Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 1 February 2025; Volume 9 (Issue 2); 100-111.; DOI: 10.1016/S2352-4642(24)00330-4
Garcia-Prats AJ, Garcia-Cremades M, Cox V, Kredo T, Dunbar R, et al.
Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 1 February 2025; Volume 9 (Issue 2); 100-111.; DOI: 10.1016/S2352-4642(24)00330-4
BACKGROUND
There are few data on the treatment of children and adolescents with multidrug-resistant (MDR) or rifampicin-resistant (RR) tuberculosis, especially with more recently available drugs and regimens. We aimed to describe the clinical and treatment characteristics and their associations with treatment outcomes in this susceptible population.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis. Databases were searched from Oct 1, 2014, to March 30, 2020. To be eligible, studies must have included more than five children or adolescents (0-19 years of age) treated for microbiologically confirmed or clinically diagnosed MDR or RR tuberculosis within a defined treatment cohort, and reported on regimen composition and treatment outcomes. Abstracts were screened independently by two authors to identify potentially eligible records. Full texts were reviewed by two authors independently to identify studies meeting the eligiblity criteria. For studies meeting eligiblity criteria, anonymised individual patient data was requested and individiual level data included for analysis. The main outcome assessed was treatment outcome defined as treatment success (cure or treatment completed) versus unfavourable outcome (treatment failure or death). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify associations between clinical and treatment factors and treatment outcomes. This study is registered with Prospero (CRD42020187230).
FINDINGS
1417 studies were identified through database searching. After removing duplicates and screening for eligibility, the search identified 23 369 individual participants from 42 studies, mostly from India and South Africa. Overall, 16 825 (72·0%) were successfully treated (treatment completed or cured), 2848 died (12·2%), 722 (3·1%) had treatment failure, and 2974 (12·7%) were lost to follow-up. In primary analyses, the median age was 16 (IQR 13-18) years. Of the 17 764 (87·1%) participants with reported HIV status, 2448 (13·8%) were living with HIV. 17 707 (89·6%) had microbiologically confirmed tuberculosis. After adjusting for significant factors associated with treatment outcome, the use of two (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·41 [95% CI 1·09-1·82]; p=0·008) or three (2·12 [1·61-2·79]; p<0·0001) WHO-classified group A drugs (bedaquiline, moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, and linezolid) compared with the use of no group A drugs at all was positively associated with treatment success.
INTERPRETATION
Younger and clinically diagnosed children are underrepresented among those treated for MDR and RR tuberculosis and should be a focus for case-finding efforts. Overall treatment outcomes in our analysis were better than in adults but lower than the international targets of 90% or more individuals successfully treated. Treatment with more group A drugs was associated with better treatment outcomes in children and adolescents, highlighting the need for more rapid access to these drugs and improved regimens.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 August 2023; Volume 27 (Issue 8); 584-598.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.23.0085
Chiang SS, Graham SM, Schaaf HS, Marais BJ, Sant’Anna CC, et al.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 August 2023; Volume 27 (Issue 8); 584-598.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.23.0085
BACKGROUND
These clinical standards aim to provide guidance for diagnosis, treatment, and management of drug-susceptible TB in children and adolescents.
METHODS
Fifty-two global experts in paediatric TB participated in a Delphi consensus process. After eight rounds of revisions, 51/52 (98%) participants endorsed the final document.
RESULTS
Eight standards were identified: Standard 1, Age and developmental stage are critical considerations in the assessment and management of TB; Standard 2, Children and adolescents with symptoms and signs of TB disease should undergo prompt evaluation, and diagnosis and treatment initiation should not depend on microbiological confirmation; Standard 3, Treatment initiation is particularly urgent in children and adolescents with presumptive TB meningitis and disseminated (miliary) TB; Standard 4, Children and adolescents should be treated with an appropriate weight-based regimen; Standard 5, Treating TB infection (TBI) is important to prevent disease; Standard 6, Children and adolescents should receive home-based/community-based treatment support whenever possible; Standard 7, Children, adolescents, and their families should be provided age-appropriate support to optimise engagement in care and clinical outcomes; and Standard 8, Case reporting and contact tracing should be conducted for each child and adolescent.
CONCLUSION
These consensus-based clinical standards, which should be adapted to local contexts, will improve the care of children and adolescents affected by TB.
These clinical standards aim to provide guidance for diagnosis, treatment, and management of drug-susceptible TB in children and adolescents.
METHODS
Fifty-two global experts in paediatric TB participated in a Delphi consensus process. After eight rounds of revisions, 51/52 (98%) participants endorsed the final document.
RESULTS
Eight standards were identified: Standard 1, Age and developmental stage are critical considerations in the assessment and management of TB; Standard 2, Children and adolescents with symptoms and signs of TB disease should undergo prompt evaluation, and diagnosis and treatment initiation should not depend on microbiological confirmation; Standard 3, Treatment initiation is particularly urgent in children and adolescents with presumptive TB meningitis and disseminated (miliary) TB; Standard 4, Children and adolescents should be treated with an appropriate weight-based regimen; Standard 5, Treating TB infection (TBI) is important to prevent disease; Standard 6, Children and adolescents should receive home-based/community-based treatment support whenever possible; Standard 7, Children, adolescents, and their families should be provided age-appropriate support to optimise engagement in care and clinical outcomes; and Standard 8, Case reporting and contact tracing should be conducted for each child and adolescent.
CONCLUSION
These consensus-based clinical standards, which should be adapted to local contexts, will improve the care of children and adolescents affected by TB.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
PLOS Med. 28 August 2012; Volume 9 (Issue 8); DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001300
Ahuja SD, Ashkin D, Avendano M, Banerjee R, Bayona J, et al.
PLOS Med. 28 August 2012; Volume 9 (Issue 8); DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001300
Treatment of multidrug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is lengthy, toxic, expensive, and has generally poor outcomes. We undertook an individual patient data meta-analysis to assess the impact on outcomes of the type, number, and duration of drugs used to treat MDR-TB.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Lancet. 8 September 2018; Volume 392 (Issue 10150); 821-834.; DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31644-1
Ahmad N, Ahuja SD, Akkerman OW, Alffenaar JWC, Anderson LF, et al.
Lancet. 8 September 2018; Volume 392 (Issue 10150); 821-834.; DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31644-1
BACKGROUND
Treatment outcomes for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis remain poor. We aimed to estimate the association of treatment success and death with the use of individual drugs, and the optimal number and duration of treatment with those drugs in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.
METHODS
In this individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify potentially eligible observational and experimental studies published between Jan 1, 2009, and April 30, 2016. We also searched reference lists from all systematic reviews of treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis published since 2009. To be eligible, studies had to report original results, with end of treatment outcomes (treatment completion [success], failure, or relapse) in cohorts of at least 25 adults (aged >18 years). We used anonymised individual patient data from eligible studies, provided by study investigators, regarding clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcomes. Using propensity score-matched generalised mixed effects logistic, or linear regression, we calculated adjusted odds ratios and adjusted risk differences for success or death during treatment, for specific drugs currently used to treat multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, as well as the number of drugs used and treatment duration.
FINDINGS
Of 12 030 patients from 25 countries in 50 studies, 7346 (61%) had treatment success, 1017 (8%) had failure or relapse, and 1729 (14%) died. Compared with failure or relapse, treatment success was positively associated with the use of linezolid (adjusted risk difference 0·15, 95% CI 0·11 to 0·18), levofloxacin (0·15, 0·13 to 0·18), carbapenems (0·14, 0·06 to 0·21), moxifloxacin (0·11, 0·08 to 0·14), bedaquiline (0·10, 0·05 to 0·14), and clofazimine (0·06, 0·01 to 0·10). There was a significant association between reduced mortality and use of linezolid (-0·20, -0·23 to -0·16), levofloxacin (-0·06, -0·09 to -0·04), moxifloxacin (-0·07, -0·10 to -0·04), or bedaquiline (-0·14, -0·19 to -0·10). Compared with regimens without any injectable drug, amikacin provided modest benefits, but kanamycin and capreomycin were associated with worse outcomes. The remaining drugs were associated with slight or no improvements in outcomes. Treatment outcomes were significantly worse for most drugs if they were used despite in-vitro resistance. The optimal number of effective drugs seemed to be five in the initial phase, and four in the continuation phase. In these adjusted analyses, heterogeneity, based on a simulated I2 method, was high for approximately half the estimates for specific drugs, although relatively low for number of drugs and durations analyses.
INTERPRETATION
Although inferences are limited by the observational nature of these data, treatment outcomes were significantly better with use of linezolid, later generation fluoroquinolones, bedaquiline, clofazimine, and carbapenems for treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. These findings emphasise the need for trials to ascertain the optimal combination and duration of these drugs for treatment of this condition.
Treatment outcomes for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis remain poor. We aimed to estimate the association of treatment success and death with the use of individual drugs, and the optimal number and duration of treatment with those drugs in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.
METHODS
In this individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify potentially eligible observational and experimental studies published between Jan 1, 2009, and April 30, 2016. We also searched reference lists from all systematic reviews of treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis published since 2009. To be eligible, studies had to report original results, with end of treatment outcomes (treatment completion [success], failure, or relapse) in cohorts of at least 25 adults (aged >18 years). We used anonymised individual patient data from eligible studies, provided by study investigators, regarding clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcomes. Using propensity score-matched generalised mixed effects logistic, or linear regression, we calculated adjusted odds ratios and adjusted risk differences for success or death during treatment, for specific drugs currently used to treat multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, as well as the number of drugs used and treatment duration.
FINDINGS
Of 12 030 patients from 25 countries in 50 studies, 7346 (61%) had treatment success, 1017 (8%) had failure or relapse, and 1729 (14%) died. Compared with failure or relapse, treatment success was positively associated with the use of linezolid (adjusted risk difference 0·15, 95% CI 0·11 to 0·18), levofloxacin (0·15, 0·13 to 0·18), carbapenems (0·14, 0·06 to 0·21), moxifloxacin (0·11, 0·08 to 0·14), bedaquiline (0·10, 0·05 to 0·14), and clofazimine (0·06, 0·01 to 0·10). There was a significant association between reduced mortality and use of linezolid (-0·20, -0·23 to -0·16), levofloxacin (-0·06, -0·09 to -0·04), moxifloxacin (-0·07, -0·10 to -0·04), or bedaquiline (-0·14, -0·19 to -0·10). Compared with regimens without any injectable drug, amikacin provided modest benefits, but kanamycin and capreomycin were associated with worse outcomes. The remaining drugs were associated with slight or no improvements in outcomes. Treatment outcomes were significantly worse for most drugs if they were used despite in-vitro resistance. The optimal number of effective drugs seemed to be five in the initial phase, and four in the continuation phase. In these adjusted analyses, heterogeneity, based on a simulated I2 method, was high for approximately half the estimates for specific drugs, although relatively low for number of drugs and durations analyses.
INTERPRETATION
Although inferences are limited by the observational nature of these data, treatment outcomes were significantly better with use of linezolid, later generation fluoroquinolones, bedaquiline, clofazimine, and carbapenems for treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. These findings emphasise the need for trials to ascertain the optimal combination and duration of these drugs for treatment of this condition.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Eur Respir J. 1 September 2016; Volume 48 (Issue 4); DOI:10.1183/13993003.00462-2016
Mitnick CD, White RA, Lu C, Rodriguez CA, Bayona J, et al.
Eur Respir J. 1 September 2016; Volume 48 (Issue 4); DOI:10.1183/13993003.00462-2016
Debate persists about monitoring method (culture or smear) and interval (monthly or less frequently) during treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB). We analysed existing data and estimated the effect of monitoring strategies on timing of failure detection.We identified studies reporting microbiological response to MDR-TB treatment and solicited individual patient data from authors. Frailty survival models were used to estimate pooled relative risk of failure detection in the last 12 months of treatment; hazard of failure using monthly culture was the reference.Data were obtained for 5410 patients across 12 observational studies. During the last 12 months of treatment, failure detection occurred in a median of 3 months by monthly culture; failure detection was delayed by 2, 7, and 9 months relying on bimonthly culture, monthly smear and bimonthly smear, respectively. Risk (95% CI) of failure detection delay resulting from monthly smear relative to culture is 0.38 (0.34-0.42) for all patients and 0.33 (0.25-0.42) for HIV-co-infected patients.Failure detection is delayed by reducing the sensitivity and frequency of the monitoring method. Monthly monitoring of sputum cultures from patients receiving MDR-TB treatment is recommended. Expanded laboratory capacity is needed for high-quality culture, and for smear microscopy and rapid molecular tests.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Int J Infect Dis. 1 February 2020; Volume 92; DOI:10.1016/j.ijid.2020.01.042
Migliori GB, Tiberi S, Zumla A, Petersen E, Chakaya JM, et al.
Int J Infect Dis. 1 February 2020; Volume 92; DOI:10.1016/j.ijid.2020.01.042
The continuous flow of new research articles on MDR-TB diagnosis, treatment, prevention and rehabilitation requires frequent update of existing guidelines. This review is aimed at providing clinicians and public health staff with an updated and easy-to-consult document arising from consensus of Global Tuberculosis Network (GTN) experts. The core published documents and guidelines have been reviewed including the recently published MDR-TB WHO rapid advice and ATS/CDC/ERS/IDSA guidelines. After a rapid review of epidemiology and risk factors, the clinical priorities on MDR-TB diagnosis (including whole genome sequencing and drug-susceptibility testing interpretations) and treatment (treatment design and management, TB in children) are discussed. Furthermore, the review comprehensively describes the latest information on contact tracing and LTBI management in MDR-TB contacts, while providing guidance on post-treatment functional evaluation and rehabilitation of TB sequelae, infection control and other public health priorities.
Journal Article > CommentaryFull Text
Eur Respir J. 18 March 2015; Volume 45 (Issue 4); DOI:10.1183/09031936.00214014
Lonnroth K, Migliori GB, Abubakar I, DAmbrosio L, de Vries G, et al.
Eur Respir J. 18 March 2015; Volume 45 (Issue 4); DOI:10.1183/09031936.00214014
This paper describes an action framework for countries with low tuberculosis (TB) incidence (<100 TB cases per million population) that are striving for TB elimination. The framework sets out priority interventions required for these countries to progress first towards "pre-elimination" (<10 cases per million) and eventually the elimination of TB as a public health problem (less than one case per million). TB epidemiology in most low-incidence countries is characterised by a low rate of transmission in the general population, occasional outbreaks, a majority of TB cases generated from progression of latent TB infection (LTBI) rather than local transmission, concentration to certain vulnerable and hard-to-reach risk groups, and challenges posed by cross-border migration. Common health system challenges are that political commitment, funding, clinical expertise and general awareness of TB diminishes as TB incidence falls. The framework presents a tailored response to these challenges, grouped into eight priority action areas: 1) ensure political commitment, funding and stewardship for planning and essential services; 2) address the most vulnerable and hard-to-reach groups; 3) address special needs of migrants and cross-border issues; 4) undertake screening for active TB and LTBI in TB contacts and selected high-risk groups, and provide appropriate treatment; 5) optimise the prevention and care of drug-resistant TB; 6) ensure continued surveillance, programme monitoring and evaluation and case-based data management; 7) invest in research and new tools; and 8) support global TB prevention, care and control. The overall approach needs to be multisectorial, focusing on equitable access to high-quality diagnosis and care, and on addressing the social determinants of TB. Because of increasing globalisation and population mobility, the response needs to have both national and global dimensions.
Journal Article > CommentaryFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 October 2021; Volume 25 (Issue 10); 797-813.; DOI: 10.5588/ijtld.21.0425
Migliori GB, Marx FM, Ambrosino N, Zampogna E, Schaaf HS, et al.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 October 2021; Volume 25 (Issue 10); 797-813.; DOI: 10.5588/ijtld.21.0425
BACKGROUND
Increasing evidence suggests that post-TB lung disease (PTLD) causes significant morbidity and mortality. The aim of these clinical standards is to provide guidance on the assessment and management of PTLD and the implementation of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR).
METHODS
A panel of global experts in the field of TB care and PR was identified; 62 participated in a Delphi process. A 5-point Likert scale was used to score the initial ideas for standards and after several rounds of revision the document was approved (with 100% agreement).
RESULTS
Five clinical standards were defined: Standard 1, to assess patients at the end of TB treatment for PTLD (with adaptation for children and specific settings/situations); Standard 2, to identify patients with PTLD for PR; Standard 3, tailoring the PR programme to patient needs and the local setting; Standard 4, to evaluate the effectiveness of PR; and Standard 5, to conduct education and counselling. Standard 6 addresses public health aspects of PTLD and outcomes due to PR.
CONCLUSION
This is the first consensus-based set of Clinical Standards for PTLD. Our aim is to improve patient care and quality of life by guiding clinicians, programme managers and public health officers in planning and implementing adequate measures to assess and manage PTLD.
Increasing evidence suggests that post-TB lung disease (PTLD) causes significant morbidity and mortality. The aim of these clinical standards is to provide guidance on the assessment and management of PTLD and the implementation of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR).
METHODS
A panel of global experts in the field of TB care and PR was identified; 62 participated in a Delphi process. A 5-point Likert scale was used to score the initial ideas for standards and after several rounds of revision the document was approved (with 100% agreement).
RESULTS
Five clinical standards were defined: Standard 1, to assess patients at the end of TB treatment for PTLD (with adaptation for children and specific settings/situations); Standard 2, to identify patients with PTLD for PR; Standard 3, tailoring the PR programme to patient needs and the local setting; Standard 4, to evaluate the effectiveness of PR; and Standard 5, to conduct education and counselling. Standard 6 addresses public health aspects of PTLD and outcomes due to PR.
CONCLUSION
This is the first consensus-based set of Clinical Standards for PTLD. Our aim is to improve patient care and quality of life by guiding clinicians, programme managers and public health officers in planning and implementing adequate measures to assess and manage PTLD.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 March 2022; Volume 26 (Issue 3); 190-205.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.21.0753
Migliori GB, Wu SJ, Matteelli A, Zenner D, Goletti D, et al.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 March 2022; Volume 26 (Issue 3); 190-205.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.21.0753
BACKGROUND
Tuberculosis (TB) preventive therapy (TPT) decreases the risk of developing TB disease and its associated morbidity and mortality. The aim of these clinical standards is to guide the assessment, management of TB infection (TBI) and implementation of TPT.
METHODS
A panel of global experts in the field of TB care was identified; 41 participated in a Delphi process. A 5-point Likert scale was used to score the initial standards. After rounds of revision, the document was approved with 100% agreement.
RESULTS
Eight clinical standards were defined: Standard 1, all individuals belonging to at-risk groups for TB should undergo testing for TBI; Standard 2, all individual candidates for TPT (including caregivers of children) should undergo a counselling/health education session; Standard 3, testing for TBI: timing and test of choice should be optimised; Standard 4, TB disease should be excluded prior to initiation of TPT; Standard 5, all candidates for TPT should undergo a set of baseline examinations; Standard 6, all individuals initiating TPT should receive one of the recommended regimens; Standard 7, all individuals who have started TPT should be monitored; Standard 8, a TBI screening and testing register should be kept to inform the cascade of care.
CONCLUSION
This is the first consensus-based set of Clinical Standards for TBI. This document guides clinicians, programme managers and public health officers in planning and implementing adequate measures to assess and manage TBI.
Tuberculosis (TB) preventive therapy (TPT) decreases the risk of developing TB disease and its associated morbidity and mortality. The aim of these clinical standards is to guide the assessment, management of TB infection (TBI) and implementation of TPT.
METHODS
A panel of global experts in the field of TB care was identified; 41 participated in a Delphi process. A 5-point Likert scale was used to score the initial standards. After rounds of revision, the document was approved with 100% agreement.
RESULTS
Eight clinical standards were defined: Standard 1, all individuals belonging to at-risk groups for TB should undergo testing for TBI; Standard 2, all individual candidates for TPT (including caregivers of children) should undergo a counselling/health education session; Standard 3, testing for TBI: timing and test of choice should be optimised; Standard 4, TB disease should be excluded prior to initiation of TPT; Standard 5, all candidates for TPT should undergo a set of baseline examinations; Standard 6, all individuals initiating TPT should receive one of the recommended regimens; Standard 7, all individuals who have started TPT should be monitored; Standard 8, a TBI screening and testing register should be kept to inform the cascade of care.
CONCLUSION
This is the first consensus-based set of Clinical Standards for TBI. This document guides clinicians, programme managers and public health officers in planning and implementing adequate measures to assess and manage TBI.