BACKGROUND
The 2022 WHO guidelines on multi-drug/rifampicin resistant tuberculosis (MDR/RR-TB) recommend six months of bedaquiline (Bdq) in the all-oral 9-month shorter regimen and six months or longer for Bdq and delamanid (Dlm) in the 18-20-month longer regimen. However, lack of evidence on extended treatment using Bdq or Dlm has limited their use to six months. We examine the frequency and incidence of QT prolongation based on duration of Bdq and/or Dlm use in longer regimens.
METHODS
We analyzed a prospective cohort of MDR/RR-TB patients from 16 countries who initiated treatment with Bdq and/or Dlm containing regimens from 1 April 2015-30 September 2018. Data were systematically collected using a shared protocol. The outcome of interest was the first clinically relevant prolonged QT interval (grade 3 or above) or a Serious Adverse Event (SAE) involving prolonged QT of any grade.
RESULTS
Among 2,553 patients, 59% received >6 months of Bdq and/or Dlm. Of these, 579 (20.9%) patients experienced a prolonged QT event, the majority (95.5%) being grade 1 or 2. Sixty-four(2.5%) patients experienced the outcome of interest with only 12 (0.5%) having ≥ 1 QT prolonging drugs permanently suspended. The incidence rate of the first prolonged QT event was highest in the first six months of treatment and lower in subsequent six-month periods.
CONCLUSION
We demonstrate that Bdq and/or Dlm use beyond six months is safe in longer MDR/RR-TB regimens with most clinically relevant QT prolongation events occurring in the first six months. ECG monitoring for early identification of QT prolongating events is possible in programmatic conditions.
Quantification of recurrence risk following successful treatment is crucial to evaluating regimens for multidrug- or rifampicin-resistant (MDR/RR) tuberculosis (TB). However, such analyses are complicated when some patients die or become lost during post-treatment-follow-up.
METHODS
We analyzed data on 1,991 patients who successfully completed a longer MDR/RR-TB regimen containing bedaquiline and/or delamanid between 2015 and 2018 in 16 countries. Using five approaches for handling post-treatment deaths, we estimated the six-month post-treatment TB recurrence risk overall, and by HIV status. We used inverse-probability-weighting to account for patients with missing follow-up and investigated the impact of potential bias from excluding these patients without applying inverse-probability weights.
RESULTS
The estimated TB recurrence risk was 7.4 per 1000 (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.5,12.9) when deaths were handled as non-recurrences, and 7.6 per 1000 (95% CI: 3.6,13.1) when deaths were censored and inverse-probability weights were applied to account for the excluded deaths. The estimated risk of composite recurrence outcomes were 25.5 (95% CI: 15.4,38.1), 11.7 (95% CI: 6.5,18.3), and 8.6 (95% CI: 4.2,14.6) per 1000 for recurrence or 1) any death, 2) death with unknown or TB-related cause, 3) TB-related death, respectively. Corresponding relative risks for HIV status varied in direction and magnitude. Exclusion of patients with missing follow-up without inverse-probability-weighting had a small impact on estimates.
CONCLUSIONS
The estimated six-month TB recurrence risk was low, and the association with HIV status was inconclusive due to few recurrence events. Estimation of post-treatment recurrence will be enhanced by explicit assumptions about deaths and appropriate adjustment for missing follow-up data.
Effectiveness of bedaquiline use beyond six months in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis
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.
Evidence of the effectiveness of the WHO-recommended design of longer individualized regimens for multidrug- or rifampicin-resistant TB (MDR/RR-TB) is limited.
OBJECTIVES
To report end-of-treatment outcomes for MDR/RR-TB patients from a 2015–2018 multi-country cohort that received a regimen consistent with current 2022 WHO updated recommendations and describe the complexities of comparing regimens.
METHODS
We analyzed a subset of participants from the endTB Observational Study who initiated a longer MDR/RR-TB regimen that was consistent with subsequent 2022 WHO guidance on regimen design for longer treatments. We excluded individuals who received an injectable agent or who received fewer than four likely effective drugs.
RESULTS
Of the 759 participants analyzed, 607 (80.0%, 95% CI 77.0–82.7) experienced successful end-of-treatment outcomes. The frequency of success was high across groups, whether stratified on number of Group A drugs or fluoroquinolone resistance, and ranged from 72.1% to 90.0%. Regimens were highly variable regarding composition and the duration of individual drugs.
CONCLUSIONS
Longer, all-oral, individualized regimens that were consistent with 2022 WHO guidance on regimen design had high frequencies of treatment success. Heterogeneous regimen compositions and drug durations precluded meaningful comparisons. Future research should examine which combinations of drugs maximize safety/tolerability and effectiveness.
The WHO provides standardized outcome definitions for rifampicin-resistant (RR) and multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB. However, operationalizing these definitions can be challenging in some clinical settings, and incorrect classification may generate bias in reporting and research. Outcomes calculated by algorithms can increase standardization and be adapted to suit the research question. We evaluated concordance between clinician-assigned treatment outcomes and outcomes calculated based on one of two standardized algorithms, one which identified failure at its earliest possible recurrence (i.e., failure-dominant algorithm), and one which calculated the outcome based on culture results at the end of treatment, regardless of early occurrence of failure (i.e., success-dominant algorithm).
METHODS
Among 2,525 patients enrolled in the multi-country endTB observational study, we calculated the frequencies of concordance using cross-tabulations of clinician-assigned and algorithm-assigned outcomes. We summarized the common discrepancies.
RESULTS
Treatment success calculated by algorithms had high concordance with treatment success assigned by clinicians (95.8 and 97.7% for failure-dominant and success-dominant algorithms, respectively). The frequency and pattern of the most common discrepancies varied by country.
CONCLUSION
High concordance was found between clinician-assigned and algorithm-assigned outcomes. Heterogeneity in discrepancies across settings suggests that using algorithms to calculate outcomes may minimize bias.
BACKGROUND
Conversion of sputum culture from positive to negative for M. tuberculosis is a key indicator of treatment response. An initial positive culture is a pre-requisite to observe conversion. Consequently, patients with a missing or negative initial culture are excluded from analyses of conversion outcomes. To identify the initial, or “baseline” culture, researchers must define a sample collection interval. An interval extending past treatment initiation can increase sample size but may introduce selection bias because patients without a positive pre-treatment culture must survive and remain in care to have a culture in the post-treatment interval.
METHODS
We used simulated data and data from the endTB observational cohort to investigate the potential for bias when extending baseline culture intervals past treatment initiation. We evaluated bias in the proportion with six-month conversion.
RESULTS
In simulation studies, the potential for bias depended on the proportion of patients missing a pre-treatment culture, proportion with conversion, proportion culture positive at treatment initiation, and proportion of patients missing a pre-treatment culture who would have been observed to be culture positive, had they had a culture. In observational data, the maximum potential for bias when reporting the proportion with conversion reached five percentage points in some sites.
CONCLUSION
Extending the allowable baseline interval past treatment initiation may introduce selection bias. If investigators choose to extend the baseline collection interval past treatment initiation, the proportion missing a pre-treatment culture and the number of deaths and losses to follow up during the post-treatment allowable interval should be clearly enumerated.
Concomitant use of bedaquiline (Bdq) and delamanid (Dlm) for multi-drug/rifampicin resistant tuberculosis (MDR/RR-TB) has raised concerns about a potentially poor risk-benefit ratio. Yet, this combination is an important alternative for patients infected with strains of TB with complex drug resistance profiles or who cannot tolerate other therapies. We assessed safety and treatment outcomes of MDR/RR-TB patients receiving concomitant Bdq and Dlm, along with other second-line anti-TB drugs.
METHODS
We conducted a multi-centric, prospective observational cohort study across 14 countries among patients receiving concomitant Bdq-Dlm treatment. Patients were recruited between April 2015 and September 2018 and were followed until the end of treatment. All serious adverse events and adverse events of special interest (AESI), leading to a treatment change, or judged significant by a clinician, were systematically monitored and documented.
RESULTS
Overall, 472 patients received Bdq and Dlm concomitantly. A large majority also received linezolid (89.6%) and clofazimine (84.5%). Nearly all (90.3%) had extensive disease; most (74.2%) had resistance to fluoroquinolones. The most common AESI were peripheral neuropathy (134, 28.4%) and electrolyte depletion (94, 19.9%). Acute kidney injury and myelosuppression were seen in 40 (8.5%) and 24 (5.1%) of patients, respectively. QT prolongation occurred in 7 (1.5%). Overall, 78.0% (358/458) had successful treatment outcomes, 8.9% died and 7.2% experienced treatment failure.
CONCLUSIONS
Concomitant use of Bdq and Dlm, along with linezolid and clofazimine, is safe and effective for MDR/RR-TB patients with extensive disease. Using these drugs concomitantly is a good therapeutic option for patients with resistance to many anti-TB drugs.