Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Nat Commun. 9 May 2024; Volume 15 (Issue 1); 3927.; DOI:10.1038/s41467-024-48077-8
Kho S, Seung KJ, Huerga H, Bastard M, Khan PY, et al.
Nat Commun. 9 May 2024; Volume 15 (Issue 1); 3927.; DOI:10.1038/s41467-024-48077-8
Sputum culture reversion after conversion is an indicator of tuberculosis (TB) treatment failure. We analyze data from the endTB multi-country prospective observational cohort (NCT03259269) to estimate the frequency (primary endpoint) among individuals receiving a longer (18-to-20 month) regimen for multidrug- or rifampicin-resistant (MDR/RR) TB who experienced culture conversion. We also conduct Cox proportional hazard regression analyses to identify factors associated with reversion, including comorbidities, previous treatment, cavitary disease at conversion, low body mass index (BMI) at conversion, time to conversion, and number of likely-effective drugs. Of 1,286 patients, 54 (4.2%) experienced reversion, a median of 173 days (97-306) after conversion. Cavitary disease, BMI < 18.5, hepatitis C, prior treatment with second-line drugs, and longer time to initial culture conversion were positively associated with reversion. Reversion was uncommon. Those with cavitary disease, low BMI, hepatitis C, prior treatment with second-line drugs, and in whom culture conversion is delayed may benefit from close monitoring following conversion.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Effectiveness of bedaquiline use beyond six months in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1 June 2023; Volume 207 (Issue 11); 1525-1532.; DOI:10.1164/rccm.202211-2125OC
Trevisi L, Hernán MA, Mitnick CD, Khan UT, Seung KJ, et al.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1 June 2023; Volume 207 (Issue 11); 1525-1532.; DOI:10.1164/rccm.202211-2125OC
RATIONALE
Current recommendations for the treatment of rifampin- and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis include bedaquiline used for six months or longer. Evidence is needed to inform the optimal duration of bedaquiline.
OBJECTIVES
We emulated a target trial to estimate the effect of three bedaquiline duration treatment strategies (6 months, 7-11 months, ≥ 12 months) on the probability of successful treatment among patients receiving a longer individualized regimen for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.
METHODS
To estimate the probability of successful treatment, we implemented a three-step approach comprising cloning, censoring, and inverse-probability weighting.
MAIN RESULTS
The 1,468 eligible individuals received a median of four (IQR: 4-5) likely effective drugs. In 87.1% and 77.7%, this included linezolid and clofazimine, respectively. The adjusted probability of successful treatment (95% CI) was 0.85 (0.81, 0.88) for 6 months of BDQ, 0.77 (0.73, 0.81) for 7-11 months, and 0.86 (0.83, 0.88) for > 12 months. Compared with 6 months of bedaquiline, the ratio of treatment success (95% CI) was 0.91 (0.85, 0.96) for 7-11 months and 1.01 (0.96, 1.06) for > 12 months. Analyses that did not account for immortal time bias found a higher probability of successful treatment with > 12 months: ratio 1.09 (1.05, 1.14).
CONCLUSIONS
Bedaquiline use beyond six months did not increase the probability of successful treatment among patients receiving longer regimens that commonly included new and repurposed drugs. When not properly accounted for, immortal person-time can bias estimate of effects of treatment duration. Future analyses should explore the effect of duration of bedaquiline and other drugs in subgroups with advanced disease and/or receiving less potent regimens.
Current recommendations for the treatment of rifampin- and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis include bedaquiline used for six months or longer. Evidence is needed to inform the optimal duration of bedaquiline.
OBJECTIVES
We emulated a target trial to estimate the effect of three bedaquiline duration treatment strategies (6 months, 7-11 months, ≥ 12 months) on the probability of successful treatment among patients receiving a longer individualized regimen for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.
METHODS
To estimate the probability of successful treatment, we implemented a three-step approach comprising cloning, censoring, and inverse-probability weighting.
MAIN RESULTS
The 1,468 eligible individuals received a median of four (IQR: 4-5) likely effective drugs. In 87.1% and 77.7%, this included linezolid and clofazimine, respectively. The adjusted probability of successful treatment (95% CI) was 0.85 (0.81, 0.88) for 6 months of BDQ, 0.77 (0.73, 0.81) for 7-11 months, and 0.86 (0.83, 0.88) for > 12 months. Compared with 6 months of bedaquiline, the ratio of treatment success (95% CI) was 0.91 (0.85, 0.96) for 7-11 months and 1.01 (0.96, 1.06) for > 12 months. Analyses that did not account for immortal time bias found a higher probability of successful treatment with > 12 months: ratio 1.09 (1.05, 1.14).
CONCLUSIONS
Bedaquiline use beyond six months did not increase the probability of successful treatment among patients receiving longer regimens that commonly included new and repurposed drugs. When not properly accounted for, immortal person-time can bias estimate of effects of treatment duration. Future analyses should explore the effect of duration of bedaquiline and other drugs in subgroups with advanced disease and/or receiving less potent regimens.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Clin Infect Dis. 15 September 2022; Volume 75 (Issue 6); 1006-1013.; DOI:10.1093/cid/ciac019
Hewison CCH, Khan UT, Bastard M, Lachenal N, Coutisson S, et al.
Clin Infect Dis. 15 September 2022; Volume 75 (Issue 6); 1006-1013.; DOI:10.1093/cid/ciac019
RATIONALE
Safety of treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR/RR-TB) can be an obstacle to treatment completion.
OBJECTIVES
Evaluate safety of longer MDR/RR-TB regimens containing bedaquiline and/or delamanid.
METHODS
Multicentre (16 countries), prospective, observational study, reporting incidence and frequency of clinically relevant adverse events of special interest (AESI) amongst patients who received MDR/RR-TB treatment containing bedaquiline and/or delamanid. The AESIs were defined a priori as important events caused by bedaquiline, delamanid, linezolid, injectables, and other commonly used drugs. Occurrence of these events was also reported by exposure to the likely causative agent.
RESULTS
Among 2296 patients, the most common clinically relevant AESIs were: peripheral neuropathy in 26.4%, electrolyte depletion in 26.0%, and hearing loss in 13.2% of patients. Per 1000 person-months of treatment, the incidence of these events was 21.5 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.8-23.2), 20.7 (95% CI: 19.1-22.4), and 9.7 (95% CI: 8.6-10.8), respectively. QT interval was prolonged in 2.7% or 1.8 (95% CI: 1.4-2.3)/1000 person-months of treatment. Patients who received injectables (N=925) and linezolid (N=1826) were most likely to experience events during exposure: Hearing loss, acute renal failure, or electrolyte depletion occurred in 36.8% or 72.8 (95%CI: 66.0-80.0) times/1000 person-months of injectable drug exposure. Peripheral neuropathy, optic neuritis and/or myelosuppression occurred in 27.8% or 22.8 (95% CI: 20.9-24.8) times/1000 patient-months of linezolid exposure.
CONCLUSIONS
Adverse events often related to linezolid and injectable drugs were more common than those frequently attributed to bedaquiline and delamanid. MDR-TB treatment monitoring schedules and individual drug durations should reflect expected safety profiles of drug combinations.
CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION
NCT02754765
Safety of treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR/RR-TB) can be an obstacle to treatment completion.
OBJECTIVES
Evaluate safety of longer MDR/RR-TB regimens containing bedaquiline and/or delamanid.
METHODS
Multicentre (16 countries), prospective, observational study, reporting incidence and frequency of clinically relevant adverse events of special interest (AESI) amongst patients who received MDR/RR-TB treatment containing bedaquiline and/or delamanid. The AESIs were defined a priori as important events caused by bedaquiline, delamanid, linezolid, injectables, and other commonly used drugs. Occurrence of these events was also reported by exposure to the likely causative agent.
RESULTS
Among 2296 patients, the most common clinically relevant AESIs were: peripheral neuropathy in 26.4%, electrolyte depletion in 26.0%, and hearing loss in 13.2% of patients. Per 1000 person-months of treatment, the incidence of these events was 21.5 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.8-23.2), 20.7 (95% CI: 19.1-22.4), and 9.7 (95% CI: 8.6-10.8), respectively. QT interval was prolonged in 2.7% or 1.8 (95% CI: 1.4-2.3)/1000 person-months of treatment. Patients who received injectables (N=925) and linezolid (N=1826) were most likely to experience events during exposure: Hearing loss, acute renal failure, or electrolyte depletion occurred in 36.8% or 72.8 (95%CI: 66.0-80.0) times/1000 person-months of injectable drug exposure. Peripheral neuropathy, optic neuritis and/or myelosuppression occurred in 27.8% or 22.8 (95% CI: 20.9-24.8) times/1000 patient-months of linezolid exposure.
CONCLUSIONS
Adverse events often related to linezolid and injectable drugs were more common than those frequently attributed to bedaquiline and delamanid. MDR-TB treatment monitoring schedules and individual drug durations should reflect expected safety profiles of drug combinations.
CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION
NCT02754765
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 October 2020; Volume 24 (Issue 10); 1087-1094.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.20.0115
Lachenal N, Hewison CCH, Mitnick CD, Lomtadze N, Coutisson S, et al.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 October 2020; Volume 24 (Issue 10); 1087-1094.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.20.0115
SETTING
Active pharmacovigilance (PV) is recommended for TB programmes, notably for multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) patients treated with new drugs. Launched with the support of UNITAID in April 2015, endTB (Expand New Drug markets for TB) facilitated treatment with bedaquiline (BDQ) and/or delamanid of >2600 patients in 17 countries, and contributed to the creation of a central PV unit (PVU).
OBJECTIVE
To explain the endTB PVU process by describing the serious adverse events (SAEs) experienced by patients who received BDQ-containing regimens.
DESIGN
The overall PV strategy was in line with the ‘advanced´ WHO active TB drug safety monitoring and management (aDSM) system. All adverse events (AEs) of clinical significance were followed up; the PVU focused on signal detection from SAEs.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
Between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2019, the PVU received and assessed 626 SAEs experienced by 417 BDQ patients. A board of MDR-TB/PV experts reviewed unexpected and possibly drug-related SAEs to detect safety signals. The experts communicated on clusters of risks factors, notably polypharmacy and off-label drug use, encouraging a patient-centred approach of care. Organising advanced PV in routine care is possible but demanding. It is reasonable to expect local/national programmes to focus on clinical management, and to limit reporting to aDSM systems to key data, such as the SAEs.
Active pharmacovigilance (PV) is recommended for TB programmes, notably for multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) patients treated with new drugs. Launched with the support of UNITAID in April 2015, endTB (Expand New Drug markets for TB) facilitated treatment with bedaquiline (BDQ) and/or delamanid of >2600 patients in 17 countries, and contributed to the creation of a central PV unit (PVU).
OBJECTIVE
To explain the endTB PVU process by describing the serious adverse events (SAEs) experienced by patients who received BDQ-containing regimens.
DESIGN
The overall PV strategy was in line with the ‘advanced´ WHO active TB drug safety monitoring and management (aDSM) system. All adverse events (AEs) of clinical significance were followed up; the PVU focused on signal detection from SAEs.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
Between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2019, the PVU received and assessed 626 SAEs experienced by 417 BDQ patients. A board of MDR-TB/PV experts reviewed unexpected and possibly drug-related SAEs to detect safety signals. The experts communicated on clusters of risks factors, notably polypharmacy and off-label drug use, encouraging a patient-centred approach of care. Organising advanced PV in routine care is possible but demanding. It is reasonable to expect local/national programmes to focus on clinical management, and to limit reporting to aDSM systems to key data, such as the SAEs.