Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Lancet Global Health. 1 February 2025; Volume 13 (Issue 2); e355-e363.; DOI:10.1016/S2214-109X(24)00467-4
Sweeney S, Laurence YV, Berry C, Singh MP, Dodd M, et al.
Lancet Global Health. 1 February 2025; Volume 13 (Issue 2); e355-e363.; DOI:10.1016/S2214-109X(24)00467-4
BACKGROUND
New 6-month rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis treatment regimens containing bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid (BPaL) with or without moxifloxacin or clofazimine, could improve treatment efficacy, safety, and tolerability, and free up resources within the health system. Following a change to WHO rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis treatment guidelines, countries are facing difficult decisions about when and how to incorporate new drug regimens into national guidelines. We aimed to assess the probability of BPaL-based regimens being cost-saving using data collected in the TB-PRACTECAL trial.
METHODS
This economic evaluation using a cost-utility analysis was embedded in five TB-PRACTECAL trial sites in Belarus, Uzbekistan, and South Africa. Between Nov 19, 2020, and Sept 27, 2022, we collected detailed primary unit cost data in six hospitals and four ambulatory health facilities and collected data on patient-incurred costs from 73 trial participants. The primary efficacy endpoint of the main trial, a composite of unfavourable outcomes (death, disease recurrence, treatment failure, early discontinuation of therapy, withdrawal, or loss to follow-up) and clinically important safety outcomes by 72 weeks of follow-up were incorporated into the analysis. Societal perspective cost data and effect outcome data were input into a Markov model to estimate the cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted by BPaL-based regimens compared with the standard of care over a 20-year time horizon. We conducted a range of univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to test our findings.
FINDINGS
BPaL-based regimens averted a mean of 1·28 DALYs and saved a mean of US$14 868 (SD 291) per person from the provider perspective compared with standard-of-care regimens over 20 years. Patient-incurred costs were reduced by a mean of $172 (SD 0·84) in BPaL-based regimen groups compared with standard of care. The main cost drivers for both providers and patients were inpatient bed-days; the duration of the inpatient period varied across countries. Varying a range of model parameters affected the degree of cost savings but did not change the finding that BPaL-based regimens are cost-saving compared with standard of care.
INTERPRETATION
This trial-based evidence adds to consistent indications from modelling studies that BPaL-based regimens are cost-saving for both the patient and health system. Urgent implementation of BPaL-based regimens in countries with a high burden of tuberculosis could improve treatment of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis, reduce pill burden, and free up desperately needed resources within the health system.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 6 June 2024; Volume 68 (Issue 7); e0053624.; DOI:10.1128/aac.00536-24
Motta I, Cusinato M, Ludman AJ, Lachenal N, Dodd M, et al.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 6 June 2024; Volume 68 (Issue 7); e0053624.; DOI:10.1128/aac.00536-24
Regimens for the treatment of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis currently rely on the use of QT-prolonging agents. Using data from the randomized controlled trial, TB-PRACTECAL, we investigated differences in QTcF among participants in the three interventional arms: BPaL (bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid), BPaLC (BPaL with clofazimine), and BPaLM (BPaL with moxifloxacin). Additionally, we assessed whether age, body mass index, and country were causally associated with QTcF prolongation. The trial included participants from South Africa, Uzbekistan, and Belarus. A post hoc analysis of electrocardiogram data was undertaken. Random effects regression was used to model QTcF longitudinally over 24 weeks and causal frameworks guided the analysis of non-randomized independent variables. 328 participants were included in BPaL-based arms. The longitudinal analysis of investigational arms showed an initial QTcF steep increase in the first week. QTcF trajectories between weeks 2 and 24 differed slightly by regimen, with highest mean peak for BPaLC (QTcF 446.5 ms). Overall, there were 397 QTcF >450 ms (of 3,744) and only one QTcF >500 ms. The odds of QTcF >450 ms among participants in any investigational arm, was 8.33 times higher in Uzbekistan compared to Belarus (95% confidence interval: 3.25–21.33). No effect on QTcF prolongation was found for baseline age or body mass index (BMI). Clinically significant QTc prolongation was rare in this cohort of closely monitored participants. Across BPaL-based regimens, BPaLC showed a slightly longer and sustained effect on QTcF prolongation, but the differences (both in magnitude of change and trajectory over time) were clinically unimportant. The disparity in the risk of QTc prolongation across countries would be an important factor to further investigate when evaluating monitoring strategies.
Conference Material > Abstract
Gotham D, Martin M, Barber M, Kazounis E, Batts C, et al.
MSF Scientific Day International 2024. 16 May 2024; DOI:10.57740/aMphKRQ
INTRODUCTION
Clinical trials are a cornerstone of medical innovation. Nonetheless, little information on the cost of conducting clinical trials is available, especially for clinical trials in the global south. This lack of data and transparency hinders the creation of reliable cost estimates and adequate funding of clinical trials in resource- limited settings. Following the recent adoption of the Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) Clinical Trial Transparency Policy, we present a detailed cost report for TB-PRACTECAL.
METHODS
TB-PRACTECAL was an open-label, phase 2–3, multicentre randomised trial of all-oral regimens for the treatment of drug- resistant tuberculosis. Trial planning began in 2013 and work on publications continued into 2023. The trial took place in six sites across Belarus, South Africa, and Uzbekistan, and enrolled 552 patients. We analysed accounting data for the TB-PRACTECAL project, comprehensively including different costs, presented into 27 categories, by site, and by year, and at the per-patient level.
RESULTS
Total costs for TB-PRACTECAL were €33.9 million, of which 26% were at central level (costs incurred by the UK clinical trial team including trial planning, management, quality assurance, and analysis of results), while 72% were at the trial site level (across all six sites) and 2% were uncategorisable. At trial sites, the largest cost category was staff (43%), followed by external diagnostic services (11%), medicines (9%), other medical consumables (7%), external non-medical services (6%), and transport and travel (6%). Among medicines, the costliest were bedaquiline (46% of medicine costs), linezolid (16%), imipenem/ cilastatin (10%), and delamanid (9%). The mean cost per patient enrolled was €61,460 across the whole trial (including trial management overhead). When only site-level costs were considered, per-patient costs ranged between €19,998 and €45,942 across the six sites.
CONCLUSION
The costs of TB-PRACTECAL were similar to previously reported estimates for comparable clinical trials. However, TB- PRACTECAL included additional costs that would not typically be incurred in a commercial trial, such as investments in clinical research infrastructure and purchase of investigative medical products. To our knowledge, this is the first time MSF, or any other entity, published and analysed the disaggregated costs of a specific clinical trial. These data could help generate reliable predictions for future clinical trials and support planning and involvement, particularly in low-resource settings. Additionally, this study highlights the role of clinical trial cost disclosure in supporting both practical and policy discussions around the development of a more equitable system of biomedical R&D and fairer medicine pricing. Additionally, we developed a financial reporting template to facilitate future reporting of clinical trial cost by MSF and other entities investing in research.
Clinical trials are a cornerstone of medical innovation. Nonetheless, little information on the cost of conducting clinical trials is available, especially for clinical trials in the global south. This lack of data and transparency hinders the creation of reliable cost estimates and adequate funding of clinical trials in resource- limited settings. Following the recent adoption of the Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) Clinical Trial Transparency Policy, we present a detailed cost report for TB-PRACTECAL.
METHODS
TB-PRACTECAL was an open-label, phase 2–3, multicentre randomised trial of all-oral regimens for the treatment of drug- resistant tuberculosis. Trial planning began in 2013 and work on publications continued into 2023. The trial took place in six sites across Belarus, South Africa, and Uzbekistan, and enrolled 552 patients. We analysed accounting data for the TB-PRACTECAL project, comprehensively including different costs, presented into 27 categories, by site, and by year, and at the per-patient level.
RESULTS
Total costs for TB-PRACTECAL were €33.9 million, of which 26% were at central level (costs incurred by the UK clinical trial team including trial planning, management, quality assurance, and analysis of results), while 72% were at the trial site level (across all six sites) and 2% were uncategorisable. At trial sites, the largest cost category was staff (43%), followed by external diagnostic services (11%), medicines (9%), other medical consumables (7%), external non-medical services (6%), and transport and travel (6%). Among medicines, the costliest were bedaquiline (46% of medicine costs), linezolid (16%), imipenem/ cilastatin (10%), and delamanid (9%). The mean cost per patient enrolled was €61,460 across the whole trial (including trial management overhead). When only site-level costs were considered, per-patient costs ranged between €19,998 and €45,942 across the six sites.
CONCLUSION
The costs of TB-PRACTECAL were similar to previously reported estimates for comparable clinical trials. However, TB- PRACTECAL included additional costs that would not typically be incurred in a commercial trial, such as investments in clinical research infrastructure and purchase of investigative medical products. To our knowledge, this is the first time MSF, or any other entity, published and analysed the disaggregated costs of a specific clinical trial. These data could help generate reliable predictions for future clinical trials and support planning and involvement, particularly in low-resource settings. Additionally, this study highlights the role of clinical trial cost disclosure in supporting both practical and policy discussions around the development of a more equitable system of biomedical R&D and fairer medicine pricing. Additionally, we developed a financial reporting template to facilitate future reporting of clinical trial cost by MSF and other entities investing in research.
Conference Material > Slide Presentation
Gotham D, Martin M, Barber M, Kazounis E, Batts C, et al.
MSF Scientific Day International 2024. 16 May 2024; DOI:10.57740/asasBXQ
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Lancet Respir Med. 1 February 2024; Volume 12 (Issue 2); 117-128.; DOI:10.1016/S2213-2600(23)00389-2
Nyang'wa BT, Berry C, Kazounis E, Motta I, Parpieva N, et al.
Lancet Respir Med. 1 February 2024; Volume 12 (Issue 2); 117-128.; DOI:10.1016/S2213-2600(23)00389-2
BACKGROUND
Around 500,000 people worldwide develop rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis each year. The proportion of successful treatment outcomes remains low and new treatments are needed. Following an interim analysis, we report the final safety and efficacy outcomes of the TB-PRACTECAL trial, evaluating the safety and efficacy of oral regimens for the treatment of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis.
METHODS
This open-label, randomised, controlled, multi-arm, multicentre, non-inferiority trial was conducted at seven hospital and community sites in Uzbekistan, Belarus, and South Africa, and enrolled participants aged 15 years and older with pulmonary rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1:1 ratio using variable block randomisation and stratified by trial site, to receive 36-80 week standard care; 24-week oral bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid (BPaL); BPaL plus clofazimine (BPaLC); or BPaL plus moxifloxacin (BPaLM) in stage one of the trial, and in a 1:1 ratio to receive standard care or BPaLM in stage two of the trial, the results of which are described here. Laboratory staff and trial sponsors were masked to group assignment and outcomes were assessed by unmasked investigators. The primary outcome was the percentage of participants with a composite unfavourable outcome (treatment failure, death, treatment discontinuation, disease recurrence, or loss to follow-up) at 72 weeks after randomisation in the modified intention-to-treat population (all participants with rifampicin-resistant disease who received at least one dose of study medication) and the per-protocol population (a subset of the modified intention-to-treat population excluding participants who did not complete a protocol-adherent course of treatment (other than because of treatment failure or death) and those who discontinued treatment early because they violated at least one of the inclusion or exclusion criteria). Safety was measured in the safety population. The non-inferiority margin was 12%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02589782, and is complete.
FINDINGS
Between Jan 16, 2017, and March 18, 2021, 680 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 552 were enrolled and randomly assigned (152 to the standard care group, 151 to the BPaLM group, 126 to the BPaLC group, and 123 to the BPaL group). The standard care and BPaLM groups proceeded to stage two and are reported here, post-hoc analyses of the BPaLC and BPaL groups are also reported. 151 participants in the BPaLM group and 151 in the standard care group were included in the safety population, with 138 in the BPaLM group and 137 in the standard care group in the modified intention-to-treat population. In the modified intention-to-treat population, unfavourable outcomes were reported in 16 (12%) of 137 participants for whom outcome was assessable in the BPaLM group and 56 (41%) of 137 participants in the standard care group (risk difference -29·2 percentage points [96·6% CI -39·8 to -18·6]; non-inferiority and superiority p<0·0001). 34 (23%) of 151 participants receiving BPaLM had adverse events of grade 3 or higher or serious adverse events, compared with 72 (48%) of 151 participants receiving standard care (risk difference -25·2 percentage points [96·6% CI -36·4 to -13·9]). Five deaths were reported in the standard care group by week 72, of which one (COVID-19 pneumonia) was unrelated to treatment and four (acute pancreatitis, suicide, sudden death, and sudden cardiac death) were judged to be treatment-related.
INTERPRETATION
The 24-week, all-oral BPaLM regimen is safe and efficacious for the treatment of pulmonary rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis, and was added to the WHO guidance for treatment of this condition in 2022. These findings will be key to BPaLM becoming the preferred regimen for adolescents and adults with pulmonary rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis.
Around 500,000 people worldwide develop rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis each year. The proportion of successful treatment outcomes remains low and new treatments are needed. Following an interim analysis, we report the final safety and efficacy outcomes of the TB-PRACTECAL trial, evaluating the safety and efficacy of oral regimens for the treatment of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis.
METHODS
This open-label, randomised, controlled, multi-arm, multicentre, non-inferiority trial was conducted at seven hospital and community sites in Uzbekistan, Belarus, and South Africa, and enrolled participants aged 15 years and older with pulmonary rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1:1 ratio using variable block randomisation and stratified by trial site, to receive 36-80 week standard care; 24-week oral bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid (BPaL); BPaL plus clofazimine (BPaLC); or BPaL plus moxifloxacin (BPaLM) in stage one of the trial, and in a 1:1 ratio to receive standard care or BPaLM in stage two of the trial, the results of which are described here. Laboratory staff and trial sponsors were masked to group assignment and outcomes were assessed by unmasked investigators. The primary outcome was the percentage of participants with a composite unfavourable outcome (treatment failure, death, treatment discontinuation, disease recurrence, or loss to follow-up) at 72 weeks after randomisation in the modified intention-to-treat population (all participants with rifampicin-resistant disease who received at least one dose of study medication) and the per-protocol population (a subset of the modified intention-to-treat population excluding participants who did not complete a protocol-adherent course of treatment (other than because of treatment failure or death) and those who discontinued treatment early because they violated at least one of the inclusion or exclusion criteria). Safety was measured in the safety population. The non-inferiority margin was 12%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02589782, and is complete.
FINDINGS
Between Jan 16, 2017, and March 18, 2021, 680 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 552 were enrolled and randomly assigned (152 to the standard care group, 151 to the BPaLM group, 126 to the BPaLC group, and 123 to the BPaL group). The standard care and BPaLM groups proceeded to stage two and are reported here, post-hoc analyses of the BPaLC and BPaL groups are also reported. 151 participants in the BPaLM group and 151 in the standard care group were included in the safety population, with 138 in the BPaLM group and 137 in the standard care group in the modified intention-to-treat population. In the modified intention-to-treat population, unfavourable outcomes were reported in 16 (12%) of 137 participants for whom outcome was assessable in the BPaLM group and 56 (41%) of 137 participants in the standard care group (risk difference -29·2 percentage points [96·6% CI -39·8 to -18·6]; non-inferiority and superiority p<0·0001). 34 (23%) of 151 participants receiving BPaLM had adverse events of grade 3 or higher or serious adverse events, compared with 72 (48%) of 151 participants receiving standard care (risk difference -25·2 percentage points [96·6% CI -36·4 to -13·9]). Five deaths were reported in the standard care group by week 72, of which one (COVID-19 pneumonia) was unrelated to treatment and four (acute pancreatitis, suicide, sudden death, and sudden cardiac death) were judged to be treatment-related.
INTERPRETATION
The 24-week, all-oral BPaLM regimen is safe and efficacious for the treatment of pulmonary rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis, and was added to the WHO guidance for treatment of this condition in 2022. These findings will be key to BPaLM becoming the preferred regimen for adolescents and adults with pulmonary rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis.
Conference Material > Poster
Motta I, Cusinato M, Ludman A, Abdrasuliev T, Butabekov I, et al.
MSF Scientific Day International 2023. 7 June 2023; DOI:10.57740/vz2n-4971
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
N Engl J Med. 22 December 2022; Volume 387 (Issue 25); 2331-2343.; DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa2117166
Nyang'wa BT, Berry C, Kazounis E, Motta I, Parpieva N, et al.
N Engl J Med. 22 December 2022; Volume 387 (Issue 25); 2331-2343.; DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa2117166
BACKGROUND
In patients with rifampin-resistant tuberculosis, all-oral treatment regimens that are more effective, shorter, and have a more acceptable side-effect profile than current regimens are needed.
METHODS
We conducted an open-label, phase 2–3, multicenter, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of three 24-week, all-oral regimens for the treatment of rifampin-resistant tuberculosis. Patients in Belarus, South Africa, and Uzbekistan who were 15 years of age or older and had rifampin-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis were enrolled. In stage 2 of the trial, a 24-week regimen of bedaquiline, pretomanid, linezolid, and moxifloxacin (BPaLM) was compared with a 9-to-20-month standard-care regimen. The primary outcome was an unfavorable status (a composite of death, treatment failure, treatment discontinuation, loss to follow-up, or recurrence of tuberculosis) at 72 weeks after randomization. The noninferiority margin was 12 percentage points.
RESULTS
Recruitment was terminated early. Of 301 patients in stage 2 of the trial, 145, 128, and 90 patients were evaluable in the intention-to-treat, modified intention-to-treat, and per-protocol populations, respectively. In the modified intention-to-treat analysis, 11% of the patients in the BPaLM group and 48% of those in the standard-care group had a primary-outcome event (risk difference, -37 percentage points; 96.6% confidence interval [CI], -53 to -22). In the per-protocol analysis, 4% of the patients in the BPaLM group and 12% of those in the standard-care group had a primary-outcome event (risk difference, -9 percentage points; 96.6% CI, -22 to 4). In the as-treated population, the incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher or serious adverse events was lower in the BPaLM group than in the standard-care group (19% vs. 59%).
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with rifampin-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis, a 24-week, all-oral regimen was noninferior to the accepted standard-care treatment, and it had a better safety profile. (Funded by Médecins sans Frontières; TB-PRACTECAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02589782. opens in new tab.)
In patients with rifampin-resistant tuberculosis, all-oral treatment regimens that are more effective, shorter, and have a more acceptable side-effect profile than current regimens are needed.
METHODS
We conducted an open-label, phase 2–3, multicenter, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of three 24-week, all-oral regimens for the treatment of rifampin-resistant tuberculosis. Patients in Belarus, South Africa, and Uzbekistan who were 15 years of age or older and had rifampin-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis were enrolled. In stage 2 of the trial, a 24-week regimen of bedaquiline, pretomanid, linezolid, and moxifloxacin (BPaLM) was compared with a 9-to-20-month standard-care regimen. The primary outcome was an unfavorable status (a composite of death, treatment failure, treatment discontinuation, loss to follow-up, or recurrence of tuberculosis) at 72 weeks after randomization. The noninferiority margin was 12 percentage points.
RESULTS
Recruitment was terminated early. Of 301 patients in stage 2 of the trial, 145, 128, and 90 patients were evaluable in the intention-to-treat, modified intention-to-treat, and per-protocol populations, respectively. In the modified intention-to-treat analysis, 11% of the patients in the BPaLM group and 48% of those in the standard-care group had a primary-outcome event (risk difference, -37 percentage points; 96.6% confidence interval [CI], -53 to -22). In the per-protocol analysis, 4% of the patients in the BPaLM group and 12% of those in the standard-care group had a primary-outcome event (risk difference, -9 percentage points; 96.6% CI, -22 to 4). In the as-treated population, the incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher or serious adverse events was lower in the BPaLM group than in the standard-care group (19% vs. 59%).
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with rifampin-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis, a 24-week, all-oral regimen was noninferior to the accepted standard-care treatment, and it had a better safety profile. (Funded by Médecins sans Frontières; TB-PRACTECAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02589782. opens in new tab.)
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
PLOS Glob Public Health. 7 December 2022; Volume 2 (Issue 12); e0001337.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pgph.0001337
Sweeney S, Berry C, Kazounis E, Motta I, Vassall A, et al.
PLOS Glob Public Health. 7 December 2022; Volume 2 (Issue 12); e0001337.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pgph.0001337
Current options for treating tuberculosis (TB) that is resistant to rifampicin (RR-TB) are few, and regimens are often long and poorly tolerated. Following recent evidence from the TB-PRACTECAL trial countries are considering programmatic uptake of 6-month, all-oral treatment regimens. We used a Markov model to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of three regimens containing bedaquiline, pretomanid and linezolid (BPaL) with and without moxifloxacin (BPaLM) or clofazimine (BPaLC) compared with the current mix of long and short standard of care (SOC) regimens to treat RR-TB from the provider perspective in India, Georgia, Philippines, and South Africa. We estimated total costs (2019 USD) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) over a 20-year time horizon. Costs and DALYs were discounted at 3% in the base case. Parameter uncertainty was tested with univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. We found that all three regimens would improve health outcomes and reduce costs compared with the current programmatic mix of long and short SOC regimens in all four countries. BPaL was the most cost-saving regimen in all countries, saving $112-$1,173 per person. BPaLM was the preferred regimen at a willingness to pay per DALY of 0.5 GDP per capita in all settings. Our findings indicate BPaL-based regimens are likely to be cost-saving and more effective than the current standard of care in a range of settings. Countries should consider programmatic uptake of BPaL-based regimens.
Journal Article > Pre-Print
medRxiv. 10 November 2022; DOI:10.1101/2022.11.08.22282060
Sweeney S, Berry C, Kazounis E, Motta I, Vassall A, et al.
medRxiv. 10 November 2022; DOI:10.1101/2022.11.08.22282060
INTRODUCTION
Current options for treating tuberculosis (TB) that is resistant to rifampicin (RR-TB) are few, and regimens are often long and poorly tolerated. Following recent evidence from the TB-PRACTECAL trial countries are considering programmatic uptake of 6-month, all-oral treatment regimens.
METHODS
We used a Markov model to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of three regimens containing bedaquiline, pretomanid and linezolid (BPaL) with and without moxifloxacin (BPaLM) or clofazimine (BPaLC) compared with the current mix of long and short standard of care (SOC) regimens to treat RR-TB from the provider perspective in India, Georgia, Philippines, and South Africa. We estimated total costs (2019 USD) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) over a 20-year time horizon. Costs and DALYs were discounted at 3% in the base case. Parameter uncertainty was tested with univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.
RESULTS
We found that all three regimens would improve health outcomes and reduce costs compared with the current programmatic mix of long and short SOC regimens in all four countries. BPaL was the most cost-saving regimen in all countries, saving $112-$1,173 per person. BPaLM was the preferred regimen at a willingness to pay per DALY of 0.5 GDP per capita in all settings.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings indicate BPaL-based regimens are likely to be cost-saving and more effective than the current standard of care in a range of settings. Countries should consider programmatic uptake of BPaL-based regimens.
Current options for treating tuberculosis (TB) that is resistant to rifampicin (RR-TB) are few, and regimens are often long and poorly tolerated. Following recent evidence from the TB-PRACTECAL trial countries are considering programmatic uptake of 6-month, all-oral treatment regimens.
METHODS
We used a Markov model to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of three regimens containing bedaquiline, pretomanid and linezolid (BPaL) with and without moxifloxacin (BPaLM) or clofazimine (BPaLC) compared with the current mix of long and short standard of care (SOC) regimens to treat RR-TB from the provider perspective in India, Georgia, Philippines, and South Africa. We estimated total costs (2019 USD) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) over a 20-year time horizon. Costs and DALYs were discounted at 3% in the base case. Parameter uncertainty was tested with univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.
RESULTS
We found that all three regimens would improve health outcomes and reduce costs compared with the current programmatic mix of long and short SOC regimens in all four countries. BPaL was the most cost-saving regimen in all countries, saving $112-$1,173 per person. BPaLM was the preferred regimen at a willingness to pay per DALY of 0.5 GDP per capita in all settings.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings indicate BPaL-based regimens are likely to be cost-saving and more effective than the current standard of care in a range of settings. Countries should consider programmatic uptake of BPaL-based regimens.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Trials. 13 June 2022; Volume 23 (Issue 1); 484.; DOI:10.1186/s13063-022-06331-8
Berry C, du Cros PAK, Fielding K, Gajewski S, Kazounis E, et al.
Trials. 13 June 2022; Volume 23 (Issue 1); 484.; DOI:10.1186/s13063-022-06331-8
BACKGROUND
Globally rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis disease affects around 460,000 people each year. Currently recommended regimens are 9-24 months duration, have poor efficacy and carry significant toxicity. A shorter, less toxic and more efficacious regimen would improve outcomes for people with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis.
METHODS
TB-PRACTECAL is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase II/III non-inferiority trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of 24-week regimens containing bedaquiline and pretomanid to treat rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis. Conducted in Uzbekistan, South Africa and Belarus, patients aged 15 and above with rifampicin-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis and requiring a new course of therapy were eligible for inclusion irrespective of HIV status. In the first stage, equivalent to a phase IIB trial, patients were randomly assigned one of four regimens, stratified by site. Investigational regimens include oral bedaquiline, pretomanid and linezolid. Additionally, two of the regimens also included moxifloxacin (arm 1) and clofazimine (arm 2) respectively. Treatment was administered under direct observation for 24 weeks in investigational arms and 36 to 96 weeks in the standard of care arm. The second stage of the study was equivalent to a phase III trial, investigating the safety and efficacy of the most promising regimen/s. The primary outcome was the percentage of unfavourable outcomes at 72 weeks post-randomisation. This was a composite of early treatment discontinuation, treatment failure, recurrence, lost-to-follow-up and death. The study is being conducted in accordance with ICH-GCP and full ethical approval was obtained from Médecins sans Frontières ethical review board, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine ethical review board as well as ERBs and regulatory authorities at each site.
DISCUSSION
TB-PRACTECAL is an ambitious trial using adaptive design to accelerate regimen assessment and bring novel treatments that are effective and safe to patients quicker. The trial took a patient-centred approach, adapting to best practice guidelines throughout recruitment. The implementation faced significant challenges from the COVID-19 pandemic. The trial was terminated early for efficacy on the advice of the DSMB and will report on data collected up to the end of recruitment and, additionally, the planned final analysis at 72 weeks after the end of recruitment.
Globally rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis disease affects around 460,000 people each year. Currently recommended regimens are 9-24 months duration, have poor efficacy and carry significant toxicity. A shorter, less toxic and more efficacious regimen would improve outcomes for people with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis.
METHODS
TB-PRACTECAL is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase II/III non-inferiority trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of 24-week regimens containing bedaquiline and pretomanid to treat rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis. Conducted in Uzbekistan, South Africa and Belarus, patients aged 15 and above with rifampicin-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis and requiring a new course of therapy were eligible for inclusion irrespective of HIV status. In the first stage, equivalent to a phase IIB trial, patients were randomly assigned one of four regimens, stratified by site. Investigational regimens include oral bedaquiline, pretomanid and linezolid. Additionally, two of the regimens also included moxifloxacin (arm 1) and clofazimine (arm 2) respectively. Treatment was administered under direct observation for 24 weeks in investigational arms and 36 to 96 weeks in the standard of care arm. The second stage of the study was equivalent to a phase III trial, investigating the safety and efficacy of the most promising regimen/s. The primary outcome was the percentage of unfavourable outcomes at 72 weeks post-randomisation. This was a composite of early treatment discontinuation, treatment failure, recurrence, lost-to-follow-up and death. The study is being conducted in accordance with ICH-GCP and full ethical approval was obtained from Médecins sans Frontières ethical review board, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine ethical review board as well as ERBs and regulatory authorities at each site.
DISCUSSION
TB-PRACTECAL is an ambitious trial using adaptive design to accelerate regimen assessment and bring novel treatments that are effective and safe to patients quicker. The trial took a patient-centred approach, adapting to best practice guidelines throughout recruitment. The implementation faced significant challenges from the COVID-19 pandemic. The trial was terminated early for efficacy on the advice of the DSMB and will report on data collected up to the end of recruitment and, additionally, the planned final analysis at 72 weeks after the end of recruitment.