Macrolides, Ketolides, and Clindamycin

Russell E. Lewis

2026-07-08

Macrolides, Ketolides and Clindamycin

Russell E. Lewis, Pharm.D
Associate Professor of Infectious Diseases (MEDS-10/B)

russelledward.lewis@unipd.it
https://github.com/Russlewisbo
Slides and course materials: www.idpadova.com

Outline

• Chemistry, mechanism of action, and the 50S ribosome
• The three resistance mechanisms (and why MLS_B matters)
• Pharmacology of erythromycin, clarithromycin, azithromycin
• Cardiac safety — what Ray et al. taught us
• Antimicrobial spectrum and key clinical uses
• Ketolides — telithromycin and the solithromycin story
• Clindamycin — anaerobes, MRSA, and toxin suppression
• Practical pearls for the consult service

Chemistry & Mechanism

The Macrolide family

erythromycin base

• 14-member ring: erythromycin, clarithromycin, roxithromycin
• 15-member ring (azalide): azithromycin — nitrogen inserted into the lactone
• 16-member ring: spiramycin, josamycin, tylosin (veterinary)
• Ketolides: 14-member macrolactone with a 3-keto group instead of L-cladinose at C-3
  • Telithromycin, solithromycin
• Lincosamides: not macrolides chemically (no macrolactone) but share the ribosomal target — clindamycin, lincomycin

Mechanism of action

A2058 is the keystone. It’s the same nucleotide modified by erm methylases and mutated in azithromycin-resistant Mycoplasma and gonorrhea. Knowing where the drug sits on the ribosome is what lets you predict every resistance mechanism we’re about to discuss [1].

Bacteriostatic vs. bactericidal

• All four agents (erythromycin, clarithromycin, azithromycin, clindamycin) are protein-synthesis inhibitors → classically bacteriostatic
• Become bactericidal under specific conditions:
  • High drug concentration relative to MIC
  • Organisms in active growth phase
  • Low inoculum
• Clinical relevance: avoid as monotherapy for endocarditis, neutropenic infections, meningitis (with rare specific exceptions)
  • However, perception of less effective “static” activity may actually be a consequence of macrolide PK- (large Vd, low bloodstream concentrations)

The static/cidal distinction is over-emphasized in textbooks, but it does matter for endovascular infections and immunocompromised hosts. Macrolides are not endocarditis drugs.

Resistance Mechanisms

Three resistance mechanisms — Overview

Mechanism	Effect	Cross-resistance
Target site modification (Erm methylation, ribosomal mutation)	23S A2058 methylated/mutated	Full MLSB (macrolides + lincosamides + streptogramin B)
Efflux (Mef, Msr)	Drug pumped out of cell	Macrolides only (M phenotype) — clindamycin spared
Enzymatic inactivation (esterases, phosphotransferases)	Drug destroyed	Variable; uncommon clinically

Three mechanisms — but the one that haunts the consult service is target-site methylation, because of MLS_B cross-resistance. The efflux phenotype is more common in pneumococci and spares clindamycin. Enzymatic destruction is rarely clinically important except in some Enterobacterales [1,2].

Target methylation — the erm Genes

erm is the single most important resistance determinant for this drug class. The gene is mobile, the modification is one chemical step, and it knocks out every drug that touches A2058 — that’s why clindamycin loses too even though it’s not a macrolide [2].

Constitutive vs. inducible MLS_B

• Constitutive (cMLS_B): erm expressed all the time → resistant to erythromycin AND clindamycin on initial testing
• Inducible (iMLS_B): erm transcript untranslated until a macrolide (or partial agonist) is encountered → appears erythromycin-resistant, clindamycin-susceptible on AST
• Risk: if you treat an iMLS_B isolate with clindamycin, erm gets induced → emergent resistance and clinical failure

This is the classic teaching pearl. AST will say “clindamycin susceptible” but the patient relapses, and you reculture and find a constitutively resistant organism. The mechanism is real — Siberry described it in MRSA, but it applies equally to GAS [3].

The D-test

• Disk-diffusion screen for inducible clindamycin resistance
• Erythromycin disk placed adjacent to clindamycin disk on the plate
• If erythromycin induces erm expression, the zone of clindamycin inhibition gets flattened on the side facing the erythromycin disk — forming a “D” shape
• D-test positive → report clindamycin as resistant despite the susceptible-looking MIC
• Routine in clinical micro labs for staphylococci and group A strep

If the report says “D-test positive” or “inducible clindamycin resistance” — clindamycin is OFF the table for that isolate, even though the MIC reading was in the susceptible range [3,4].

Efflux — mef and msr

• mefA / mefE (Streptococcus, found in pneumococci): pumps 14- and 15-member macrolides out of the cell
• msrA (Staphylococcus): ATP-binding cassette pump; efflux of macrolides and streptogramin B
• M phenotype: erythromycin/azithromycin-resistant but clindamycin- and 16-member macrolide-susceptible
• Usually lower-level resistance than MLS_B — high inocula can overwhelm the pump

The M phenotype is the “clindamycin-sparing” pattern. If a pneumococcal pharyngitis or skin isolate comes back erythromycin-R / clindamycin-S, that’s most likely efflux — and clindamycin will work without need for a D-test in pneumococci (the D-test is for staphylococci and GAS).

Ribosomal mutations and atypicals

• Single-step point mutations at 23S rRNA A2058 / A2059 confer high-level macrolide resistance
• Particularly relevant for organisms with few rRNA operons (1–2 copies), where a single mutation knocks out most ribosomes:
  • Mycoplasma pneumoniae — A2058G/C mutations driving outbreaks across Asia (>90% in parts of China/Japan), now spreading in Europe
  • Mycobacterium avium complex — 23S mutations under clarithromycin monotherapy
  • Neisseria gonorrhoeae — 23S rRNA mutations and mtr efflux
  • Helicobacter pylori — A2143G is the dominant driver of clarithromycin failure

Mycoplasma macrolide resistance is now >90% in some Asian regions and approaching 30% in parts of Italy — relevant for empiric atypical coverage. H. pylori clarithromycin resistance is the reason quadruple therapy is now first-line in many regions instead of standard triple [5–8].

Pharmacology

Erythromycin — preparations

Erythromycin formulations

Preparation	Notes	Typical adult dose
Base	Acid-labile; enteric-coated	250–500 mg PO q6–12h
Stearate	Acid-stable salt	Similar
Ethylsuccinate	Suspension/pediatric	400–800 mg PO q6–12h
Lactobionate	IV form	15–20 mg/kg/day divided q6h, max 4 g
Estolate	Highest bioavailability; hepatotoxicity risk	Largely abandoned

The estolate form historically caused cholestatic hepatitis in adults — withdrawn in many markets. The lactobionate IV form is the one to know for hospital use.

Erythromycin — pharmacokinetics

• Oral absorption: variable, reduced by food and gastric acid
• Half-life: 1.5–2 hours — frequent dosing required
• Distribution: broad except poor CNS penetration
• Metabolism: hepatic via CYP3A4 (substrate and potent inhibitor)
• Elimination: primarily biliary; minimal renal — no renal-failure adjustment
• Hepatic dysfunction: caution; reduce dose

Three things to remember about erythromycin PK: short half-life, no renal adjustment, and powerful CYP3A4 interactions. The interactions list is enormous.

Erythromycin — Adverse effects

• GI: dose-related nausea, vomiting, diarrhea (mediated by motilin receptor agonism — basis for use as prokinetic)
• Hepatobiliary: cholestatic hepatitis (estolate > other forms)
• Ototoxicity: reversible high-tone hearing loss with high IV doses or renal failure
• Cardiac: QTc prolongation, torsades de pointes — ↑ with renal dysfunction, drug interactions
• Hypertrophic pyloric stenosis in neonates exposed in early infancy

The motilin agonism is why we used IV erythromycin for gastroparesis. The pyloric stenosis association in neonates is a teaching board favorite — it’s a real risk in the first 2 weeks of life, with relative risk around 8–10 in case-control series [9,10].

Drug interactions — The statin story

• Erythromycin and clarithromycin ↑↑↑ simvastatin and lovastatin exposure (5–10× AUC)
• Documented fatal rhabdomyolysis with simvastatin + clarithromycin co-prescription
• US FDA: avoid concurrent simvastatin > 20 mg or lovastatin > 20 mg with these macrolides
• Atorvastatin less affected but still ↑ AUC by ~80%
• Rosuvastatin, pravastatin, fluvastatin — not significant CYP3A4 substrates, safer pairings
• Azithromycin — minimal effect; preferred macrolide when statin therapy must continue

This is the single most common dangerous drug interaction with macrolides in practice. If a patient is on simvastatin and needs a macrolide for atypical pneumonia, choose azithromycin — not clarithromycin or erythromycin.

Macrolides in pregnancy

• Azithromycin and erythromycin: Category B / consensus-safe — extensive human pregnancy data
• Clarithromycin: Category C — animal teratogenicity; avoid in 1st trimester if alternatives exist
• Pertussis treatment in pregnancy → azithromycin
• Chlamydia in pregnancy → azithromycin single dose
• Erythromycin estolate avoided — cholestatic hepatitis in pregnancy
• Spiramycin (Europe) for gestational toxoplasmosis to prevent vertical transmission

For pregnant patients needing macrolide therapy, azithromycin is essentially universally first choice — safety data are the best of the class and tolerability is excellent. Clarithromycin gets avoided where possible [9].

Erythromycin — Drug interactions

Potent CYP3A4 inhibitor — many clinically important interactions:

• Warfarin — INR rises
• Statins (especially simvastatin, lovastatin) — rhabdomyolysis
• Calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporine, tacrolimus) — toxic levels
• Theophylline — toxicity
• Carbamazepine — toxicity
• Colchicine — fatal toxicity reported- myopathy, neuromyopathy, bone marrow suppression, and potentially multi-organ failure
• QT-prolonging drugs (amiodarone, sotalol, fluoroquinolones, antipsychotics) — additive arrhythmia risk

The colchicine interaction has killed patients — and azithromycin shares it. Review the medication list before prescribing any macrolide.

Clarithromycin

• Better-tolerated GI profile than erythromycin; acid-stable
• Half-life ~3–7 hours (parent) and ~5–9 hours (active 14-OH metabolite)
• Active metabolite (14-OH-clarithromycin): independently potent against H. influenzae
• CYP3A4 inhibitor — interaction profile similar to erythromycin
• Renal elimination is significant — reduce dose if CrCl <30 mL/min
• Twice-daily standard; once-daily extended-release available

The active metabolite is unique to clarithromycin and gives it better Haemophilus activity than its in vitro MIC would suggest. Don’t forget to dose-adjust in renal failure — easy to miss because we’re trained to think of macrolides as not needing renal adjustment.

Azithromycin — the outlier

• 15-member azalide ring (nitrogen substitution) — explains unique properties
• Half-life: 40–68 hours in serum, 2–4 days in tissue
• Massive tissue concentrations — accumulates in macrophages, fibroblasts, neutrophils (1000× plasma)
• Tissue >> plasma → unreliable for bacteremia, but ideal for intracellular pathogens
• Not a significant CYP3A4 inhibitor — far fewer drug interactions
• Predominantly biliary elimination — no renal dose adjustment

Azithromycin’s tissue pharmacokinetics is the clinical fingerprint of this drug. The long half-life is what lets you do single-dose chlamydia treatment, 3-day or 5-day pneumonia courses, and weekly dosing for MAC prophylaxis. It’s also why measuring serum azithromycin levels for bacteremia is pointless — the drug is in cells, not blood.

PK/PD Principles

• Macrolides are protein-synthesis inhibitors → AUC/MIC is the primary PK/PD index
• Azithromycin’s prolonged post-antibiotic effect supports once-daily and even single-dose regimens
• Erythromycin and clarithromycin are more time-dependent — need frequent dosing to maintain trough levels
• High tissue/plasma ratios for azithromycin mean serum concentrations underestimate target-site exposure
• For intracellular pathogens (Legionella, Chlamydia), tissue concentration is what matters

The classic dichotomy of time-vs-concentration-dependent killing breaks down for azithromycin — the long tissue half-life and post-antibiotic effect drive efficacy independently of serum trough. Erythromycin and clarithromycin behave more conventionally.

Comparing the three — Quick reference

Macrolide comparison

Property	Erythromycin	Clarithromycin	Azithromycin
Half-life	1.5–2 h	3–7 h	40–68 h
Active metabolite	No	14-OH (active)	No
CYP3A4 inhibitor	Strong	Strong	Minimal
Renal adjustment	No	Yes (CrCl <30)	No
Tissue penetration	Modest	Good	Exceptional (intracellular)
Frequency	q6h	q12h	q24h (or single dose)

This table explains why azithromycin replaced erythromycin in almost every outpatient indication.

Cardiac Safety

QT Prolongation — Mechanism

The mechanism is the same as quinidine and many other arrhythmogenic drugs. Risk is not uniform across the class — erythromycin > clarithromycin > azithromycin in vitro and in epidemiology.

Ray et al. — the NEJM Data

• Ray 2004 (NEJM): Oral erythromycin was associated with a 5× increase in sudden cardiac death; risk further amplified by CYP3A4 inhibitors (verapamil, diltiazem)
• Ray 2012 (NEJM): During 5-day azithromycin courses, +47 cardiovascular deaths per million courses vs. amoxicillin; concentrated in patients at highest baseline cardiovascular risk
• Albert 2014 (AJRCCM): Class-level synthesis — risk is real but small in absolute terms; restrict in high-risk patients

These three papers reshaped FDA/EMA labeling. The absolute risk is small for the average patient but concentrates dramatically in those with structural heart disease, electrolyte derangements, or other QT drugs. Worth a mental checklist before prescribing azithromycin to an older or polypharmacy patient [11–13].

Allergy and hypersensitivity

• True macrolide allergy is uncommon (~0.4–3% in surveys)
• IgE-mediated immediate reactions rare; most are delayed mild rashes
• Cross-reactivity within the class is variable — a patient with documented azithromycin urticaria often tolerates clarithromycin, and vice versa
• No cross-reactivity between macrolides and lincosamides (clindamycin) — clindamycin remains an option
• Stevens-Johnson syndrome rare but reported with all macrolides
• Skin testing not standardized; rechallenge under observation often diagnostic

The “macrolide allergy” label gets attached very loosely in records. Most patients can tolerate alternatives within the class, and clindamycin is safe to use despite being a 50S-binding cousin [14,15].

Practical risk stratification

• Low risk: young, structurally normal heart, no QT drugs → proceed
• Moderate risk: older, mild electrolyte derangement, single QT drug → consider alternatives (doxycycline often serves)
• High risk: known long QT, QT >500 ms, recent torsades, multiple QT drugs → avoid macrolides
• Check ECG and correct K+ / Mg++ before IV erythromycin in critically ill patients

Do not use erythromycin IV in ICU patients without checking baseline QTc and electrolytes. Azithromycin is safer, but not exempt.

Spectrum & Clinical Use

Spectrum — Macrolides at a glance

• Excellent: atypicals (Mycoplasma, Chlamydia, Legionella), Bordetella, Helicobacter, Treponema pallidum (allergy backup), Borrelia (children), MAC, Toxoplasma (cyst killing)
• Good (where susceptible): GAS, pneumococcus, group B strep
• Variable: Haemophilus influenzae (clarithromycin metabolite, azithromycin OK; erythromycin poor)
• None or unreliable: Enterobacterales (except limited GI use), Pseudomonas, Acinetobacter, anaerobes (variable), enterococci, MRSA
• Mycobacterial: active against MAC, M. leprae; M. tuberculosis is intrinsically resistant

The intracellular niche is where macrolides shine. M. tuberculosis is intrinsically resistant — don’t confuse it with MAC, which is fully susceptible [16].

M. tuberculosis — Intrinsic resistance

• M. tuberculosis is intrinsically macrolide-resistant despite being a mycobacterium
• Mechanism: chromosomally encoded Erm(37) rRNA methyltransferase
• A positive AFB smear that is macrolide-resistant is not necessarily MDR-TB — it could simply be M. tuberculosis
• Conversely, MAC and most NTM are macrolide-susceptible — species identification matters before therapy
• Do not include a macrolide in an “expanded TB regimen” — no benefit

The Erm(37) methylase is intrinsic to the species.

Macrolides — Less common pathogens

• Bartonella spp. — azithromycin or doxycycline (cat-scratch disease, bacillary angiomatosis)
• Brucella spp. — macrolides not first-line; reserved for combinations in specific settings
• Whipple disease (Tropheryma whipplei) — doxycycline + hydroxychloroquine first-line; macrolides limited role
• Rhodococcus equi — azithromycin combined with rifampin ± aminoglycoside in immunocompromised
• Mycoplasma genitalium — extended-course azithromycin; rising macrolide resistance worldwide

M. genitalium is the rising concern — macrolide resistance now exceeds 50% in many MSM cohorts; moxifloxacin is the main alternative.

Geographic resistance snapshot

• Macrolide resistance varies dramatically by region — driven by background prescribing intensity
• S. pneumoniae (invasive isolates, recent surveillance):
  • North America: ~30–40% (mostly mef-mediated, lower MICs)
  • Europe: 20–30% overall, higher in Mediterranean / Italy (mostly ermB-mediated, high MICs)
  • East Asia: 50–80% (very high, predominantly ermB)
• M. pneumoniae macrolide resistance: <10% in most of Europe, 70–95% in parts of China and Japan
• Practical: when traveling or treating recent immigrants from high-resistance regions, mentally adjust empiric coverage

The geographic skew matters. Italian and Southern European pneumococcal resistance leans toward ermB with high MICs and full MLS_B cross-resistance — qualitatively worse than the US efflux pattern [5,17].

Pneumococcal susceptibility — the Italian Picture

• Macrolide resistance in S. pneumoniae is high in Southern Europe
• Italy: pneumococcal macrolide resistance ~25–35% in invasive isolates (recent surveillance)
• Dominant mechanism in Europe: ermB (MLS_B) → high MICs, also clindamycin-R
• US: more mef-mediated efflux → lower-level resistance
• Clinical implication: azithromycin monotherapy is inadequate empiric coverage for bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia in Italy

The European/Italian epidemiology favors high-level MLS_B resistance — when you read US guidelines that recommend monotherapy macrolide for outpatient pneumonia, mentally adjust for our resistance landscape [17].

Clinical Uses — Respiratory

Community-acquired pneumonia

• 2019 ATS/IDSA guideline: macrolide monotherapy reserved for outpatients with low resistance prevalence (<25%); otherwise β-lactam + macrolide combination or respiratory fluoroquinolone
• Role: covers atypicals (Mycoplasma, Chlamydia, Legionella) that β-lactams miss
• Inpatient CAP: ceftriaxone + azithromycin remains a standard regimen
• Italy: pneumococcal resistance generally exceeds the 25% threshold — guideline favors β-lactam + macrolide

The macrolide adds atypical coverage and possibly immunomodulation. Several observational studies suggest mortality benefit from combination β-lactam + macrolide even when no atypical is identified — possibly an immunomodulatory effect, possibly residual confounding [18].

Atypical pneumonia

• Mycoplasma pneumoniae — azithromycin or doxycycline; rising macrolide resistance in adolescents/young adults
• Chlamydia pneumoniae — azithromycin, clarithromycin, doxycycline
• Legionella pneumophila — azithromycin or fluoroquinolone (levofloxacin preferred for severe disease)
• Mycoplasma macrolide resistance is a particular issue in pediatric cases — consider doxycycline if no response after 48 h of macrolide

For severe Legionella, most experts prefer levofloxacin over azithromycin, based on observational data — though the comparison has never been done in a proper RCT [5,19].

Pertussis

• Treatment of choice: azithromycin (5-day course) or clarithromycin (7-day course); erythromycin is alternative but worse tolerated
• Post-exposure prophylaxis: same regimens for close contacts within 21 days of cough onset
• Infants <1 month: azithromycin preferred — erythromycin estolate has been linked to hypertrophic pyloric stenosis
• Antibiotic eliminates carriage and reduces transmission but does not shorten illness once paroxysmal phase begins

[20–22]

The pyloric stenosis signal is real but rare. The take-home: if you must treat a neonate, use azithromycin and counsel parents about projectile vomiting in the first weeks.

Mycobacterium avium Complex (MAC)

• Pulmonary MAC: macrolide-based triple regimen (clarithromycin or azithromycin + ethambutol + rifampin / rifabutin) per 2020 ATS/ERS/ESCMID/IDSA guideline
• Disseminated MAC (AIDS, severe immunosuppression): same combination, longer duration
• Resistance prevention: never use macrolide monotherapy — 23S rRNA mutations emerge rapidly
• Azithromycin: weekly 1200 mg for primary prophylaxis in AIDS patients with CD4 <50 (largely obsolete since modern ART)

Macrolide monotherapy is the cardinal sin in MAC — resistance emerges in weeks. The combination regimen is mandatory [6,23].

Diffuse panbronchiolitis and chronic airway disease

• Diffuse panbronchiolitis (largely Japanese cohort): low-dose erythromycin transformed survival from <50% at 5 years to >90% (Kudoh 1998) — an early demonstration of macrolide immunomodulation
• Cystic fibrosis with chronic P. aeruginosa colonization: azithromycin 3×/week improves lung function, reduces exacerbations
• Non-CF bronchiectasis: azithromycin reduces exacerbations
• COPD (Albert 2011, NEJM): azithromycin 250 mg daily reduced acute exacerbations — but hearing loss and arrhythmias limit chronic use

This is one of the most interesting stories in antimicrobial pharmacology — a drug that works not by killing bacteria but by modulating innate immunity. Quorum sensing inhibition in Pseudomonas, decreased neutrophil chemotaxis, reduced pro-inflammatory cytokine release. Mechanism still debated [24,25].

Clinical uses — Non-Respiratory

Helicobacter pylori

• Clarithromycin-based triple therapy (PPI + clarithromycin + amoxicillin or metronidazole) was first-line — but rising clarithromycin resistance (~30%+ in many populations) is reducing efficacy
• Maastricht VI / European consensus now favors bismuth quadruple therapy as first-line where clarithromycin resistance exceeds 15%
• Macrolide resistance driven by A2143G mutation in 23S rRNA
• Consider testing for susceptibility before retreatment

The H. pylori story illustrates the cost of widespread macrolide use — what was once a 90%+ cure rate has eroded to 70% in many regions because of background macrolide exposure for other indications [26].

Chlamydia trachomatis — Urogenital and Rectal

• Urogenital chlamydia: azithromycin 1 g single dose or doxycycline 100 mg BID × 7 days
• Geisler 2015 (NEJM): doxycycline non-inferior to azithromycin overall but superior in men with urethritis (~3% failure with doxy vs. 5% with azithro)
• Rectal chlamydia (MSM): azithromycin clearly inferior to doxycycline — Lau 2021 (NEJM) microbiologic cure 76% azithro vs. 100% doxy
• Current US/European guideline: doxycycline 7 days is first-line; azithromycin reserved for adherence concerns or pregnancy

The pendulum has swung. Single-dose azithromycin was beloved for its adherence advantage, but the doxycycline data — particularly in rectal infection — are now compelling. Save azithromycin for patients who absolutely cannot take a 7-day regimen [27,28].

Trachoma and mass drug administration

• WHO trachoma elimination strategy (SAFE): annual single-dose azithromycin to entire endemic communities (mass drug administration, MDA)
• Bailey 1993 RCT established single-dose azithromycin equivalent to 6 weeks of tetracycline ointment
• MORDOR trial (Keenan 2018 NEJM): biannual azithromycin MDA in sub-Saharan Africa reduced all-cause childhood mortality by ~14%
• MORDOR II (Keenan 2019): benefit persists but growing concern about resistance selection — including macrolide-R S. pneumoniae, E. coli, S. aureus

MORDOR was a paradigm-shifting trial — but also a cautionary tale. We’re saving lives now at the cost of seeding resistance for the future. The WHO is grappling with how to balance these [29–31].

Neisseria gonorrhoeae — Don’t use azithromycin!

• Azithromycin has been abandoned for gonorrhea due to widespread resistance
• 2021 CDC update: ceftriaxone 500 mg IM × 1 alone (no longer dual therapy with azithromycin)
• European guideline (IUSTI 2020): ceftriaxone 1 g + azithromycin 2 g — but actively under revision
• Macrolide resistance driven by 23S rRNA mutations and mtr efflux upregulation
• Solithromycin tested in Phase 3 — efficacy demonstrated but FDA rejected the drug on safety grounds

Guidelines have dropped azithromycin from dual therapy in 2020 because rates of azithromycin-R gonorrhea exceeded 5% — now monotherapy ceftriaxone at a higher dose is standard. Test of cure is essential [7,32,33].

Toxoplasmosis and pregnancy

• Spiramycin (Europe; not FDA-approved in US): standard prophylaxis for T. gondii seroconversion during pregnancy — reduces fetal transmission
• Azithromycin and clarithromycin have in vitro and in vivo activity against tachyzoites and cyst stages
• Azithromycin + pyrimethamine — alternative to sulfadiazine + pyrimethamine in sulfa-allergic patients with cerebral toxoplasmosis (less data than clindamycin-based regimen — see clindamycin section)

Spiramycin is not available in the US — clinicians have to import it for confirmed gestational toxoplasmosis. Europe is the leader in toxoplasmosis screening and management [34,35].

Syphilis — A cautionary tale

• Single-dose oral azithromycin (2 g) was once an attractive alternative for penicillin-allergic syphilis
• Treatment failures emerged rapidly in San Francisco, Ireland, and elsewhere in the 2000s
• Resistance driven by the A2058G mutation in 23S rRNA of Treponema pallidum (the same residue as in Mycoplasma)
• US CDC guideline 2021: azithromycin no longer recommended for syphilis — desensitization to penicillin preferred for allergy
• Illustrative of how rapidly macrolide resistance can emerge in slow-growing pathogens

The syphilis story is striking — within a few years of azithromycin being promoted as an alternative, resistance had spread so widely it had to be withdrawn from guidelines. A reminder that macrolide-target organisms with few rRNA copies are exquisitely vulnerable to single-step resistance.

Babesiosis

• Standard regimen: atovaquone + azithromycin × 7–10 days (mild–moderate disease); IDSA 2020 guideline preferred over clindamycin + quinine in non-severe cases due to better tolerability
• Severe babesiosis or immunocompromised host: clindamycin + quinine (IV) or atovaquone + azithromycin combined with exchange transfusion when high parasitemia
• Immunocompromised patients (asplenic, B-cell lymphoma, anti-CD20 therapy) require prolonged courses (≥6 weeks)

Krause 2000 was the landmark NEJM trial that established atovaquone + azithromycin as equivalent to clindamycin + quinine with much better tolerance. Severe and immunocompromised cases still get the older regimen [36,37].

Macrolide Immunomodulation

Macrolides as immunomodulators

The mechanism story is messy — multiple proposed pathways, none singularly proven. But the clinical effect in DPB, CF, and COPD is real and reproducible. It’s the leading edge of the “antibiotics as immunomodulators” field [38,39].

Ketolides

Ketolides — Designed to overcome MLS_B

• Semi-synthetic 14-member macrolides with a 3-keto group replacing the L-cladinose sugar
• Designed to bind both A2058 and A752 of 23S rRNA — second binding site maintains activity against MLS_B isolates
• Telithromycin — first ketolide approved (2004); now severely restricted
• Solithromycin — second-generation; FDA rejected 2016

The chemistry was elegant — a dual-binding ketolide that would defeat the most prevalent macrolide resistance mechanism. The pharmacology delivered. The toxicology did not.

Telithromycin (Ketek)

• Approved 2004 for CABP, acute sinusitis, AECB
• Hepatotoxicity signal emerged post-marketing — including acute liver failure and deaths
• Also linked to visual disturbances, syncope, and exacerbation of myasthenia gravis (reports of fatal MG crises)
• FDA 2007: indications restricted to CABP only; black-box warnings added
• Now rarely used; not available in many European markets

Telithromycin is the cautionary tale that informed the solithromycin review. The hepatotoxicity was not predicted by the macrolide class profile — something specific about the ketolide modification [40].

Solithromycin — Promise and fall

• Demonstrated activity against MLS_B-resistant pneumococci, macrolide-resistant M. genitalium and N. gonorrhoeae
• Two successful phase 3 CABP trials (oral and IV–to-oral) — non-inferior to moxifloxacin
• 2016 FDA Antimicrobial Drugs Advisory Committee: voted against approval due to hepatotoxicity signal (transaminase elevations in ~9% of patients) — given the telithromycin precedent
• Cempra’s resubmission and additional trials did not satisfy FDA; drug never approved in US or EU
• Gonorrhea phase 3 (Fernandes 2019, Lancet ID) — efficacy demonstrated but moot

Solithromycin is the drug we needed for MLS_B-resistant pneumococcus, M. genitalium, and gonorrhea — and we don’t have it. The FDA was probably right to be cautious given telithromycin, but the field lost a useful agent [33,41,42].

Lefamulin — A Cousin, not a ketolide

• Pleuromutilin class — binds the 50S ribosome at the peptidyl transferase center, but at a distinct site from macrolides/ketolides
• Maintains activity against most MLS_B-resistant pneumococci, S. aureus, atypicals
• FDA-approved 2019 for CABP (LEAP 1 and LEAP 2 trials — non-inferior to moxifloxacin)
• IV and oral formulations
• Adverse effects: QTc prolongation (CYP3A4 substrate and inhibitor — interactions matter)
• Conceptual placeholder for the gap solithromycin would have filled

Lefamulin isn’t a macrolide, but mention it because it occupies the niche solithromycin would have occupied — an oral agent active against MLS_B-resistant pneumococcus for CABP. Penetration is okay but not great; QT and drug interactions limit broad use.

Newer ketolides

• Nafithromycin (Wockhardt) — Indian-developed ketolide; phase 3 completed for CABP; approval pending in India
• Cethromycin — never reached market; failed phase 3
• The ketolide pipeline has stalled — investment moved to oxazolidinones and lefamulin instead

Nafithromycin is one to watch — particularly for the Indian market, where it may be approved before any Western regulator considers it. The class is unlikely to return to wider use without a clearly safer molecule.

Clindamycin

Clindamycin — Origins

• Lincomycin isolated 1962 from Streptomyces lincolnensis (Nebraska soil sample)
• Clindamycin = 7(S)-chloro-7-deoxy-lincomycin (semi-synthetic, 1966)
• Improved oral absorption, GI tolerability, and antimicrobial potency vs. parent
• Not a macrolide — but binds the same 23S rRNA site, hence MLS_B cross-resistance

The Lincoln, Nebraska origin gave the parent compound its name. Clindamycin is the semi-synthetic improvement that made the class clinically useful [43].

Clindamycin — pharmacology

• Oral bioavailability ~90% (clindamycin HCl capsule) — can switch IV→PO 1:1
• Half-life: ~2.5 hours; q6–8h dosing
• Distribution: excellent into bone, joint, lung, abscess; poor CNS penetration even with inflamed meninges
• Metabolism: hepatic; no renal adjustment needed
• Active metabolites contribute to bactericidal activity in some settings
• Excellent intracellular concentrations (macrophages, PMNs)

The 90% oral bioavailability is critical clinically — when a patient is improving and tolerating PO, you can transition without any dose change. That makes clindamycin uniquely friendly for outpatient antibiotic therapy (OPAT) deescalation.

Clindamycin — spectrum

• Excellent: Gram-positive aerobes (streptococci, methicillin-susceptible and many CA-MRSA staph), most anaerobes (including Bacteroides historically, though resistance is rising)
• Good: T. gondii, P. jirovecii (with primaquine), Plasmodium (with quinine), Babesia (with quinine), some atypical mycobacteria
• None or poor: enterococci, Listeria, Gram-negative aerobes, most Mycobacteria
• MRSA: depends on local epidemiology; CA-MRSA often susceptible, HA-MRSA more often resistant

[2]

Clindamycin — Resistance concerns

• MLS_B (constitutive or inducible) — covered earlier; check D-test for staph and GAS

• Bacteroides fragilis resistance rising — current European rates 25–50% (varies); empiric reliance for intraabdominal infection has been abandoned

• Resistance in Clostridioides difficile irrelevant to therapy because clindamycin causes rather than treats CDI

• Lnu nucleotidyltransferase genes — emerging in streptococci

Bacteroides resistance is the reason clindamycin is no longer the go-to for intraabdominal infection — metronidazole or β-lactam/inhibitor combos cover anaerobes more reliably. Stick to clindamycin for above-diaphragm anaerobes and toxin-mediated indications [44].

Clostridioides difficile — The cardinal adverse effect

• Clindamycin has the highest relative risk of CDI among commonly used antibiotics in many epidemiologic studies

• Disrupts colonic anaerobic flora → permissive environment for C. difficile

• Risk persists for weeks to months after exposure

• All forms (oral, IV, topical, even vaginal cream) implicated

• Practical: don’t reach for clindamycin reflexively if a narrower or safer alternative exists in elderly, hospitalized, or recently antibiotic-exposed patients

This is the single most important point about clindamycin for inpatient prescribing. The CDI risk is real, durable, and now confounds risk-benefit for many traditional indications [45–47].

Why is clindamycin uniquely good at selecting C. difficile?

More theoretical than real-life?
(ECCMID 2026 Late breakers)

• The SNAP trial’s adjunctive clindamycin domain (5 days of clindamycin vs. no adjunctive antibiotic in S. aureus bacteraemia) found no mortality benefit and a signal of possible harm — the ICU subgroup had a 96% posterior probability of higher mortality.

• C. difficile risk was not increased: CDI diarrhea was low and essentially identical in both arms (1.9% each), reassuring given this is likely the largest-ever RCT of clindamycin — though all-cause diarrhoea was higher in the clindamycin arm.

• The suspected mechanism of harm is gut-microbiome/anaerobe disruption (loss of “colonization resistance”), not CDI specifically.

  • The anti-toxin rationale (clindamycin inhibits ribosomal protein synthesis → less exotoxin production) was mechanistic only; outcome by clindamycin susceptibility/MIC was pre-specified but not yet analyzed, and the presenter expected it wouldn’t change the result.

Bowen AC, Davis JS, Tong SYC, et al. Adjunctive clindamycin for treatment of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: a randomised controlled trial within the S. aureus Network Adaptive Platform (SNAP). Late-breaking abstract, ESCMID Global 2026.

Clindamycin — Clinical uses

Anaerobic infections

• Classic role: above-the-diaphragm anaerobes — aspiration pneumonia, lung abscess, dental infections, head and neck space infections
• Below-the-diaphragm: historically used for intraabdominal infection (B. fragilis); now superseded by metronidazole, β-lactam/inhibitor combinations due to rising resistance
• Necrotizing soft tissue infection: part of empiric broad-spectrum coverage (synergy plus toxin suppression)

The above/below diaphragm rule is a useful heuristic — anaerobes above the diaphragm (mouth, throat, aspirated material) remain reliably clindamycin-susceptible; gut anaerobes much less so.

Aspiration pneumonia and lung abscess

• Polymicrobial — oral aerobes + anaerobes (Prevotella, Fusobacterium, Peptostreptococcus)
• Clindamycin remains a reasonable monotherapy for community-acquired aspiration pneumonia with abscess
• Alternative: β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor (amoxicillin-clavulanate, ampicillin-sulbactam)
• Duration typically 3–6 weeks based on imaging and clinical response

For a typical community-acquired lung abscess, clindamycin 600 mg IV q8h or 450 mg PO q8h works well. The choice between clindamycin and amoxicillin-clavulanate depends on local resistance patterns and patient factors.

CA-MRSA skin and soft tissue infection

• Clindamycin is a reasonable oral option for CA-MRSA SSTI if the isolate is susceptible AND D-test negative
• Pre-treatment: lab D-test on the isolate; if D-test positive, do not use clindamycin
• Useful particularly in children, pregnancy (TMP/SMX and doxycycline often relatively contraindicated)
• Penetrates abscess cavities and skin/soft tissue well

[3,4]

The Eagle effect — Why penicillin alone fails

• Eagle effect (Harry Eagle, 1948): paradoxical loss of β-lactam efficacy at very high inocula or in stationary-phase organisms
• In overwhelming GAS infection, the bacteria are not dividing rapidly → penicillin-binding proteins not actively engaged → killing slows
• Protein synthesis inhibitors (clindamycin, linezolid) are not growth-phase dependent — they suppress toxin production and slow viable bacterial replication independently
• Direct evidence in necrotizing fasciitis mouse models
• Justifies adjunctive clindamycin in invasive GAS even when isolate is susceptible to penicillin

The Eagle effect is the mechanistic justification for adjunctive clindamycin in invasive GAS. Penicillin is bactericidal only against actively dividing organisms — in a fulminant infection most bugs are in stationary phase and penicillin loses its punch.

Necrotizing fasciitis and invasive GAS

• Adjunctive clindamycin added to penicillin (or carbapenem) for invasive group A streptococcal infection
• Mechanism — three independent benefits:
  1. Toxin suppression — protein synthesis inhibitor reduces M protein, streptolysin O, SpeA, SpeB production
  2. Eagle effect mitigation — clindamycin not affected by stationary-phase bacterial density
  3. Anti-inflammatory — reduces cytokine release
• Stevens 2007: dramatic reduction in toxin gene expression by clindamycin in MSSA and GAS in vitro
• IDSA SSTI guideline: add clindamycin for invasive GAS or staphylococcal TSS

[48,49]

Penicillin alone is theoretically sufficient to kill S. pyogenes, but in fulminant disease the bacteria are not actively growing (stationary phase) — penicillin loses efficacy (“Eagle effect”), and we need a protein synthesis inhibitor to shut down toxin production and the cytokine storm.

Streptococcal and staphylococcal TSS

• Streptococcal toxic shock syndrome (M protein-mediated, superantigen): clindamycin + β-lactam mandatory
• Staphylococcal TSS (TSST-1, enterotoxin-mediated): clindamycin + β-lactam (oxacillin for MSSA; vancomycin or linezolid + clindamycin for MRSA)
• IVIG considered in fulminant disease, particularly streptococcal TSS
• Clindamycin should be added even if the isolate’s susceptibility hasn’t returned

Don’t wait for susceptibilities — add empiric clindamycin in any case of invasive GAS or staphylococcal TSS. The toxin-suppression benefit is the urgent issue, not the kill and anti-toxin effects may not closely follow the MIC.

Clostridium perfringens and gas gangrene

• Penicillin + clindamycin remains standard for myonecrosis
• Stevens 1987 demonstrated reduced α-toxin and θ-toxin production with clindamycin exposure
• Same principle as GAS: kill (penicillin) + toxin suppression (clindamycin)
• Surgical debridement is the dominant therapeutic intervention

[49]

Bone and joint infections

• Clindamycin penetrates bone well
• Reasonable option for osteomyelitis caused by susceptible MSSA, CA-MRSA, streptococci
• Long-course oral therapy possible after IV induction — high oral bioavailability supports outpatient regimens
• Check D-test for staphylococci before committing to a prolonged clindamycin course

For pediatric osteomyelitis where TMP/SMX is unappealing, clindamycin is often a backbone of long-course therapy — provided susceptibilities support it.

Pneumocystis jirovecii Pneumonia

• Clindamycin + primaquine is a salvage regimen for mild-moderate PCP in sulfa-allergic or TMP/SMX-failing patients
• Benfield 2008: clindamycin–primaquine appears more effective than pentamidine for second-line therapy
• Primaquine requires G6PD screening before initiation
• Not first-line — TMP/SMX remains preferred for severe disease

[50,51]

Cerebral toxoplasmosis

• Pyrimethamine + sulfadiazine + leucovorin is first-line
• Pyrimethamine + clindamycin + leucovorin is the preferred sulfa-allergic alternative
• Dannemann 1992: comparable efficacy of pyrimethamine + clindamycin vs. pyrimethamine + sulfadiazine for acute TE in AIDS patients
• Maintenance therapy until immune reconstitution (CD4 >200 for ≥6 months on ART)

[52,53]

Bacterial vaginosis

• Oral metronidazole 500 mg BID × 7 days — first-line
• Topical clindamycin 2% cream × 7 days — equivalent efficacy, often better tolerated
• Oral clindamycin 300 mg BID × 7 days — alternative
• Treatment during pregnancy may reduce preterm delivery risk in selected populations (controversial)
• Topical clindamycin cream → reports of CDI (Meadowcroft 1998)

[54–56]

Malaria — Clindamycin’s antiparasitic Role

• Quinine + clindamycin is recommended treatment for uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria in pregnancy (1st trimester) and in young children when ACT is not appropriate
• Mechanism: clindamycin inhibits apicoplast ribosomal protein synthesis (residual prokaryotic organelle) — delayed-death effect over 2 parasite cycles
• WHO regimen: quinine 10 mg/kg PO q8h + clindamycin 10 mg/kg PO q12h × 7 days
• Artesunate + clindamycin also evaluated

The apicoplast story is one of the more elegant in antiparasitic pharmacology — Plasmodium retains a vestigial prokaryotic organelle, which is why a 70S-targeting antibiotic works against it.

[57,58]

Severe babesiosis

• For severe babesiosis (high parasitemia, immunocompromise, asplenia, hemodynamic compromise): clindamycin + quinine IV is the historical regimen
• IDSA 2020 guideline now also accepts atovaquone + azithromycin as initial therapy even in severe cases, given better tolerability
• Exchange transfusion considered if parasitemia >10% or end-organ dysfunction
• Immunocompromised patients require prolonged therapy (≥6 weeks); confirmed clearance by smear and PCR

[37]

Practical Pearls

What you should remember — Macrolides

• A2058 is the keystone — every resistance mechanism converges there
• MLS_B cross-resistance means erm methylation knocks out clindamycin too
• D-test inducible MLS_B in staph and GAS — check it before using clindamycin
• Azithromycin is the macrolide with long half-life, tissue residence, and minimal CYP3A4 interactions
• QT prolongation is real — risk-stratify before prescribing in older, polypharmacy, or cardiac patients
• Italian pneumococcal resistance is high — macrolide monotherapy is not adequate for bacteremic CAP locally

What you should remember — Ketolides

• Designed to overcome MLS_B — and biochemically they do
• Telithromycin → hepatotoxicity and MG exacerbation; severely restricted
• Solithromycin → never approved, despite successful CABP and gonorrhea trials, because of liver-signal concerns
• Nafithromycin may emerge in Indian and Asian markets
• For now, the ketolide class is essentially clinically unavailable in Europe

What you should remember— Clindamycin

• 90% oral bioavailability — uniquely friendly for IV→PO and OPAT
• Toxin suppression is the reason we add it to penicillin in invasive GAS and to oxacillin/vanco in TSS
• C. difficile risk is real and durable — don’t reach for it reflexively
• Useful in PCP salvage (with primaquine), cerebral toxoplasmosis (with pyrimethamine), severe babesiosis (with quinine), falciparum malaria in pregnancy
• The MLS_B trap — D-test before committing to a long course in MRSA

Macrolides and COVID-19 — A Caution Tale

• Early 2020: azithromycin promoted (with hydroxychloroquine) for COVID-19 based on small open-label studies
• Mechanism rationale: anti-inflammatory effects + putative antiviral activity
• RECOVERY trial (Lancet 2021): no mortality benefit in hospitalized COVID-19 (n>7,700 patients)
• PRINCIPLE trial (Lancet 2021): no benefit in early outpatient COVID-19
• Net effect: contributed to short-term azithromycin overprescribing → measurable rises in macrolide resistance in some regions
• Lesson: enthusiasm without RCT data can drive unintended antimicrobial selection pressure

The COVID-azithromycin story is a useful real-world example of how soft evidence can drive enormous prescribing surges. RECOVERY and PRINCIPLE definitively settled the question — but not before a year of overuse.

Pediatric considerations

• Azithromycin preferred in infants and young children — better tolerated, single daily dose
• Erythromycin estolate avoided in infants — pyloric stenosis risk in first 6 weeks
• Pediatric SSTI: clindamycin is a workhorse oral option (palatability is poor — flavored suspensions help)
• Clarithromycin dosed pediatrically for MAC, H. pylori, and pertussis
• Macrolide-resistant M. pneumoniae now common in pediatric outbreaks — consider doxycycline or fluoroquinolone for non-responders >8 years old

The pediatric story has shifted considerably with rising macrolide resistance — particularly Mycoplasma. The old “azithromycin solves everything in children” mindset needs adjustment for the modern resistance landscape.

Antimicrobial stewardship implications

• Macrolides are among the most prescribed antibiotics globally — outpatient respiratory and STI indications
• Heavy use drives resistance in S. pneumoniae, GAS, H. pylori, N. gonorrhoeae, M. genitalium, M. pneumoniae
• Stewardship targets:
  • Avoid azithromycin monotherapy for sinusitis, bronchitis, otitis when viral or self-limited
  • De-escalate from broad combinations once pathogen identified
  • Audit prolonged maintenance courses (CF, COPD) — defined indication, monitor for hearing/QT
  • Substitute doxycycline for chlamydia in non-pregnant patients
• Reducing macrolide pressure has reduced pneumococcal resistance in Finland, Belgium, US ambulatory settings

The most direct interventions: switch from azithro to doxy for urogenital and rectal chlamydia, and don’t reach for azithro for self-limited URIs. Both have measurable downstream effects on community resistance.

References

1.

Mao JCH, Putterman M. Accumulation in gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria as a mechanism of resistance to erythromycin. Journal of Bacteriology 1968;95:1111.

2.

Ackermann G, Degner A, Cohen SH, others. Prevalence and association of macrolide- lincosamide-streptogramin b (MLS(b)) resistance with resistance to moxifloxacin in clostridium difficile. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003;51:599–603.

3.

Siberry GK, Tekle T, Carroll K, Dick J. Failure of clindamycin treatment of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus expressing inducible clindamycin resistance in vitro. Clin Infect Dis 2003;37:1257–1260.

4.

LaPlante KL, Leonard SN, Andes DR, others. Activities of clindamycin, daptomycin, doxycycline, linezolid, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and vancomycin against community- associated methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus with inducible clindamycin resistance in murine thigh infection and in vitro pharmacodynamic models. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008;52:2156–2162.

5.

Kawai Y, Miyashita N, Kubo M, others. Nationwide surveillance of macrolide-resistant mycoplasma pneumoniae infection in pediatric patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2013;57:4046–4049.

6.

Nash KA, Inderlied CB. Genetic basis of macrolide resistance in mycobacterium avium isolated from patients with disseminated disease. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995;39:2625–2630.

7.

Ng LK, Martin I, Liu G, Bryden L. Mutation in 23S rRNA associated with macrolide resistance in neisseria gonorrhoeae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002;46:3020–3025.

8.

Meier A, Heifets L, Wallace RJ Jr., others. Molecular mechanisms of clarithromycin resistance in mycobacterium avium: Observation of multiple 23S rDNA mutations in a clonal population. J Infect Dis 1996;174:354–360.

9.

Cooper WO, Griffin MR, Arbogast P, others. Very early exposure to erythromycin and infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2002;156:647–650.

10.

SanFilippo A. Infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis related to ingestion of erythromycine estolate: A report of five cases. J Pediatr Surg 1976;11:177–180.

11.

Ray WA, Murray KT, Meredith S, others. Oral erythromycin and the risk of sudden death from cardiac causes. N Engl J Med 2004;351:1089–1096.

12.

Ray WA, Murray KT, Hall K, others. Azithromycin and the risk of cardiovascular death. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1881–1890.

13.

Albert RK. JL schuller and CCR network: Macrolide antibiotics and the risk of cardiac arrhythmias. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2014;189:1173–1180.

14.

Pejcic AV. Stevens-johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis associated with the use of macrolide antibiotics: A review of published cases. Int J Dermatol 2021;60:12–24.

15.

Nappe TM, Goren-Garcia SL, Jacoby JL. Stevens-johnson syndrome after treatment with azithromycin: An uncommon culprit. Am J Emerg Med 2016;34:676.

16.

Bermudez LE, Inderlied CB, Kolonoski P, others. Telithromycin is active against mycobacterium avium in mice despite lacking significant activity in standard in vitro and macrophage assays and is associated with low frequency of resistance during treatment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2001;45:2210–2214.

17.

Xu XP, Cai L, Xiao M, others. Distribution of serotypes, genotypes, and resistance determinants among macrolide-resistant streptococcus pneumoniae isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010;54:1152–1159.

18.

Martinez JA, Horcajada JP, Almela M, others. Addition of a macrolide to a β-lactam-based empirical antibiotic regimen is associated with lower in-hospital mortality for patients with bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 2003;36:389–395.

19.

Critchley IA, Jones ME, Heinze PD, others. In vitro activity of levofloxacin against contemporary clinical isolates of legionella pneumophila, mycoplasma pneumoniae and chlamydia pneumoniae from north america and europe. Clin Microbiol Infect 2002;8:214–221.

20.

Aoyama T, Sunakawa K, Iwata S, others. Efficacy of short-term treatment of pertussis with clarithromycin and azithromycin. J Pediatr 1996;129:761–764.

21.

Sprauer MA, Cochi SL, Zell ER, others. Prevention of secondary transmission of pertussis in households with early use of erythromycin. Am J Dis Child 1992;146:177–181.

22.

Langley JM, Halperin SA, Boucher FD, others. Azithromycin is as effective as and better tolerated than erythromycin estolate for the treatment of pertussis. Pediatrics 2004;114:e96–e101.

23.

Daley CL, Iaccarino JM, Lange C, others. Treatment of nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease: An official ATS/ERS/ESCMID/IDSA clinical practice guideline. Eur Respir J 2020;56.

24.

Kudoh S, Azuma A, Yamamoto M, others. Improvement of survival in patients with diffuse panbronchiolitis treated with low-dose erythromycin. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;157:1829–1832.

25.

Albert RK, Connett J, Bailey WC, others. Azithromycin for prevention of exacerbations of copd. N Engl J Med 2011;365:689–698.

26.

Abdellatif M, Ghozy S, Kamel MG, others. Association between exposure to macrolides and the development of infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis: A systematic review and meta- analysis. Eur J Pediatr 2019;178:301–314.

27.

Geisler WM, Uniyal A, Lee JY, others. Azithromycin versus doxycycline for urogenital chlamydia trachomatis infection. N Engl J Med 2015;373:2512–2521.

28.

Lau A, Kong FYS, Fairley CK, others. Azithromycin or doxycycline for asymptomatic rectal chlamydia trachomatis. N Engl J Med 2021;384:2418–2427.

29.

Bailey RL, Arullendran P, Whittle HC, Mabey DC. Randomised controlled trial of single- dose azithromycin in treatment of trachoma. Lancet 1993;342:453–456.

30.

Keenan JD, Bailey RL, West SK, others. Azithromycin to reduce childhood mortality in sub- saharan africa. N Engl J Med 2018;378:1583–1592.

31.

Keenan JD, Arzika AM, Maliki R, others. Longer-term assessment of azithromycin for reducing childhood mortality in africa. N Engl J Med 2019;380:2207–2214.

32.

Barbee LA, St Cyr SB. Management of neisseria gonorrhoeae in the united states: Summary of evidence from the development of the 2020 gonorrhea treatment recommendations and the 2021 centers for disease control and prevention sexually transmitted infection treatment guidelines. Clin Infect Dis 2022;74:S95–S111.

33.

Fernandes P, Craft JC. Phase 3 trial of treating gonorrhoea with solithromycin. Lancet Infect Dis 2019;19:928.

34.

Ribeiro M, Franco PS, Lopes-Maria JB, others. Azithromycin treatment is able to control the infection by two genotypes of toxoplasma gondii in human trophoblast BeWo cells. Exp Parasitol 2017;181:111–118.

35.

Derouin F, Chastang C. Activity in vitro against toxoplasma gondii of azithromycin and clarithromycin alone and with pyrimethamine. J Antimicrob Chemother 1990;25:708–711.

36.

Krause PJ, Lepore T, Sikand VK, others. Atovaquone and azithromycin for the treatment of babesiosis. N Engl J Med 2000;343:1454–1458.

37.

Krause PJ, Auwaerter PG, Bannuru RR, others. Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america (IDSA): 2020 guideline on diagnosis and management of babesiosis. Clin Infect Dis 2021;72:185–189.

38.

Mikasa K, Kita E, Sawaki M, others. The anti-inflammatory effect of erythromycin in zymosan- induced peritonitis of mice. J Antimicrob Chemother 1992;30:339–348.

39.

Keicho N, Kudoh S. Diffuse panbronchiolitis: Role of macrolides in therapy. Am J Respir Med 2002;1:119–131.

40.

Shain CS. GW amsden: Telithromycin: The first of the ketolides. Ann Pharmacother 2002;36:452–464.

41.

Donald BJ, Surani S, Deol HS, others. Spotlight on solithromycin in the treatment of community- acquired bacterial pneumonia: Design, development, and potential place in therapy. Drug Des Devel Ther 2017;11:3559–3566.

42.

Lang JE, Hornik CP, Elliott C, others. Solithromycin in children and adolescents with community- acquired bacterial pneumonia. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2022;41:556–562.

43.

McGehee RF Jr., Smith CB, Wilcox C, Finland M. Comparative studies of antibacterial activity in vitro and absorption and excretion of lincomycin and clindamycin. Am J Med Sci 1968;256:279–292.

44.

Achard A, Villers C, Pichereau V, Leclercq R. New lnu(c) gene conferring resistance to lincomycin by nucleotidylation in streptococcus agalactiae UCN36. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005;49:2716–2719.

45.

Tedesco FJ. Clindamycin and colitis: A review. J Infect Dis 1977;135:S95–S98.

46.

Gantz NM, Zawacki JK, Dickerson WJ, Bartlett JG. Pseudomembranous colitis associated with erythromycin. Ann Intern Med 1979;91:866–867.

47.

Meadowcroft AM, Diaz PR, Latham GS. Clostridium difficile toxin-induced colitis after use of clindamycin phosphate vaginal cream. Ann Pharmacother 1998;32:309–311.

48.

Stevens DL, Ma Y, Salmi DB, others. Impact of antibiotics on expression of virulence- associated exotoxin genes in methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus. J Infect Dis 2007;195:202–211.

49.

Stevens DL, Maier KA, Mitten JE. Effect of antibiotics on toxin production and viability of clostridium perfringens. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1987;31:213–218.

50.

Safrin S, Finkelstein DM, Feinberg J, others. Comparison of three regimens for treatment of mild to moderate pneumocystis carinii pneumonia in patients with AIDS. A double-blind, randomized, trial of oral trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, dapsone-trimethoprim, and clindamycin- primaquine. ACTG 108 study group. Ann Intern Med 1996;124:792–802.

51.

Benfield T, Atzori C, Miller RF, Helweg-Larsen J. Second-line salvage treatment of AIDS- associated pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia: A case series and systematic review. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2008;48:63–67.

52.

Dannemann B, McCutchan JA, Israelski D, others. Treatment of toxoplasmic encephalitis in patients with AIDS. A randomized trial comparing pyrimethamine plus clindamycin to pyrimethamine plus sulfadiazine. The california collaborative treatment group. Ann Intern Med 1992;116:33–43.

53.

Pfefferkorn ER, Nothnagel RF, Borotz SE. Parasiticidal effect of clindamycin on toxoplasma gondii grown in cultured cells and selection of a drug-resistant mutant. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992;36:1091–1096.

54.

Schmitt C, Sobel JD, Meriwether C. Bacterial vaginosis: Treatment with clindamycin cream versus oral metronidazole. Obstet Gynecol 1992;79:1020–1023.

55.

Haahr T, Ersboll AS, Karlsen MA, others. Treatment of bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy in order to reduce the risk of spontaneous preterm delivery - a clinical recommendation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2016;95:850–860.

56.

Lamont RF, Keelan JA, Larsson PG, Jorgensen JS. The treatment of bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy with clindamycin to reduce the risk of infection-related preterm birth: A response to the danish society of obstetrics and gynecology guideline group’s clinical recommendations. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2017;96:139–143.

57.

Ramharter M, Oyakhirome S, Klein Klouwenberg P, others. Artesunate-clindamycin versus quinine-clindamycin in the treatment of plasmodium falciparum malaria: A randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis 2005;40:1777–1784.

58.

Andersen SL, Ager AL, McGreevy P, others. Efficacy of azithromycin as a causal prophylactic agent against murine malaria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994;38:1862–1863.