BACKGROUND
Only 63% of patients initiating multidrug-resistant/rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (MDR/RR-TB) treatment in 2020 were treated successfully. 24-Week all-oral bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid (BPaL)–based regimens have demonstrated higher rates of treatment success and have been recommended by the World Health Organization. Operational research is urgently required to evaluate these regimens in non-trial settings.
METHODS
This was a prospective cohort study of patients with microbiologically confirmed MDR/RR-TB and pre–extensively drug-resistant TB (pre-XDR-TB) initiated on BPaL-based regimens in Belarus and Uzbekistan (February 2022–June 2023). All clinical care and research procedures were delivered by treating physicians. After treatment completion, patients were followed up at 6 and 12 months, including collecting sputum to ascertain recurrence. The primary objective was to estimate the effectiveness (cured or treatment completed) and safety (the occurrence of serious adverse events) of BPaL-based regimens.
RESULTS
A total of 677 patients initiated treatment with BPaL-based regimens during the study. We documented successful treatment outcomes in 95.3% (427/448) of patients with MDR/RR-TB treated with BPaL plus moxifloxacin and 90.4% (207/229) of patients with pre–XDR-TB treated with BPaL plus clofazimine. 10.2% (69/677) experienced serious adverse events including 24 deaths (3.5%), 11 of which occurred during treatment. 83.3% (20/24) of deaths were not related to TB or TB treatment. Of patients who were successfully treated and completed 12-month follow-up, 0.5% (2/383) had recurrence.
CONCLUSIONS
BPaL-based regimens for MDR/RR-TB and pre–XDR-TB are safe and highly effective in non-trial settings. These regimens should be considered for widespread implementation globally, and further research is needed to evaluate their performance in other key populations.
BACKGROUND
There are few data on the treatment of children and adolescents with multidrug-resistant (MDR) or rifampicin-resistant (RR) tuberculosis, especially with more recently available drugs and regimens. We aimed to describe the clinical and treatment characteristics and their associations with treatment outcomes in this susceptible population.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis. Databases were searched from Oct 1, 2014, to March 30, 2020. To be eligible, studies must have included more than five children or adolescents (0-19 years of age) treated for microbiologically confirmed or clinically diagnosed MDR or RR tuberculosis within a defined treatment cohort, and reported on regimen composition and treatment outcomes. Abstracts were screened independently by two authors to identify potentially eligible records. Full texts were reviewed by two authors independently to identify studies meeting the eligiblity criteria. For studies meeting eligiblity criteria, anonymised individual patient data was requested and individiual level data included for analysis. The main outcome assessed was treatment outcome defined as treatment success (cure or treatment completed) versus unfavourable outcome (treatment failure or death). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify associations between clinical and treatment factors and treatment outcomes. This study is registered with Prospero (CRD42020187230).
FINDINGS
1417 studies were identified through database searching. After removing duplicates and screening for eligibility, the search identified 23 369 individual participants from 42 studies, mostly from India and South Africa. Overall, 16 825 (72·0%) were successfully treated (treatment completed or cured), 2848 died (12·2%), 722 (3·1%) had treatment failure, and 2974 (12·7%) were lost to follow-up. In primary analyses, the median age was 16 (IQR 13-18) years. Of the 17 764 (87·1%) participants with reported HIV status, 2448 (13·8%) were living with HIV. 17 707 (89·6%) had microbiologically confirmed tuberculosis. After adjusting for significant factors associated with treatment outcome, the use of two (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·41 [95% CI 1·09-1·82]; p=0·008) or three (2·12 [1·61-2·79]; p<0·0001) WHO-classified group A drugs (bedaquiline, moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, and linezolid) compared with the use of no group A drugs at all was positively associated with treatment success.
INTERPRETATION
Younger and clinically diagnosed children are underrepresented among those treated for MDR and RR tuberculosis and should be a focus for case-finding efforts. Overall treatment outcomes in our analysis were better than in adults but lower than the international targets of 90% or more individuals successfully treated. Treatment with more group A drugs was associated with better treatment outcomes in children and adolescents, highlighting the need for more rapid access to these drugs and improved regimens.
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.