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 > Meta-AnalysisFull Text
Emerg Infect Dis. 2019 May 1 (Issue 5); DOI:10.3201/eid2505.181823.
Mbuagbaw L, Guglielmetti L, Hewison CCH, Bakare N, Bastard M, et al.
Emerg Infect Dis. 2019 May 1 (Issue 5); DOI:10.3201/eid2505.181823.
Bedaquiline is recommended by the World Health Organization for the treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis (TB). We pooled data from 5 cohorts of patients treated with bedaquiline in France, Georgia, Armenia, and South Africa and in a multicountry study. The rate of culture conversion to negative at 6 months (by the end of 6 months of treatment) was 78% (95% CI 73.5%-81.9%), and the treatment success rate was 65.8% (95% CI 59.9%-71.3%). Death rate was 11.7% (95% CI 7.0%-19.1%). Up to 91.1% (95% CI 82.2%-95.8%) of the patients experienced >1 adverse event, and 11.2% (95% CI 5.0%-23.2%) experienced a serious adverse event. Lung cavitations were consistently associated with unfavorable outcomes. The use of bedaquiline in MDR and XDR TB treatment regimens appears to be effective and safe across different settings, although the certainty of evidence was assessed as very low.
Journal Article > ReviewAbstract
Future Microbiol. 2020 July 23; Volume 15; DOI:10.2217/fmb-2019-0309
Guglielmetti L, Chiesi S, Eimer J, Dominguez J, Masini T, et al.
Future Microbiol. 2020 July 23; Volume 15; DOI:10.2217/fmb-2019-0309
Drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) represents a substantial threat to the global efforts to control this disease. After decades of stagnation, the treatment of drug-resistant TB is undergoing major changes: two drugs with a new mechanism of action, bedaquiline and delamanid, have been approved by stringent regulatory authorities and are recommended by the WHO. This narrative review summarizes the evidence, originating from both observational studies and clinical trials, which is available to support the use of these drugs, with a focus on special populations. Areas of uncertainty, including the use of the two drugs together or for prolonged duration, are discussed. Ongoing clinical trials are aiming to optimize the use of bedaquiline and delamanid to shorten the treatment of drug-resistant TB.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2017 February 1; Volume 21 (Issue 2); 167-174.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.16.0493
Guglielmetti L, Hewison CCH, Avaliani Z, Hughes AJ, Kiria N, et al.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2017 February 1; Volume 21 (Issue 2); 167-174.; DOI:10.5588/ijtld.16.0493
BACKGROUND
For the first time in almost 50 years, there are new drugs available for the treatment of tuberculosis (TB), including bedaquiline (BDQ) and delamanid (DLM). The rate of introduction, however, has not kept pace with patient needs. It is estimated that as many as 23% of multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) patients have an indication for receiving BDQ. As this is the first time the MDR-TB community is introducing new medications, it is important to understand how implementation can be developed in a variety of settings.
METHODS
A qualitative assessment of country TB programs in which more than 5% of MDR-TB patients were started on BDQ under program conditions.
RESULTS
National TB programs in Belarus, France, Georgia, South Africa, and Swaziland all started sizeable cohorts of patients on BDQ in 2015. Common factors observed in these programs included experience with compassionate use/expanded access, support from implementing partners, and adequate national or donor-supported budgets. Barriers to introduction included restriction of BDQ to the in-patient setting, lack of access to companion drugs, and the development of systems for pharmacovigilance.
CONCLUSION
The five countries in this paper are examples of the introduction of new therapeutic options for the treatment of TB.
For the first time in almost 50 years, there are new drugs available for the treatment of tuberculosis (TB), including bedaquiline (BDQ) and delamanid (DLM). The rate of introduction, however, has not kept pace with patient needs. It is estimated that as many as 23% of multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) patients have an indication for receiving BDQ. As this is the first time the MDR-TB community is introducing new medications, it is important to understand how implementation can be developed in a variety of settings.
METHODS
A qualitative assessment of country TB programs in which more than 5% of MDR-TB patients were started on BDQ under program conditions.
RESULTS
National TB programs in Belarus, France, Georgia, South Africa, and Swaziland all started sizeable cohorts of patients on BDQ in 2015. Common factors observed in these programs included experience with compassionate use/expanded access, support from implementing partners, and adequate national or donor-supported budgets. Barriers to introduction included restriction of BDQ to the in-patient setting, lack of access to companion drugs, and the development of systems for pharmacovigilance.
CONCLUSION
The five countries in this paper are examples of the introduction of new therapeutic options for the treatment of TB.