Conference Material > Slide Presentation
Guglielmetti L, Khan U, Velasquez GE, Gouillou M, Lachenal N, et al.
MSF Scientific Day International 2024. 2024 May 16; DOI:10.57740/HWpBuX
Journal Article > ReviewFull Text
Clin Infect Dis. 2024 March 20; Volume 78 (Issue 3); 730-741.; DOI:10.1093/cid/ciad653
Hasan T, Medcalf E, Nyang'wa BT, Egizi E, Berry C, et al.
Clin Infect Dis. 2024 March 20; Volume 78 (Issue 3); 730-741.; DOI:10.1093/cid/ciad653
BACKGROUND
Effectiveness, safety, tolerability, and adherence are critical considerations in shifting to shorter tuberculosis (TB) regimens. Novel 6-month oral regimens that include bedaquiline (B), pretomanid (Pa), and linezolid (L), with or without a fourth drug, have been shown to be as or more effective than the established longer regimens for the treatment of multidrug-resistant/rifampicin-resistant TB (MDR/RR-TB). We aimed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of linezolid in BPaL-containing regimens for the treatment of MDR/RR-TB among recently completed clinical trials.
METHODS
A review and meta-analysis was undertaken including published and unpublished data from clinical trials, conducted between 2010 and 2021, that evaluated regimens containing BPaL for the treatment of MDR/RR-TB. Individual patient data were obtained. For each BPaL-containing regimen, we evaluated the frequency and severity of treatment-related adverse events. The risk difference of adverse events for each regimen was calculated, in comparison to patients assigned to receiving the lowest cumulative exposure of linezolid.
RESULTS
Data from 3 clinical trials investigating 8 unique BPaL-containing regimens were included, comprising a total of 591 participants. Adverse events were more frequent in groups randomized to a higher cumulative linezolid dose. Among patients who were randomized to a daily dose of 1200 mg linezolid, 68 of 195 (35%) experienced a grade 3–4 adverse event versus 89 of 396 (22%) patients receiving BPaL-containing regimens containing 600 mg linezolid.
CONCLUSIONS
Regimens containing BPaL were relatively well tolerated when they included a daily linezolid dose of 600 mg. These novel regimens promise to improve the tolerability of treatment for MDR/RR-TB.
Effectiveness, safety, tolerability, and adherence are critical considerations in shifting to shorter tuberculosis (TB) regimens. Novel 6-month oral regimens that include bedaquiline (B), pretomanid (Pa), and linezolid (L), with or without a fourth drug, have been shown to be as or more effective than the established longer regimens for the treatment of multidrug-resistant/rifampicin-resistant TB (MDR/RR-TB). We aimed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of linezolid in BPaL-containing regimens for the treatment of MDR/RR-TB among recently completed clinical trials.
METHODS
A review and meta-analysis was undertaken including published and unpublished data from clinical trials, conducted between 2010 and 2021, that evaluated regimens containing BPaL for the treatment of MDR/RR-TB. Individual patient data were obtained. For each BPaL-containing regimen, we evaluated the frequency and severity of treatment-related adverse events. The risk difference of adverse events for each regimen was calculated, in comparison to patients assigned to receiving the lowest cumulative exposure of linezolid.
RESULTS
Data from 3 clinical trials investigating 8 unique BPaL-containing regimens were included, comprising a total of 591 participants. Adverse events were more frequent in groups randomized to a higher cumulative linezolid dose. Among patients who were randomized to a daily dose of 1200 mg linezolid, 68 of 195 (35%) experienced a grade 3–4 adverse event versus 89 of 396 (22%) patients receiving BPaL-containing regimens containing 600 mg linezolid.
CONCLUSIONS
Regimens containing BPaL were relatively well tolerated when they included a daily linezolid dose of 600 mg. These novel regimens promise to improve the tolerability of treatment for MDR/RR-TB.
Conference Material > Poster
Motta I, Cusinato M, Ludman A, Abdrasuliev T, Butabekov I, et al.
MSF Scientific Day International 2023. 2023 June 7; DOI:10.57740/vz2n-4971
Conference Material > Slide Presentation
Nyang'wa BT, Berry C, Motta I, Kazounis E
MSF Scientific Days International 2021: Research. 2021 May 19
Conference Material > Slide Presentation
Berry C, Motta I, Kazounis E, Fielding K, Dodd M, et al.
MSF Scientific Days International 2022. 2022 May 11; DOI:10.57740/v9ye-0032
Journal Article > ReviewFull Text
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2023 July 21; Volume S1198-743X (Issue 23); 00339-7.; DOI:10.1016/j.cmi.2023.07.013
Motta I, Boeree M, Chesov D, Dheda K, Günther G, et al.
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2023 July 21; Volume S1198-743X (Issue 23); 00339-7.; DOI:10.1016/j.cmi.2023.07.013
BACKGROUND
Tuberculosis is a global health challenge and one of the leading causes of death worldwide. In the last decade, the tuberculosis treatment landscape has dramatically changed. After long years of stagnation, new compounds entered the market (bedaquiline, delamanid and pretomanid) and phase III clinical trials have shown promising results towards shortening duration of treatment for both drug-susceptible (Study 31/A5349, TRUNCATE-TB, SHINE) and drug-resistant tuberculosis (STREAM, NiX-TB, ZeNix, TB-PRACTECAL). Dose optimization of rifamycins and repurposed drugs have also brought hopes of further development of safe and effective regimens. Consequently, international and World Health Organization clinical guidelines have been updated multiple times in the last years to keep pace with these advances.
OBJECTIVES
This narrative review aims to summarize the state-of-the-art on treatment of drug-susceptible and drug-resistant tuberculosis, as well as recent trials results and an overview of ongoing clinical trials.
SOURCES
A non-systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed and MEDLINE, focusing on the treatment of tuberculosis. Ongoing clinical trials were listed according to the authors' knowledge, and completed consulting clinicaltrials.gov and other publicly available websites (www.resisttb.org/clinical-trials-progress-report, www.newtbdrugs.org/pipeline/trials).
CONTENT
This review summarizes the recent, major changes in the landscape for drug-susceptible and drug-resistant treatment, with a specific focus on their potential impact on patient outcomes and programmatic TB management. Moreover, insights in host-directed therapies, and advances in pharmacokinetic and pharmacogenomics are discussed. A thorough outline of ongoing therapeutic clinical trials is presented, highlighting different approaches and goals in current TB clinical research.
IMPLICATIONS
Future research should be directed to individualize regimens and protect these recent breakthroughs by preventing and identifying the selection of drug resistance and providing widespread, affordable, patient-centered access to new treatment options for all people affected by tuberculosis.
Tuberculosis is a global health challenge and one of the leading causes of death worldwide. In the last decade, the tuberculosis treatment landscape has dramatically changed. After long years of stagnation, new compounds entered the market (bedaquiline, delamanid and pretomanid) and phase III clinical trials have shown promising results towards shortening duration of treatment for both drug-susceptible (Study 31/A5349, TRUNCATE-TB, SHINE) and drug-resistant tuberculosis (STREAM, NiX-TB, ZeNix, TB-PRACTECAL). Dose optimization of rifamycins and repurposed drugs have also brought hopes of further development of safe and effective regimens. Consequently, international and World Health Organization clinical guidelines have been updated multiple times in the last years to keep pace with these advances.
OBJECTIVES
This narrative review aims to summarize the state-of-the-art on treatment of drug-susceptible and drug-resistant tuberculosis, as well as recent trials results and an overview of ongoing clinical trials.
SOURCES
A non-systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed and MEDLINE, focusing on the treatment of tuberculosis. Ongoing clinical trials were listed according to the authors' knowledge, and completed consulting clinicaltrials.gov and other publicly available websites (www.resisttb.org/clinical-trials-progress-report, www.newtbdrugs.org/pipeline/trials).
CONTENT
This review summarizes the recent, major changes in the landscape for drug-susceptible and drug-resistant treatment, with a specific focus on their potential impact on patient outcomes and programmatic TB management. Moreover, insights in host-directed therapies, and advances in pharmacokinetic and pharmacogenomics are discussed. A thorough outline of ongoing therapeutic clinical trials is presented, highlighting different approaches and goals in current TB clinical research.
IMPLICATIONS
Future research should be directed to individualize regimens and protect these recent breakthroughs by preventing and identifying the selection of drug resistance and providing widespread, affordable, patient-centered access to new treatment options for all people affected by tuberculosis.
Conference Material > Video
Berry C, Motta I, Kazounis E, Fielding K, Dodd M, et al.
MSF Scientific Days International 2022. 2022 June 7; DOI:10.57740/atfr-ws57
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2023 December 1; Volume 27 (Issue 12); 885-898.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.23.0341
du Cros PAK, Greig J, Cross GB, Cousins C, Berry C, et al.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2023 December 1; Volume 27 (Issue 12); 885-898.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.23.0341
English
Français
BACKGROUND
The value, speed of completion and robustness of the evidence generated by TB treatment trials could be improved by implementing standards for best practice.
METHODS
A global panel of experts participated in a Delphi process, using a 7-point Likert scale to score and revise draft standards until consensus was reached.
RESULTS
Eleven standards were defined: Standard 1, high quality data on TB regimens are essential to inform clinical and programmatic management; Standard 2, the research questions addressed by TB trials should be relevant to affected communities, who should be included in all trial stages; Standard 3, trials should make every effort to be as inclusive as possible; Standard 4, the most efficient trial designs should be considered to improve the evidence base as quickly and cost effectively as possible, without compromising quality; Standard 5, trial governance should be in line with accepted good clinical practice; Standard 6, trials should investigate and report strategies that promote optimal engagement in care; Standard 7, where possible, TB trials should include pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic components; Standard 8, outcomes should include frequency of disease recurrence and post-treatment sequelae; Standard 9, TB trials should aim to harmonise key outcomes and data structures across studies; Standard 10, TB trials should include biobanking; Standard 11, treatment trials should invest in capacity strengthening of local trial and TB programme staff.
CONCLUSION
These standards should improve the efficiency and effectiveness of evidence generation, as well as the translation of research into policy and practice.
The value, speed of completion and robustness of the evidence generated by TB treatment trials could be improved by implementing standards for best practice.
METHODS
A global panel of experts participated in a Delphi process, using a 7-point Likert scale to score and revise draft standards until consensus was reached.
RESULTS
Eleven standards were defined: Standard 1, high quality data on TB regimens are essential to inform clinical and programmatic management; Standard 2, the research questions addressed by TB trials should be relevant to affected communities, who should be included in all trial stages; Standard 3, trials should make every effort to be as inclusive as possible; Standard 4, the most efficient trial designs should be considered to improve the evidence base as quickly and cost effectively as possible, without compromising quality; Standard 5, trial governance should be in line with accepted good clinical practice; Standard 6, trials should investigate and report strategies that promote optimal engagement in care; Standard 7, where possible, TB trials should include pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic components; Standard 8, outcomes should include frequency of disease recurrence and post-treatment sequelae; Standard 9, TB trials should aim to harmonise key outcomes and data structures across studies; Standard 10, TB trials should include biobanking; Standard 11, treatment trials should invest in capacity strengthening of local trial and TB programme staff.
CONCLUSION
These standards should improve the efficiency and effectiveness of evidence generation, as well as the translation of research into policy and practice.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
N Engl J Med. 2022 December 22; 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. 2022 December 22; 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 > EditorialFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2022 April 1; Volume 26 (Issue 4); 298-301.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.22.0072
Motta I, Cozzi SN, Pontali E
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2022 April 1; Volume 26 (Issue 4); 298-301.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.22.0072