secondary syphilis: a novel A2059G mutation in the 23S rRNA gene of Treponema pallidum subsp pallidum
Matejkova, P; Flasarova, M; Zakoucka, H; Borek, M; Kremenova, S; Arenberger, P; Woznicova, V; Weinstock, GM; Smajs, D
Journal of Medical Microbiology, 58(6): 832-836.
10.1099/jmm.0.007542-0
CrossRef
Sexually Transmitted Infections
Syphilis in adults
Goh, BT
Sexually Transmitted Infections, 81(6): 448-452.
10.1136/sti.2005.015875
CrossRef
International Journal of Std & AIDS
Response of HIV-infected patients with asymptomatic syphilis to intensive intramuscular therapy with ceftriaxone or procaine penicillin
Smith, NH; Musher, DM; Huang, DB; Rodriguez, PS; Dowell, ME; White, AC
International Journal of Std & AIDS, 15(5): 328-332.

New England Journal of Medicine
Macrolide resistance in Treponema pallidum in the United States and Ireland
Lukehart, SA; Godornes, C; Molini, BJ; Sonnett, P; Hopkins, S; Mulcahy, F; Engelman, J; Mitchell, SJ; Rompalo, AM; Marra, CM; Klausner, JD
New England Journal of Medicine, 351(2): 154-158.

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
Detection of azithromycin resistance in Treponema pallidum by real-time PCR
Pandori, MW; Gordones, C; Castro, L; Engelman, J; Siedner, M; Lukehart, S; Klausner, J
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 51(9): 3425-3430.
10.1128/AAC.00340-07
CrossRef
Sexually Transmitted Infections
Antenatal screening for syphilis
Goh, BT; Thornton, AC
Sexually Transmitted Infections, 83(5): 345-346.
10.1136/sti.2007.026633
CrossRef
Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association
Update on syphilis - Resurgence of an old problem
Golden, MR; Marra, CM; Holmes, KK
Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association, 290(): 1510-1514.

Nature Reviews Microbiology
Disease watch - Focus - Syphilis
Peeling, RW; Mabey, DCW
Nature Reviews Microbiology, 2(6): 448-449.
10.1038/nrmicro911
CrossRef
Annals of Family Medicine
Screening for syphilis infection: Recommendation statement
Berg, AO; Allan, JD; Frame, P; Homer, GJ; Johnson, MS; Klein, JD; Lieu, TA; Orleans, CT; Peipert, JF; Pender, NJ; Siu, AL; Teutsch, SM; Westhoff, C; Woolf, SH
Annals of Family Medicine, 2(4): 362-365.
10.1370/afm.215
CrossRef
New England Journal of Medicine
Single-dose azithromycin versus penicillin G benzathine for the treatment of early syphilis
Riedner, G; Rusizoka, M; Todd, J; Maboko, L; Hoelscher, M; Mmbando, D; Samky, E; Lyamuya, E; Mabey, D; Grosskurth, H; Hayes, R
New England Journal of Medicine, 353(): 1236-1244.

Dermatologic Clinics
Antibiotic Use in Sexually Transmissible Diseases
Rosen, T; Vandergriff, T; Harting, M
Dermatologic Clinics, 27(1): 49-+.
10.1016/j.det.2008.07.002
CrossRef
Lancet
Avoiding HIV and dying of syphilis
Peeling, RW; Mabey, D; Fitzgerald, DW; Watson-Jones, D
Lancet, 364(): 1561-1563.

Hautarzt
Syphilis. Guideline of the DSTDG on diagnosis and therapy
Schofer, H; Brockmeyer, NH; Hagedorn, HJ; Hamouda, O; Handrick, W; Krause, W; Marcus, U; Munstermann, D; Petry, KU; Prange, H; Potthoff, A; Gross, G
Hautarzt, 56(): 1084-+.
10.1007/s00105-005-1044-0
CrossRef
Annals of Emergency Medicine
Update on emerging infections: News from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - Commentary
[Anon]
Annals of Emergency Medicine, 44(3): 233-234.
10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.06.003
CrossRef
Infectious Disease Clinics of North America
Macrolides and ketolides: azithromycin, clarithromycin, telithromycin
Zuckerman, JM
Infectious Disease Clinics of North America, 18(3): 621-+.
10.1016/j.idc.2004.04.010
CrossRef
International Journal of Std & AIDS
The impact of syphilis mass treatment one year later: self-reported behaviour change among participants
Rekart, ML; Wong, T; Wong, E; Hutchinson, K; Ogilvie, G
International Journal of Std & AIDS, 16(8): 571-578.

Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy
Syphilis treatment: old and new
Dayan, L; Ooi, C
Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy, 6(): 2271-2280.
10.1517/14656566.6.13.2271
CrossRef
American Family Physician
Prevention and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases: An update
Van Vranken, M
American Family Physician, 76(): 1827-1832.

Clinical Infectious Diseases
Current controversies in the management of adult syphilis
Stoner, BP
Clinical Infectious Diseases, 44(): S130-S146.
10.1086/511426
CrossRef
Enfermedades Infecciosas Y Microbiologia Clinica
Up to date in sexually transmitted infections: epidemiology, diagnostic approaches and treatments
Vazquez, F; Otero, L; Ordas, J; Junquera, ML; Varela, JA
Enfermedades Infecciosas Y Microbiologia Clinica, 22(7): 392-411.

International Journal of Std & AIDS
Azithromycin vs. benzathine penicillin G for early syphilis: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Bai, ZG; Yang, KH; Liu, YL; Tian, JH; Ma, B; Mi, DH; Jiang, L; Tan, JY; Gai, QY
International Journal of Std & AIDS, 19(4): 217-221.
10.1258/ijsa.2007.007245
CrossRef
Journal of Infectious Diseases
A Phase III Equivalence Trial of Azithromycin versus Benzathine Penicillin for Treatment of Early Syphilis
Hook, EW; Behets, F; Van Damme, K; Ravelomanana, N; Leone, P; Sena, AC; Martin, D; Langley, C; McNeil, L; Wolff, M
Journal of Infectious Diseases, 201(): 1729-1735.
10.1086/652239
CrossRef
Acta Dermato-Venereologica
Clarithromycin Treatment Failure due to Macrolide Resistance in Treponema pallidum in a Patient with Primary Syphilis
Woznicova, V; Matejkova, P; Flasarova, M; Zakoucka, H; Dastychova, E; Valisova, Z; Smajs, D
Acta Dermato-Venereologica, 90(2): 206-207.
10.2340/00015555-0774
CrossRef
Canadian Medical Association Journal
Canadian guidelines on sexually transmitted infections, 2006
MacDonald, N; Wong, T
Canadian Medical Association Journal, 176(2): 175-176.
10.1503/cmaj.061616
CrossRef
Canadian Medical Association Journal
Syphilis: Have we dropped the ball?
Weir, E; Fishman, D
Canadian Medical Association Journal, 167(): 1267-1268.

Canadian Medical Association Journal
CASES Neurocognitive and psychiatric changes as the initial presentation of neurosyphilis
Costiniuk, CT; MacPherson, PA
Canadian Medical Association Journal, 185(6): 499-503.
10.1503/cmaj.121146
CrossRef
Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases
Azithromycin resistance in Treponema pallidum
Katz, KA; Klausner, JD
Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases, 21(1): 83-91.
10.1097/QCO.0b013e3282f44772
PDF (142) | CrossRef
Current Opinion in Pediatrics
Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines
Burstein, GR; Workowski, KA
Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 15(4): 391-397.

PDF (346)
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Syphilis Epidemiology and Clinical Outcomes in HIV-Infected and HIV-Uninfected Patients in Kaiser Permanente Northern California
Horberg, MA; Ranatunga, DK; Quesenberry, CP; Klein, DB; Silverberg, MJ
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 37(1): 53-58.
10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3181b6f0cc
PDF (224) | CrossRef
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
The Cost-Effectiveness of Single-Dose Azithromycin for Treatment of Incubating Syphilis
BLANDFORD, JM; GIFT, TL
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 30(6): 502-508.

PDF (694)
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Responding to a Community Outbreak of Syphilis by Targeting Sex Partner Meeting Location:: An Example of a Risk-Space Intervention
Michaud, JM; Ellen, J; Johnson, SM; Rompalo, A
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 30(7): 533-538.

PDF (447)
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Occurrence of Congenital Syphilis After Maternal Treatment With Azithromycin During Pregnancy
Zhou, P; Qian, Y; Xu, J; Gu, Z; Liao, K
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 34(7): 472-474.
10.1097/01.olq.0000246314.35047.91
PDF (388) | CrossRef
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Cost-Effectiveness of Rapid Point-of-Care Prenatal Syphilis Screening in Sub-Saharan Africa
Rydzak, CE; Goldie, SJ
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 35(9): 775-784.
10.1097/OLQ.0b013e318176196d
PDF (835) | CrossRef
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
The Public Health Response to Epidemic Syphilis, San Francisco, 1999–2004
Klausner, JD; Kent, CK; Wong, W; McCright, J; Katz, MH
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 32(): S11-S18.
10.1097/01.olq.0000180456.15861.92
PDF (482) | CrossRef
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Evaluation of Azithromycin Resistance in Treponema pallidum Specimens From Madagascar
Damme, KV; Behets, F; Ravelomanana, N; Godornes, C; Khan, M; Randrianasolo, B; Rabenja, NL; Lukehart, S; Cohen, M; Hook, E
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 36(12): 775-776.
10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3181bd11dd
PDF (90) | CrossRef
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Azithromycin Resistance in Treponema pallidum
Mabey, D
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 36(12): 777-778.
10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3181bd0fdd
PDF (81) | CrossRef
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Effectiveness of Syphilis Treatment Using Azithromycin and/or Benzathine Penicillin in Rakai, Uganda
Kiddugavu, MG; Kiwanuka, N; Wawer, MJ; Serwadda, D; Sewankambo, NK; Wabwire-Mangen, F; Makumbi, F; Li, X; Reynolds, SJ; Quinn, TC; Gray, RH; the Rakai Study Group,
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 32(1): 1-6.

PDF (208)
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Misclassification of the Stages of Syphilis: Implications for Surveillance
Peterman, TA; Kahn, RH; Ciesielski, CA; Ortiz-Rios, E; Furness, BW; Blank, S; Schillinger, JA; Gunn, RA; MD, MT; Berman, SM
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 32(3): 144-149.

PDF (213)
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Syphilis Treatment and HIV Infection in a Population-Based Study of Persons at High Risk for Sexually Transmitted Disease/HIV Infection in Lima, Peru
Long, CM; Klausner, JD; Leon, S; Jones, FR; Giron, M; Cuadros, J; Pajuelo, J; Caceres, C; Coates, TJ; the NIMH Collaborative HIV/STD Prevention Trial Group,
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 33(3): 151-155.
10.1097/01.olq.0000204506.06551.5f
PDF (188) | CrossRef
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Are Targeted HIV Prevention Activities Cost-Effective in High Prevalence Settings? Results From a Sexually Transmitted Infection Treatment Project for Sex Workers in Johannesburg, South Africa
Rees, H; Watts, C; Vickerman, P; Terris-Prestholt, F; Delany, S; Kumaranayake, L
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 33(10): S122-S132.
10.1097/01.olq.0000221351.55097.36
PDF (524) | CrossRef
Back to Top | Article Outline

© Copyright 2002 American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association

Login