Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Fluoroquinolone-based regimens increase therapeutic failure risk in patients with brucellosisFluoroquinolones show higher failure rates in treating brucellosis

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that fluoroquinolone-based regimens are associated with higher therapeutic failure in adult brucellosis.

This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of fluoroquinolone-based regimens compared to standard non-fluoroquinolone regimens, such as doxycycline with streptomycin or rifampicin, in 602 patients with brucellosis. The study aimed to determine the clinical utility of incorporating fluoroquinolones into treatment protocols.

The analysis found that fluoroquinolone-based regimens were associated with a significantly higher risk of therapeutic failure (RR=2.11; 95% CI: 1.26-3.51; P=0.004). Additionally, patients on these regimens experienced a longer time to defervescence (MD=1.20 days; 95% CI: 0.66-1.74; P<0.001). While a higher risk of relapse was observed (RR=1.88), the result did not reach statistical significance (95% CI: 0.94-3.74; P=0.07). No statistically significant difference was found regarding adverse events (RR=0.62; 95% CI: 0.29-1.33; P=0.22).

The authors note low certainty of evidence regarding relapse and adverse events. Due to the increased risk of failure and delayed defervescence, the findings do not support the routine use of fluoroquinolones as first-line therapy for adult brucellosis. Clinical decisions should prioritize established non-fluoroquinolone regimens.

How this fits prior evidence

This meta-analysis addresses a gap in determining the role of fluoroquinolones in brucellosis treatment. While previous coverage noted that fluoroquinolone-resistant (FQR) rectal bacterial colonization is associated with a higher risk of post-transrectal biopsy infection, this study specifically evaluates fluoroquinolones as a primary treatment component for brucellosis. The findings confirm that fluoroquinolone-based regimens are associated with a higher risk of therapeutic failure (RR=2.11) and longer time to defervescence (MD=1.20 days) compared to standard regimens.

Brucellosis is a serious infection that can linger in the body, making it hard to treat effectively. Doctors often have to choose the right combination of antibiotics to clear the infection. Recent data looked at how fluoroquinolones—a specific class of antibiotics—performed compared to standard treatments like doxycycline combined with streptomycin or rifampicin.

The analysis of 602 patients found that those on fluoroquinolone-based regimens faced a higher risk of treatment failure. These patients also took longer to reach defervescence, which is the point where a fever breaks. While the data showed a possible trend toward more relapses with fluoroquinolones, the evidence for that specific outcome was not strong enough to be certain.

Safety was another factor in the study. There was no significant difference in the number of adverse events between the two treatment groups. However, because the evidence for side effects and relapses was not very certain, these results should be viewed with caution. The findings suggest that fluoroquinolones may not be the best first-line choice for treating adult brucellosis.

What this means for you:
Fluoroquinolones may lead to higher treatment failure and longer recovery times for patients with brucellosis.

Common questions

Are fluoroquinolones as effective as other antibiotics for brucellosis?

The study found that fluoroquinolone-based regimens had a higher risk of treatment failure compared to standard treatments like doxycycline with streptomycin or rifampicin. Because of this, the findings do not support using fluoroquinolones as the first-line therapy for adults with brucellosis.

How long does it take for a fever to break with these treatments?

Patients treated with fluoroquinolone-based regimens took an average of 1.20 days longer to reach defervescence, which is the point when a fever breaks. This result was statistically significant, meaning the difference was unlikely to be due to chance.

Are there more side effects with fluoroquinolones?

The study found no statistically significant difference in the number of adverse events between fluoroquinolone-based regimens and standard treatments. However, the researchers noted that the certainty of evidence regarding these side effects was low.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
Follow-up1.8 mo
PublishedOct 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
INTRODUCTION: Brucellosis is a major zoonotic infection worldwide, with the highest burden reported in the Mediterranean region. The therapeutic role of fluoroquinolones in this disease continues to be controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fluoroquinolone-containing regimens compared with standard non-fluoroquinolone regimens for the treatment of human brucellosis. METHODS: In accordance with PRISMA recommendations, this systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of fluoroquinolone-based regimens for treating brucellosis. It was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251142019). A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was carried out, including studies published through August 2025. Randomized controlled trials comparing fluoroquinolones with conventional therapies (such as doxycycline with streptomycin or rifampicin) were included. Therapeutic failure, relapse, adverse events, and time to defervescence were the main outcomes. To compute pooled risk ratios and mean differences with 95%CIs, data were analyzed using STATA v18. The GRADE method and the RoB 2 tool were used to evaluate the risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: The analysis comprised 9 clinical studies with 602 brucellosis patients. When compared to standard regimens, fluoroquinolone-based regimens were linked to a significantly higher risk of therapeutic failure (RR = 2.11, 95% CI: 1.26-3.51; P = 0.004) and a higher, though not statistically significant, risk of relapse (RR = 1.88, 95% CI: 0.94-3.74; P = 0.07). No statistically significant between-study heterogeneity was observed for either outcome (I² = 0%). Subgroup analyses showed a significantly increased risk of therapeutic failure in patients with uncomplicated brucellosis and in studies with treatment durations >8 weeks, although between-subgroup differences were not statistically significant. On the other hand, no statistically significant difference in adverse events was observed between fluoroquinolone-based and standard regimens under the random-effects model (RR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.29-1.33; P = 0.22). Although the point estimate favored fluoroquinolone-based regimens, the confidence interval included the null effect. Fluoroquinolone-based regimens were also associated with a significantly longer time to defervescence compared with standard regimens (MD = 1.20 days, 95% CI: 0.66-1.74; P < 0.001). The certainty of evidence was moderate for therapeutic failure, and time to defervescence, and low for relapse and adverse events according to the GRADE evaluation. CONCLUSION: Compared with conventional doxycycline-based combinations, fluoroquinolone-based regimens were associated with a higher risk of therapeutic failure and longer time to defervescence, while the overall risk of relapse did not differ significantly. No significant difference in adverse events was observed with the random-effects model, although the point estimate favored fluoroquinolone-based regimens. Overall, these findings do not support the routine use of fluoroquinolones as first-line therapy for adult brucellosis. Further well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.