Journal Article > Research
PLOS Glob Public Health. 28 April 2023; Volume 3 (Issue 4); e0000818.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pgph.0000818
Rodriguez CA, Lodi S, Horsburgh CR, Mitnick CD, Bastard M, et al.
PLOS Glob Public Health. 28 April 2023; Volume 3 (Issue 4); e0000818.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pgph.0000818
Clarity about the role of delamanid in longer regimens for multidrug-resistant TB is needed after discordant Phase IIb and Phase III randomized controlled trial results. The Phase IIb trial found that the addition of delamanid to a background regimen hastened culture conversion; the results of the Phase III trial were equivocal. We evaluated the effect of adding delamanid for 24 weeks to three-drug MDR/RR-TB regimens on two- and six-month culture conversion in the endTB observational study. We used pooled logistic regression to estimate the observational analogue of the intention-to-treat effect (aITT) adjusting for baseline confounders and to estimate the observational analogue of the per-protocol effect (aPP) using inverse probability of censoring weighting to control for time-varying confounding. At treatment initiation, 362 patients received three likely effective drugs (delamanid-free) or three likely effective drugs plus delamanid (delamanid-containing). Over 80% of patients received two to three Group A drugs (bedaquiline, linezolid, moxifloxacin/levofloxacin) in their regimen. We found no evidence the addition of delamanid to a three-drug regimen increased two-month (aITT relative risk: 0.90 (95% CI: 0.73–1.11), aPP relative risk: 0.89 (95% CI: 0.66–1.21)) or six-month culture conversion (aITT relative risk: 0.94 (95% CI: 0.84, 1.02), aPP relative risk: 0.93 (95% CI: 0.83, 1.04)). In regimens containing combinations of three likely effective, highly active anti-TB drugs the addition of delamanid had no discernible effect on culture conversion at two or six months. As the standard of care for MDR/RR-TB treatment becomes more potent, it may become increasingly difficult to detect the benefit of adding a single agent to standard of care MDR/RR-TB regimens. Novel approaches like those implemented may help account for background regimens and establish effectiveness of new chemical entities.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
PLOS One. 10 November 2022; Volume 17 (Issue 11); e0276457.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0276457
Rodriguez CA, Lodi S, Horsburgh CR, Bastard M, Hewison C, et al.
PLOS One. 10 November 2022; Volume 17 (Issue 11); e0276457.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0276457
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.
Journal Article > ReviewFull Text
PLOS One. 25 May 2016; Volume 11 (Issue 5); e0155968.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0155968
Mitnick CD, Rodriguez CA, Hatton ML, Brigden G, Cobelens F, et al.
PLOS One. 25 May 2016; Volume 11 (Issue 5); e0155968.; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0155968
INTRODUCTION
There are numerous challenges in delivering appropriate treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) and the evidence base to guide those practices remains limited. We present the third updated Research Agenda for the programmatic management of drug-resistant TB (PMDT), assembled through a literature review and survey.
METHODS
Publications citing the 2008 research agenda and normative documents were reviewed for evidence gaps. Gaps were formulated into questions and grouped as in the 2008 research agenda: Laboratory Support, Treatment Strategy, Programmatically Relevant Research, Epidemiology, and Management of Contacts. A survey was distributed through snowball sampling to identify research priorities. Respondent priority rankings were scored and summarized by mean. Sensitivity analyses explored weighting and handling of missing rankings.
RESULTS
Thirty normative documents and publications were reviewed for stated research needs; these were collapsed into 56 research questions across 5 categories. Of more than 500 survey recipients, 133 ranked priorities within at least one category. Priorities within categories included new diagnostics and their effect on improving treatment outcomes, improved diagnosis of paucibacillary and extra pulmonary TB, and development of shorter, effective regimens. Interruption of nosocomial transmission and treatment for latent TB infection in contacts of known MDR−TB patients were also top priorities in their respective categories. Results were internally consistent and robust.
DISCUSSION
Priorities retained from the 2008 research agenda include shorter MDR-TB regimens and averting transmission. Limitations of recent advances were implied in the continued quest for: shorter regimens containing new drugs, rapid diagnostics that improve treatment outcomes, and improved methods of estimating burden without representative data.
CONCLUSION
There is continuity around the priorities for research in PMDT. Coordinated efforts to address questions regarding shorter treatment regimens, knowledge of disease burden without representative data, and treatment for LTBI in contacts of known DR-TB patients are essential to stem the epidemic of TB, including DR-TB.
There are numerous challenges in delivering appropriate treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) and the evidence base to guide those practices remains limited. We present the third updated Research Agenda for the programmatic management of drug-resistant TB (PMDT), assembled through a literature review and survey.
METHODS
Publications citing the 2008 research agenda and normative documents were reviewed for evidence gaps. Gaps were formulated into questions and grouped as in the 2008 research agenda: Laboratory Support, Treatment Strategy, Programmatically Relevant Research, Epidemiology, and Management of Contacts. A survey was distributed through snowball sampling to identify research priorities. Respondent priority rankings were scored and summarized by mean. Sensitivity analyses explored weighting and handling of missing rankings.
RESULTS
Thirty normative documents and publications were reviewed for stated research needs; these were collapsed into 56 research questions across 5 categories. Of more than 500 survey recipients, 133 ranked priorities within at least one category. Priorities within categories included new diagnostics and their effect on improving treatment outcomes, improved diagnosis of paucibacillary and extra pulmonary TB, and development of shorter, effective regimens. Interruption of nosocomial transmission and treatment for latent TB infection in contacts of known MDR−TB patients were also top priorities in their respective categories. Results were internally consistent and robust.
DISCUSSION
Priorities retained from the 2008 research agenda include shorter MDR-TB regimens and averting transmission. Limitations of recent advances were implied in the continued quest for: shorter regimens containing new drugs, rapid diagnostics that improve treatment outcomes, and improved methods of estimating burden without representative data.
CONCLUSION
There is continuity around the priorities for research in PMDT. Coordinated efforts to address questions regarding shorter treatment regimens, knowledge of disease burden without representative data, and treatment for LTBI in contacts of known DR-TB patients are essential to stem the epidemic of TB, including DR-TB.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 February 2022; Volume 26 (Issue 2); 150-157.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.21.0494
Mohr-Holland E, Daniels J, Reuter A, Rodriguez CA, Mitnick CD, et al.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 February 2022; Volume 26 (Issue 2); 150-157.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.21.0494
BACKGROUND
Data suggest that treatment with newer TB drugs (linezolid [LZD], bedaquiline [BDQ] and delamanid [DLM]), used in Khayelitsha, South Africa, since 2012, reduces mortality due to rifampicin-resistant TB (RR-TB).
METHODS
This was a retrospective cohort study to assess 6-month mortality among RR-TB patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2019.
RESULTS
By 6 months, 236/2,008 (12%) patients died; 12% (78/651) among those diagnosed in 2008-2011, and respectively 8% (49/619) and 15% (109/738) with and without LZD/BDQ/DLM in 2012-2019. Multivariable analysis showed a small, non-significant mortality reduction with LZD/BDQ/DLM use compared to the 2008-2011 period (aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.5-1.2). Inpatient treatment initiation (aOR 3.2, 95% CI 2.4-4.4), fluoroquinolone (FQ) resistance (aOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.8-4.2) and female sex (aOR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.0) were also associated with mortality. When restricted to 2012-2019, use of LZD/BDQ/DLM was associated with lower mortality (aOR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.87).
CONCLUSIONS
While LZD/BDQ/DLM reduced 6-month mortality between 2012 and 2019, there was no significant effect overall. These findings may be due to initially restricted LZD/BDQ/DLM use for those with high-level resistance or treatment failure. Additional contributors include increased treatment initiation among individuals who would have otherwise died before treatment due to universal drug susceptibility testing from 2012, an effect that also likely contributed to higher mortality among females (survival through to care-seeking).
Data suggest that treatment with newer TB drugs (linezolid [LZD], bedaquiline [BDQ] and delamanid [DLM]), used in Khayelitsha, South Africa, since 2012, reduces mortality due to rifampicin-resistant TB (RR-TB).
METHODS
This was a retrospective cohort study to assess 6-month mortality among RR-TB patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2019.
RESULTS
By 6 months, 236/2,008 (12%) patients died; 12% (78/651) among those diagnosed in 2008-2011, and respectively 8% (49/619) and 15% (109/738) with and without LZD/BDQ/DLM in 2012-2019. Multivariable analysis showed a small, non-significant mortality reduction with LZD/BDQ/DLM use compared to the 2008-2011 period (aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.5-1.2). Inpatient treatment initiation (aOR 3.2, 95% CI 2.4-4.4), fluoroquinolone (FQ) resistance (aOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.8-4.2) and female sex (aOR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.0) were also associated with mortality. When restricted to 2012-2019, use of LZD/BDQ/DLM was associated with lower mortality (aOR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.87).
CONCLUSIONS
While LZD/BDQ/DLM reduced 6-month mortality between 2012 and 2019, there was no significant effect overall. These findings may be due to initially restricted LZD/BDQ/DLM use for those with high-level resistance or treatment failure. Additional contributors include increased treatment initiation among individuals who would have otherwise died before treatment due to universal drug susceptibility testing from 2012, an effect that also likely contributed to higher mortality among females (survival through to care-seeking).
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Eur Respir J. 1 September 2016; Volume 48 (Issue 4); DOI:10.1183/13993003.00462-2016
Mitnick CD, White RA, Lu C, Rodriguez CA, Bayona J, et al.
Eur Respir J. 1 September 2016; Volume 48 (Issue 4); DOI:10.1183/13993003.00462-2016
Debate persists about monitoring method (culture or smear) and interval (monthly or less frequently) during treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB). We analysed existing data and estimated the effect of monitoring strategies on timing of failure detection.We identified studies reporting microbiological response to MDR-TB treatment and solicited individual patient data from authors. Frailty survival models were used to estimate pooled relative risk of failure detection in the last 12 months of treatment; hazard of failure using monthly culture was the reference.Data were obtained for 5410 patients across 12 observational studies. During the last 12 months of treatment, failure detection occurred in a median of 3 months by monthly culture; failure detection was delayed by 2, 7, and 9 months relying on bimonthly culture, monthly smear and bimonthly smear, respectively. Risk (95% CI) of failure detection delay resulting from monthly smear relative to culture is 0.38 (0.34-0.42) for all patients and 0.33 (0.25-0.42) for HIV-co-infected patients.Failure detection is delayed by reducing the sensitivity and frequency of the monitoring method. Monthly monitoring of sputum cultures from patients receiving MDR-TB treatment is recommended. Expanded laboratory capacity is needed for high-quality culture, and for smear microscopy and rapid molecular tests.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 March 2016; Volume 20 (Issue 3); 290-294.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.15.0490
Furin J, Alirol E, Allen E, Fielding K, Merle CS, et al.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1 March 2016; Volume 20 (Issue 3); 290-294.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.15.0490
Drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) is a growing public health problem, and for the first time in decades, new drugs for the treatment of this disease have been developed. These new drugs have prompted strengthened efforts in DR-TB clinical trials research, and there are now multiple ongoing and planned DR-TB clinical trials. To facilitate comparability and maximise policy impact, a common set of core research definitions is needed, and this paper presents a core set of efficacy and safety definitions as well as other important considerations in DR-TB clinical trials work. To elaborate these definitions, a search of clinical trials registries, published manuscripts and conference proceedings was undertaken to identify groups conducting trials of new regimens for the treatment of DR-TB. Individuals from these groups developed the core set of definitions presented here. Further work is needed to validate and assess the utility of these definitions but they represent an important first step to ensure there is comparability in clinical trials on multidrug-resistant TB.