Journal Article > ResearchAbstract Only
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2018 September 1; Volume 22 (Issue 9); 1023-1030.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.17.0826
Snyman L, Venables E, Trivino Duran L, Mohr E, Azevedo VD, et al.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2018 September 1; Volume 22 (Issue 9); 1023-1030.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.17.0826
SETTING
Early interventions for patients who interrupt their treatment for drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) are rarely reported and assessed. A novel, patient-centred intervention for patients at risk of loss to follow-up (LTFU) from DR-TB treatment was implemented in Khayelitsha, South Africa, in September 2013.
OBJECTIVE
To explore the experiences and perceptions of patients, key support persons, health care workers (HCWs) and programme managers of a patient-centred model.
DESIGN
This was a qualitative study consisting of 18 in-depth interviews with patients, key support persons, HCWs, key informants and one focus group discussion with HCWs, between July and September 2017. Data were coded and thematically analysed.
RESULTS
The model was well perceived and viewed positively by patients, care providers and programme managers. 'Normalisation' and tolerance of occasional treatment interruptions, tracing, tailored management plans and peer support were perceived to be beneficial for retaining patients in care. Although the model was resource-demanding, health workers were convinced that it 'needs to be sustained,' and proposed solutions for its standardisation.
CONCLUSION
An intervention based on early tracing of patients who interrupt treatment, peer-delivered counselling and individualised management plans by a multidisciplinary team was considered a beneficial and acceptable model to support patients at risk of LTFU from DR-TB treatment.
Early interventions for patients who interrupt their treatment for drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) are rarely reported and assessed. A novel, patient-centred intervention for patients at risk of loss to follow-up (LTFU) from DR-TB treatment was implemented in Khayelitsha, South Africa, in September 2013.
OBJECTIVE
To explore the experiences and perceptions of patients, key support persons, health care workers (HCWs) and programme managers of a patient-centred model.
DESIGN
This was a qualitative study consisting of 18 in-depth interviews with patients, key support persons, HCWs, key informants and one focus group discussion with HCWs, between July and September 2017. Data were coded and thematically analysed.
RESULTS
The model was well perceived and viewed positively by patients, care providers and programme managers. 'Normalisation' and tolerance of occasional treatment interruptions, tracing, tailored management plans and peer support were perceived to be beneficial for retaining patients in care. Although the model was resource-demanding, health workers were convinced that it 'needs to be sustained,' and proposed solutions for its standardisation.
CONCLUSION
An intervention based on early tracing of patients who interrupt treatment, peer-delivered counselling and individualised management plans by a multidisciplinary team was considered a beneficial and acceptable model to support patients at risk of LTFU from DR-TB treatment.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
PLOS One. 2015 November 10; Volume 10 (Issue 11); e0142873.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0142873
Daniels J, Khogali MA, Mohr E, Cox V, Moyo S, et al.
PLOS One. 2015 November 10; Volume 10 (Issue 11); e0142873.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0142873
SETTING
Khayelitsha, South Africa, with high burdens of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB) and HIV co-infection.
OBJECTIVE
To describe time to antiretroviral treatment (ART) initiation among HIV-infected RR-TB patients initiating RR-TB treatment and to assess the association between time to ART initiation and treatment outcomes.
DESIGN
A retrospective cohort study of patients with RR-TB and HIV co-infection not on ART at RR-TB treatment initiation.
RESULTS
Of the 696 RR-TB and HIV-infected patients initiated on RR-TB treatment between 2009 and 2013, 303 (44%) were not on ART when RR-TB treatment was initiated. The median CD4 cell count was 126 cells/mm3. Overall 257 (85%) patients started ART during RR-TB treatment, 33 (11%) within 2 weeks, 152 (50%) between 2-8 weeks and 72 (24%) after 8 weeks. Of the 46 (15%) who never started ART, 10 (21%) died or stopped RR-TB treatment within 4 weeks and 16 (37%) had at least 4 months of RR-TB treatment. Treatment success and mortality during treatment did not vary by time to ART initiation: treatment success was 41%, 43%, and 50% among patients who started ART within 2 weeks, between 2-8 weeks, and after 8 weeks (p = 0.62), while mortality was 21%, 13% and 15% respectively (p = 0.57). Mortality was associated with never receiving ART (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 6.0, CI 2.1-18.1), CD4 count ≤100 (aHR 2.1, CI 1.0-4.5), and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) with second-line resistance (aHR 2.5, CI 1.1-5.4).
CONCLUSIONS
Despite wide variation in time to ART initiation among RR-TB patients, no differences in mortality or treatment success were observed. However, a significant proportion of patients did not initiate ART despite receiving >4 months of RR-TB treatment. Programmatic priorities should focus on ensuring all patients with RR-TB/HIV co-infection initiate ART regardless of CD4 count, with special attention for patients with CD4 counts ≤ 100 to initiate ART as soon as possible after RR-TB treatment initiation.
Khayelitsha, South Africa, with high burdens of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB) and HIV co-infection.
OBJECTIVE
To describe time to antiretroviral treatment (ART) initiation among HIV-infected RR-TB patients initiating RR-TB treatment and to assess the association between time to ART initiation and treatment outcomes.
DESIGN
A retrospective cohort study of patients with RR-TB and HIV co-infection not on ART at RR-TB treatment initiation.
RESULTS
Of the 696 RR-TB and HIV-infected patients initiated on RR-TB treatment between 2009 and 2013, 303 (44%) were not on ART when RR-TB treatment was initiated. The median CD4 cell count was 126 cells/mm3. Overall 257 (85%) patients started ART during RR-TB treatment, 33 (11%) within 2 weeks, 152 (50%) between 2-8 weeks and 72 (24%) after 8 weeks. Of the 46 (15%) who never started ART, 10 (21%) died or stopped RR-TB treatment within 4 weeks and 16 (37%) had at least 4 months of RR-TB treatment. Treatment success and mortality during treatment did not vary by time to ART initiation: treatment success was 41%, 43%, and 50% among patients who started ART within 2 weeks, between 2-8 weeks, and after 8 weeks (p = 0.62), while mortality was 21%, 13% and 15% respectively (p = 0.57). Mortality was associated with never receiving ART (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 6.0, CI 2.1-18.1), CD4 count ≤100 (aHR 2.1, CI 1.0-4.5), and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) with second-line resistance (aHR 2.5, CI 1.1-5.4).
CONCLUSIONS
Despite wide variation in time to ART initiation among RR-TB patients, no differences in mortality or treatment success were observed. However, a significant proportion of patients did not initiate ART despite receiving >4 months of RR-TB treatment. Programmatic priorities should focus on ensuring all patients with RR-TB/HIV co-infection initiate ART regardless of CD4 count, with special attention for patients with CD4 counts ≤ 100 to initiate ART as soon as possible after RR-TB treatment initiation.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Lancet Infect Dis. 2018 February 13; Volume 18 (Issue 5); 536-544.; DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30100-2
Ferlazzo G, Mohr E, Laxmeshwar C, Hewison CCH, Hughes J, et al.
Lancet Infect Dis. 2018 February 13; Volume 18 (Issue 5); 536-544.; DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30100-2
BACKGROUND
Bedaquiline and delamanid have been approved for treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis in the past 5 years. Because of theoretical safety concerns, patients have been unable to access the two drugs in combination. Médecins Sans Frontières has supported the use of combination bedaquiline and delamanid for people with few treatment options since 2016. We describe early safety and efficacy of regimens containing the bedaquiline and delamanid combination in patients with drug-resistant tuberculosis in Yerevan, Armenia; Mumbai, India; and Khayelitsha, South Africa.
METHODS
We retrospectively analysed a cohort of all patients who received 6-12 months of oral bedaquiline and delamanid in combination (400 mg bedaquiline once per day for 2 weeks, then 200 mg bedaquiline three times per week and 100 mg delamanid twice per day) in MSF-supported projects. We report serious adverse events, QTc corrected using the Fridericia formula (QTcF) interval data, and culture conversion data during the first 6 months of treatment.
FINDINGS
Between Jan 1, 2016, and Aug 31, 2016, 28 patients (median age 32·5 years [IQR 28·5-40·5], 17 men) were included in the analysis. 11 (39%) of 28 patients were HIV-positive. 24 patients (86%) had isolates resistant to fluoroquinolones; 14 patients (50%) had extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis. No patient had an increase of more than 500 ms in their QTcF interval. Four patients (14%) had six instances of QTcF increase of more than 60 ms from baseline but none permanently discontinued the drugs. 16 serious adverse events were reported in seven patients. Of 23 individuals with positive baseline cultures, 17 (74%) converted to negative by month 6 of treatment.
INTERPRETATION
Use of the bedaquiline and delamanid combination appears to reveal no additive or synergistic QTcF-prolonging effects. Access to bedaquiline and delamanid in combination should be expanded for people with few treatment options while awaiting the results of formal clinical trials.
Bedaquiline and delamanid have been approved for treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis in the past 5 years. Because of theoretical safety concerns, patients have been unable to access the two drugs in combination. Médecins Sans Frontières has supported the use of combination bedaquiline and delamanid for people with few treatment options since 2016. We describe early safety and efficacy of regimens containing the bedaquiline and delamanid combination in patients with drug-resistant tuberculosis in Yerevan, Armenia; Mumbai, India; and Khayelitsha, South Africa.
METHODS
We retrospectively analysed a cohort of all patients who received 6-12 months of oral bedaquiline and delamanid in combination (400 mg bedaquiline once per day for 2 weeks, then 200 mg bedaquiline three times per week and 100 mg delamanid twice per day) in MSF-supported projects. We report serious adverse events, QTc corrected using the Fridericia formula (QTcF) interval data, and culture conversion data during the first 6 months of treatment.
FINDINGS
Between Jan 1, 2016, and Aug 31, 2016, 28 patients (median age 32·5 years [IQR 28·5-40·5], 17 men) were included in the analysis. 11 (39%) of 28 patients were HIV-positive. 24 patients (86%) had isolates resistant to fluoroquinolones; 14 patients (50%) had extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis. No patient had an increase of more than 500 ms in their QTcF interval. Four patients (14%) had six instances of QTcF increase of more than 60 ms from baseline but none permanently discontinued the drugs. 16 serious adverse events were reported in seven patients. Of 23 individuals with positive baseline cultures, 17 (74%) converted to negative by month 6 of treatment.
INTERPRETATION
Use of the bedaquiline and delamanid combination appears to reveal no additive or synergistic QTcF-prolonging effects. Access to bedaquiline and delamanid in combination should be expanded for people with few treatment options while awaiting the results of formal clinical trials.
Journal Article > Meta-AnalysisFull Text
Lancet. 2018 September 8; 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. 2018 September 8; 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. 2018 October 25; Volume 52 (Issue 6); DOI:10.1183/13993003.01528-2018
Ndjeka N, Schnippel K, Master I, Meintjes GA, Maartens G, et al.
Eur Respir J. 2018 October 25; Volume 52 (Issue 6); DOI:10.1183/13993003.01528-2018
Background: South African patients with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis and resistance to fluoroquinolones and/or injectables (pre/XDR-TB) were granted access to bedaquiline through a Clinical Access Programme with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria.Methods: Pre/XDR-TB and XDR-TB patients were treated with 24 weeks bedaquiline within an optimised, individualised background regimen that could include levofloxacin, linezolid and clofazimine as needed.Results: 200 patients were enrolled: 87 (43.9%) with XDR-TB, 99 (49.3%) were female, median age 34 years (IQR 27, 42). 134 (67.0%) were living with HIV; median CD4+ 281 (IQR 130; 467) and all on antiretroviral therapy.16/200 patients (8.0%) did not complete 6 months of bedaquiline of which 8 were lost to follow up, 6 died, 1 stopped for side effects and 1 patient was diagnosed with drug-sensitive TB.146/200 (73.0%) patients had favourable outcomes: 139/200 were cured (69.5%) and 7 completed treatment (3.5%). 25 died (12.5%), were lost from treatment (10.0%), 9 had treatment failure (4.5%).22 adverse events were attributed to bedaquiline: including QTcF >500 ms (n=5), QTcF increase >50 ms from baseline (n=11), paroxysmal atrial flutter (n=1).Conclusion: Bedaquiline added to an optimised background regimen was associated with a high rate of successful treatment outcomes for this MDR-TB and XDR-TB cohort.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
PLOS One. 2017 May 18; Volume 12 (Issue 5); e0178054.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0178054
Mohr E, Daniels J, Beko B, Isaakidis P, Cox V, et al.
PLOS One. 2017 May 18; Volume 12 (Issue 5); e0178054.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0178054
BACKGROUND
Daily directly-observed therapy (DOT) is recommended for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB) patients throughout treatment. We assessed the impact of self-administered treatment (SAT) in a South African township with high rates of RR-TB and HIV.
METHODS
Community-supported SAT for patients who completed the intensive phase was piloted in five primary care clinics in Khayelitsha. We compared final treatment outcomes among RR-TB patients initiating treatment before (standard-of-care (SOC)-cohort, January 2010-July 2013) and after the implementation of the pilot (SAT-cohort, January 2012-December 2014). All patients with outcomes before January 1, 2017 were considered in the analysis of outcomes.
RESULTS
One-hundred-eighteen patients in the SOC-cohort and 174 patients in the SAT-cohort had final RR-TB treatment outcomes; 70% and 73% were HIV-co-infected, respectively. The proportion of patients with a final outcome of loss to follow-up (LTFU) did not differ whether treated in the SOC (25/118, 21.2%) or SAT-cohort (31/174, 17.8%) (P = 0.47). There were no significant differences in the time to 24-month LTFU among HIV-infected and uninfected patients (HR 0.90, 95% CI: 0.51-1.6, P = 0.71), or among patients enrolled in the SOC-cohort versus the SAT-cohort (HR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.49-1.4, P = 0.50) who received at least 6-months of RR-TB treatment.
CONCLUSION
The introduction of SAT during the continuation phase of RR-TB treatment does not adversely affect final RR-TB treatment outcomes in a high TB and HIV-burden setting. This differentiated, patient-centred model of care could be considered in RR-TB programmes to decrease the burden of DOT on patients and health facilities.
Daily directly-observed therapy (DOT) is recommended for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB) patients throughout treatment. We assessed the impact of self-administered treatment (SAT) in a South African township with high rates of RR-TB and HIV.
METHODS
Community-supported SAT for patients who completed the intensive phase was piloted in five primary care clinics in Khayelitsha. We compared final treatment outcomes among RR-TB patients initiating treatment before (standard-of-care (SOC)-cohort, January 2010-July 2013) and after the implementation of the pilot (SAT-cohort, January 2012-December 2014). All patients with outcomes before January 1, 2017 were considered in the analysis of outcomes.
RESULTS
One-hundred-eighteen patients in the SOC-cohort and 174 patients in the SAT-cohort had final RR-TB treatment outcomes; 70% and 73% were HIV-co-infected, respectively. The proportion of patients with a final outcome of loss to follow-up (LTFU) did not differ whether treated in the SOC (25/118, 21.2%) or SAT-cohort (31/174, 17.8%) (P = 0.47). There were no significant differences in the time to 24-month LTFU among HIV-infected and uninfected patients (HR 0.90, 95% CI: 0.51-1.6, P = 0.71), or among patients enrolled in the SOC-cohort versus the SAT-cohort (HR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.49-1.4, P = 0.50) who received at least 6-months of RR-TB treatment.
CONCLUSION
The introduction of SAT during the continuation phase of RR-TB treatment does not adversely affect final RR-TB treatment outcomes in a high TB and HIV-burden setting. This differentiated, patient-centred model of care could be considered in RR-TB programmes to decrease the burden of DOT on patients and health facilities.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
PLOS One. 2018 September 14; Volume 13 (Issue 9); e0203888.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0203888
Mohr E, Snyman L, Mbakaz Z, Caldwell J, De Azevedo V, et al.
PLOS One. 2018 September 14; Volume 13 (Issue 9); e0203888.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0203888
BACKGROUND
Self-administered treatment (SAT), a differentiated model of care for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB), might address adherence challenges faced by patients and health care systems. This study explored patient, health-care worker (HCW) and community care worker (CCW) perspectives on a SAT pilot programme in South Africa, in which patients were given medication to take at home with the optional support of a CCW.
METHODS
We conducted a mixed-methods study from July 2016-June 2017. The quantitative component included semi-structured questionnaires with patients, HCWs and CCWs; the qualitative component involved in-depth interviews with patients enrolled in the pilot programme. Interviews were conducted in isiXhosa, translated, transcribed and manually coded.
RESULTS
Overall, 27 patients, 12 HCWs and 44 CCWs were enrolled in the quantitative component; nine patients were also interviewed. Of the 27 patients who completed semi-structured questionnaires, 22 were HIV-infected and 17 received a monthly supply of RR TB treatment. Most HCWs and CCWs (10 and 32, respectively) understood the pilot programme; approximately half (n = 14) of the patients could not correctly describe the pilot programme. Overall, 11 and 41 HCWs and CCWs reported that the pilot programme promoted treatment adherence. Additionally, 11 HCWs reported that the pilot programme relieved pressure on the clinic. Key qualitative findings highlighted the importance of a support person and how the flexibility of SAT enabled integration of treatment into their daily routines and reduced time spent in clinics. The pilot programme was also perceived to allow patients more autonomy and made it easier for them to manage side-effects.
CONCLUSION
The SAT pilot programme was acceptable from the perspective of patients, HCWs and CCWs and should be considered as a differentiated model of care for RR-TB, particularly in settings with high burdens of HIV, in order to ease management of treatment for patients and health-care providers.
Self-administered treatment (SAT), a differentiated model of care for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB), might address adherence challenges faced by patients and health care systems. This study explored patient, health-care worker (HCW) and community care worker (CCW) perspectives on a SAT pilot programme in South Africa, in which patients were given medication to take at home with the optional support of a CCW.
METHODS
We conducted a mixed-methods study from July 2016-June 2017. The quantitative component included semi-structured questionnaires with patients, HCWs and CCWs; the qualitative component involved in-depth interviews with patients enrolled in the pilot programme. Interviews were conducted in isiXhosa, translated, transcribed and manually coded.
RESULTS
Overall, 27 patients, 12 HCWs and 44 CCWs were enrolled in the quantitative component; nine patients were also interviewed. Of the 27 patients who completed semi-structured questionnaires, 22 were HIV-infected and 17 received a monthly supply of RR TB treatment. Most HCWs and CCWs (10 and 32, respectively) understood the pilot programme; approximately half (n = 14) of the patients could not correctly describe the pilot programme. Overall, 11 and 41 HCWs and CCWs reported that the pilot programme promoted treatment adherence. Additionally, 11 HCWs reported that the pilot programme relieved pressure on the clinic. Key qualitative findings highlighted the importance of a support person and how the flexibility of SAT enabled integration of treatment into their daily routines and reduced time spent in clinics. The pilot programme was also perceived to allow patients more autonomy and made it easier for them to manage side-effects.
CONCLUSION
The SAT pilot programme was acceptable from the perspective of patients, HCWs and CCWs and should be considered as a differentiated model of care for RR-TB, particularly in settings with high burdens of HIV, in order to ease management of treatment for patients and health-care providers.
Journal Article > LetterFull Text
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 May 1; Volume 19; DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(19)30168-9
Mohr E, Ferlazzo G, Hewison CCH, De Azevedo V, Isaakidis P
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 May 1; Volume 19; DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(19)30168-9
Here we report on the final outcomes for the cohort of 28 patients from Armenia, India, and South Africa who initiated regimens containing the combination of bedaquiline and delamanid from January to August, 2016, for the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in our cohort study.1 The median duration on combination treatment was 12 months (interquartile range [IQR] 5·9–20·0); 17 (61%) of 28 patients received the combination for more than 6 months.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Eur Respir J. 2018 May 3; Volume 51 (Issue 6); 1800017.; DOI:10.1183/13993003.00017-2018
Mohr E, Hughes J, Reuter A, Trivino Duran L, Ferlazzo G, et al.
Eur Respir J. 2018 May 3; Volume 51 (Issue 6); 1800017.; DOI:10.1183/13993003.00017-2018
Experience with delamanid (Dlm) is limited, particularly among HIV-positive individuals. We describe early efficacy and safety data from a programmatic setting in South Africa. This was a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving Dlm-containing treatment regimens between November 2015 and August 2017. We report 12-month interim outcomes, sputum culture conversion (SCC) by months 2 and 6, serious adverse events (SAEs) and QT intervals corrected using the Frederica formula (QTcF). Overall, 103 patients were initiated on Dlm; 79 (77%) were HIV positive. The main indication for Dlm was intolerance to second-line anti-tuberculosis (TB) drugs (n=58, 56%). There were 12 months of follow-up for 46 patients; 28 (61%) had a favourable outcome (cure, treatment completion or culture negativity). Positive cultures were found for 57 patients at Dlm initiation; 16 out of 31 (52%) had SCC within 2 months and 25 out of 31 (81%) within 6 months. There were 67 SAEs reported in 29 patients (28%). There were four instances of QTcF prolongation >500 ms in two patients (2%), leading to permanent discontinuation in one case; however, no cardiac arrhythmias occurred. This large cohort of difficult-to-treat patients receiving Dlm for rifampicin-resistant TB treatment in a programmatic setting with high HIV prevalence had favourable early treatment response and tolerated treatment well. Dlm should remain available, particularly for those who cannot be treated with conventional regimens or with limited treatment options.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2017 October 1; Volume 21 (Issue 10); 1100-1105.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.17.0372
Mohr E, Daniels J, Muller O, Furin J, Chabalala B, et al.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2017 October 1; Volume 21 (Issue 10); 1100-1105.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.17.0372
OBJECTIVE
To assess the proportion of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB) patients with potential earlier RR-TB diagnoses in Khayelitsha, South Africa.
DESIGN
We conducted a retrospective analysis among RR-TB patients diagnosed from 2012 to 2014. Patients were considered to have missed opportunities for earlier diagnosis if 1) they were incorrectly screened according to the Western Cape diagnostic algorithm; 2) the first specimen was not tested using Xpert® MTB/RIF; 3) no specimen was ever tested; or 4) the initial Xpert test showed a negative result, but no subsequent specimen was sent for follow-up testing in human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients.
RESULTS
Among 543 patients, 386 (71%) were diagnosed with Xpert and 112 (21%) had had at least one presentation at a health care facility within the 6 months before the presentation at which RR-TB was diagnosed. Overall, 95/543 (18%) patients were screened incorrectly at some point: 48 at diagnostic presentation only, 38 at previous presentation only, and 9 at both previous and diagnostic presentations.
CONCLUSIONS
These data show that a significant proportion of RR-TB patients might have been diagnosed earlier, and suggest that case detection could be improved if diagnostic algorithms were followed more closely. Further training and monitoring is required to ensure the greatest benefit from universal Xpert implementation.
To assess the proportion of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB) patients with potential earlier RR-TB diagnoses in Khayelitsha, South Africa.
DESIGN
We conducted a retrospective analysis among RR-TB patients diagnosed from 2012 to 2014. Patients were considered to have missed opportunities for earlier diagnosis if 1) they were incorrectly screened according to the Western Cape diagnostic algorithm; 2) the first specimen was not tested using Xpert® MTB/RIF; 3) no specimen was ever tested; or 4) the initial Xpert test showed a negative result, but no subsequent specimen was sent for follow-up testing in human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients.
RESULTS
Among 543 patients, 386 (71%) were diagnosed with Xpert and 112 (21%) had had at least one presentation at a health care facility within the 6 months before the presentation at which RR-TB was diagnosed. Overall, 95/543 (18%) patients were screened incorrectly at some point: 48 at diagnostic presentation only, 38 at previous presentation only, and 9 at both previous and diagnostic presentations.
CONCLUSIONS
These data show that a significant proportion of RR-TB patients might have been diagnosed earlier, and suggest that case detection could be improved if diagnostic algorithms were followed more closely. Further training and monitoring is required to ensure the greatest benefit from universal Xpert implementation.