Comparison of cidofovir and the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine in the treatment of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis

Ryan Meacham, Jerome W. Thompson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We conducted a retrospective study of the use of cidofovir and the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccineas adjunctive treatments to lesion debridement in patients with recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP). Our study population was made up of 15 children-7 boys and 8 girls, aged 1 to 16 years at diagnosis (mean: 6.2)-with pathologically confirmed RRP who had been followed for at least 1 year. In addition to demographic data, we compiled information on disease severity, the type of adjunctive treatment administered to each patient, the frequency of debridements, the length of observation, and remission rates. Of the 15 patients, 5 had been treated with cidofovirafter debridement (cidofovir-only group), 6 were treated with MMR vaccine after debridement (MMR-only group), 3 were treated with one and later switched to the other based on parental preference, and 1 received neither treatment, only debridement. The initial mean Derkay disease severity scores were 12.6 for the cidofovir-only group and 11.0 for the MMR-only group (p = 0.61). The cidofovir-only patients underwent an average of 11.8 adjunctive treatments and the MMR-only patients an average of 17.7 (p = 0.33). The average duration of observation was 44.0 months in the cidofovir-only group and 64.7 months in the MMR-only group (p = 0.29). Remission rates were 20% in the cidofovir-only group and 50% in the MMR-only group (p = 0.54). Our study found insufficient evidence of any significant differences between cidofovir and the MMR vaccinein terms of the number and frequency of adjunctive treatments and the rates of remission.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)69-74
Number of pages6
JournalEar, Nose and Throat Journal
Volume96
Issue number2
StatePublished - 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine
Mumps
Rubella
Measles
Debridement
Therapeutics
Observation
Recurrent respiratory papillomatosis
cidofovir
Retrospective Studies
Demography

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Comparison of cidofovir and the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine in the treatment of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis. / Meacham, Ryan; Thompson, Jerome W.

In: Ear, Nose and Throat Journal, Vol. 96, No. 2, 2017, p. 69-74.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c7a2187b4e8c424ba40dd01db27c1f01,
title = "Comparison of cidofovir and the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine in the treatment of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis",
abstract = "We conducted a retrospective study of the use of cidofovir and the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccineas adjunctive treatments to lesion debridement in patients with recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP). Our study population was made up of 15 children-7 boys and 8 girls, aged 1 to 16 years at diagnosis (mean: 6.2)-with pathologically confirmed RRP who had been followed for at least 1 year. In addition to demographic data, we compiled information on disease severity, the type of adjunctive treatment administered to each patient, the frequency of debridements, the length of observation, and remission rates. Of the 15 patients, 5 had been treated with cidofovirafter debridement (cidofovir-only group), 6 were treated with MMR vaccine after debridement (MMR-only group), 3 were treated with one and later switched to the other based on parental preference, and 1 received neither treatment, only debridement. The initial mean Derkay disease severity scores were 12.6 for the cidofovir-only group and 11.0 for the MMR-only group (p = 0.61). The cidofovir-only patients underwent an average of 11.8 adjunctive treatments and the MMR-only patients an average of 17.7 (p = 0.33). The average duration of observation was 44.0 months in the cidofovir-only group and 64.7 months in the MMR-only group (p = 0.29). Remission rates were 20{\%} in the cidofovir-only group and 50{\%} in the MMR-only group (p = 0.54). Our study found insufficient evidence of any significant differences between cidofovir and the MMR vaccinein terms of the number and frequency of adjunctive treatments and the rates of remission.",
author = "Ryan Meacham and Thompson, {Jerome W.}",
year = "2017",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "96",
pages = "69--74",
journal = "Ear, Nose and Throat Journal",
issn = "0145-5613",
publisher = "Medquest Communications LLC",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of cidofovir and the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine in the treatment of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis

AU - Meacham, Ryan

AU - Thompson, Jerome W.

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - We conducted a retrospective study of the use of cidofovir and the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccineas adjunctive treatments to lesion debridement in patients with recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP). Our study population was made up of 15 children-7 boys and 8 girls, aged 1 to 16 years at diagnosis (mean: 6.2)-with pathologically confirmed RRP who had been followed for at least 1 year. In addition to demographic data, we compiled information on disease severity, the type of adjunctive treatment administered to each patient, the frequency of debridements, the length of observation, and remission rates. Of the 15 patients, 5 had been treated with cidofovirafter debridement (cidofovir-only group), 6 were treated with MMR vaccine after debridement (MMR-only group), 3 were treated with one and later switched to the other based on parental preference, and 1 received neither treatment, only debridement. The initial mean Derkay disease severity scores were 12.6 for the cidofovir-only group and 11.0 for the MMR-only group (p = 0.61). The cidofovir-only patients underwent an average of 11.8 adjunctive treatments and the MMR-only patients an average of 17.7 (p = 0.33). The average duration of observation was 44.0 months in the cidofovir-only group and 64.7 months in the MMR-only group (p = 0.29). Remission rates were 20% in the cidofovir-only group and 50% in the MMR-only group (p = 0.54). Our study found insufficient evidence of any significant differences between cidofovir and the MMR vaccinein terms of the number and frequency of adjunctive treatments and the rates of remission.

AB - We conducted a retrospective study of the use of cidofovir and the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccineas adjunctive treatments to lesion debridement in patients with recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP). Our study population was made up of 15 children-7 boys and 8 girls, aged 1 to 16 years at diagnosis (mean: 6.2)-with pathologically confirmed RRP who had been followed for at least 1 year. In addition to demographic data, we compiled information on disease severity, the type of adjunctive treatment administered to each patient, the frequency of debridements, the length of observation, and remission rates. Of the 15 patients, 5 had been treated with cidofovirafter debridement (cidofovir-only group), 6 were treated with MMR vaccine after debridement (MMR-only group), 3 were treated with one and later switched to the other based on parental preference, and 1 received neither treatment, only debridement. The initial mean Derkay disease severity scores were 12.6 for the cidofovir-only group and 11.0 for the MMR-only group (p = 0.61). The cidofovir-only patients underwent an average of 11.8 adjunctive treatments and the MMR-only patients an average of 17.7 (p = 0.33). The average duration of observation was 44.0 months in the cidofovir-only group and 64.7 months in the MMR-only group (p = 0.29). Remission rates were 20% in the cidofovir-only group and 50% in the MMR-only group (p = 0.54). Our study found insufficient evidence of any significant differences between cidofovir and the MMR vaccinein terms of the number and frequency of adjunctive treatments and the rates of remission.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85013301804&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85013301804&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 28231366

AN - SCOPUS:85013301804

VL - 96

SP - 69

EP - 74

JO - Ear, Nose and Throat Journal

JF - Ear, Nose and Throat Journal

SN - 0145-5613

IS - 2

ER -