Search

Background: In 2020, WHO guidelines prioritised the use of a standard fully oral short treatment regimen (STR) consisting of bedaquiline, levofloxacin or moxifloxacin, ethionamide, ethambutol, high-dose isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and clofazimine for the management of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis. A high prevalence of resistance to constituent drugs precluded its widespread use by countries in the WHO European region. We evaluated three 9-month fully oral modified STRs (mSTRs) in which ethionamide, ethambutol, isoniazid, and pyrazinamide were replaced by linezolid, cycloserine, or delamanid (or a combination)., Methods: This multicountry, prospective, single-arm, cohort study examined the effectiveness and safety of mSTRs for fluoroquinolone-susceptible, rifampicin-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis in 13 countries in the WHO European region during 2020-23. We enrolled adults and children of all ages with bacteriologically confirmed rifampicin-resistant, fluoroquinolone-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis, and children (aged 0-18 years) with clinically diagnosed disease and a confirmed contact with rifampicin-resistant, fluoroquinolone-susceptible tuberculosis. Participants aged 6 years or older received one of two regimens: bedaquiline, linezolid, levofloxacin, clofazimine, and cycloserine; or bedaquiline, linezolid, levofloxacin, clofazimine, and delamanid. Children younger than 6 years received delamanid, linezolid, levofloxacin, and clofazimine. Participants were followed up for 12 months after successful treatment completion to detect recurrence and death. The primary outcome was the cumulative probability of not having an unsuccessful study outcome (defined as treatment failure, on-treatment loss to follow-up, death, or recurrence) before 22 months of study follow-up. The primary safety outcome was the incidence of each adverse event of interest (peripheral neuropathy, optic neuritis, myelosuppression, hepatitis, prolonged QT interval, hypokalaemia, and acute kidney injury) of grade 3 or higher severity during the treatment course., Findings: Between Aug 28, 2020 and May 26, 2021, 7272 patients were screened and 2636 were included in the treatment cohort. 1966 (74·6%) were male, 670 (25·4%) were female, and median age was 43 years (IQR 33-53). Treatment success was recorded for 2181 (82·7%) participants. The cumulative probability of not having an unsuccessful study outcome 22 months after treatment initiation was 79% (95% CI 78-81). Increasing age (adjusted hazard ratio 2·61 [95% CI 1·70-4·04] for people aged >64 years vs 35-44 years), HIV-positive status (1·53 [1·16-2·01]), presence of bilateral cavities (1·68 [1·29-2·19]), smoking history (1·34 [1·05-1·71]), baseline anaemia (1·46 [1·15-1·86]), unemployment (1·37 [1·04-1·80]), elevated baseline liver enzymes (1·40 [1·13-1·73]), and excessive alcohol use (1·47 [1·14-1·89]) were positively associated with unsuccessful study outcomes. In the safety cohort of 2813 participants who received at least one dose, 301 adverse events of interest were recorded in 252 (9·0%) participants with the most frequent being myelosuppression (139 [4·9%] participants, 157 [52·2%] events)., Interpretation: The high treatment success and good safety results indicate considerable potential for the use of mSTRs in programmatic conditions, especially for individuals not eligible for the current WHO-recommended 6-month regimen and in settings with a need for alternative options., Funding: The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria; United States Agency for International Development; Government of Germany; and WHO., Translation: For the Russian translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.)

Background: Tuberculosis (TB) drugs and their import are costly. We assessed how shorter TB drug regimens, which were non-inferior or superior in recent TB trials, can affect the costs for purchasing and importing TB drugs., Methods: We estimated the drug costs and import costs of 39 longer and shorter TB drug regimens using TB drug prices from the Global Drug Facility and import cost estimates for a TB program in Karakalpakstan, Uzbekistan. Drug regimens from recent TB trials were compared with TB drug regimens following present or past World Health Organization recommendations., Results: We estimated an import cost of $4.19 and a drug cost of $43 per standard 6-month drug-sensitive (DS)-TB regimen. A new 17-week DS-TB regimen from the TBTC Study 31 currently requires more tablets and is more expensive to import ($6.08) and purchase ($233). The TB program can substantially decrease import costs ($2.26-14) and drug costs ($391-2308) per multidrug-resistant (MDR)-TB regimen when using new 6-month or shorter drug regimens from the Nix-TB, NExT, TB PRACTECAL, ZeNix, or BEAT TB trials instead of 9-20-month regimens with import costs of $9.96-507 and drug costs of $354-15 028. For a commonly used 20-month all-oral, bedaquiline-containing MDR-TB regimen, we estimated costs of $41 for drug import and $1773 for drug purchase., Conclusions: The implementation of a new and shorter DS-TB regimen may increase the costs for drug purchase and import. The implementation of new and shorter MDR-TB regimens may decrease the costs for drug purchase and/or drug import., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Faculty of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The global proportion of successful treatment outcomes of Multidrug-Resistant/Rifampicin-Resistant Tuberculosis (MDR/RR-TB) remains unacceptably low. Time to culture conversion is important in making treatment-related decisions and is used as an interim predictor of pulmonary MDR/RR-TB treatment success. No previous studies have been conducted to assess determinants of time to culture conversion for MDR/RR-TB patients in Lithuania. Secondary analysis of data of culture-positive MDR/RR-TB patients, treated in Republican Klaipeda Hospital between 1st July 2016 and 1st July 2019 was performed. Culture conversion was defined as two consecutive negative cultures on solid media submitted at least 30 days apart. Factors associated with culture conversion were estimated by crude and multivariable Cox regression accounting for competing risks. In total, 115 consecutive patients starting treatment were included in the study. Of them, the majority was male (86/115; 74.8%) with a mean age of 48 (standard deviation (SD) ±12) years and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) negative (105/115; 91.3%). Nearly two-thirds (72/115; 62.6%) had XDR (extensive drug resistance) or MDR/RR-TB with additional resistance to second-line injectables or fluoroquinolones. Of 115 culture-positive patients at baseline, 103 (89.6%) patients achieved culture conversion during 12 months of treatment. The median time to culture conversion was 1.1 months (interquartile range: 0.9-1.8). Patients aged ≥60 years compared with <40 years [adjusted hazard ration (aHR): 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.18-0.86], smokers (aHR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.2-0.73), patients with positive sputum smear microscopy at baseline (aHR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.25-0.63), cavities on initial chest X-ray (aHR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.35-0.88) and resistance to at least one fluoroquinolone drug (aHR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.32-0.84) were slower to culture convert. In conclusion, we recommend providing additional counseling, treatment adherence interventions and scale up the use of new and repurposed TB drugs to patient groups at risk of worse interim treatment outcome: patients aged 60 and above, with resistance to fluoroquinolones, smear-positive, smokers, or with signs of extensive disease evident on initial chest radiography.

Introduction: Standard multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) treatment is lengthy, toxic, and insufficiently effective. New drugs and a shorter treatment regimen (SCR) are now recommended. However, patient and health-care worker (HCW) perspectives regarding the SCR are unknown. We aimed to determine the views and experiences of patients with MDR-TB and HCW regarding the SCR in Karakalpakstan, Uzbekistan., Methods: In a qualitative study, we conducted 48 in-depth interviews with 24 people with MDR-TB and 20 HCW, purposively recruited to include those with a range of treatment-taking experiences and employment positions. Data were analysed thematically using Nvivo 12, to identify emergent patterns, concepts, and categories. Principles of grounded theory were drawn upon to generate findings inductively from participants' accounts., Results: All patients viewed the SCR favourably. The SCR was seen as enabling an expedited return to work, studies, and "normality". This reduced the burden of treatment and difficulties with treatment fatigue. The SCR appeared to improve mental health, ease difficulties with TB-related stigma, and foster improved adherence. While patients wanted shorter treatment, it was also important that treatment be tolerable and effective. However, HCW doubted the appropriateness and effectiveness of the SCR, which influenced their confidence in prescribing the regimen., Conclusion: The SCR was said to benefit treatment completion and patients' lives. HCW concerns about SCR appropriateness and effectiveness may influence who receives the regimen. These are important considerations for SCR implementation and MDR-TB treatment developments, and dissonance between patient and HCW perspectives must be addressed for successful implementation of shorter regimens in the future., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction: Person-centred care, an internationally recognised priority, describes the involvement of people in their care and treatment decisions, and the consideration of their needs and priorities within service delivery. Clarity is required regarding how it may be implemented in practice within different contexts. The standard multi-drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) treatment regimen is lengthy, toxic and insufficiently effective. 2019 World Health Organisation guidelines include a shorter (9-11-month) regimen and recommend that people with MDR-TB be involved in the choice of treatment option. We examine the perspectives and experiences of people with MDR-TB and health-care workers (HCW) regarding person-centred care in an MDR-TB programme in Karakalpakstan, Uzbekistan, run by Médecins Sans Frontières and the Ministry of Health., Methods: A qualitative study comprising 48 interviews with 24 people with MDR-TB and 20 HCW was conducted in June-July 2019. Participants were recruited purposively to include a range of treatment-taking experiences and professional positions. Interview data were analysed thematically using coding to identify emerging patterns, concepts, and categories relating to person-centred care, with Nvivo12., Results: People with MDR-TB were unfamiliar with shared decision-making and felt uncomfortable taking responsibility for their treatment choice. HCW were viewed as having greater knowledge and expertise, and patients trusted HCW to act in their best interests, deferring the choice of appropriate treatment course to them. HCW had concerns about involving people in treatment choices, preferring that doctors made decisions. People with MDR-TB wanted to be involved in discussions about their treatment, and have their preference sought, and were comfortable choosing whether treatment was ambulatory or hospital-based. Participants felt it important that people with MDR-TB had knowledge and understanding about their treatment and disease, to foster their sense of preparedness and ownership for treatment. Involving people in their care was said to motivate sustained treatment-taking, and it appeared important to have evidence of treatment need and effect., Conclusions: There is a preference for doctors choosing the treatment regimen, linked to shared decision-making unfamiliarity and practitioner-patient knowledge imbalance. Involving people in their care, through discussions, information, and preference-seeking could foster ownership and self-responsibility, supporting sustained engagement with treatment.

Background: There are unique challenges in the diagnosis and management of multi drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in children. It is difficult to obtain confirmatory microbiological diagnosis in TB pericarditis. It is essential to differentiate between drug sensitive and drug resistant forms of TB as it has a major bearing on the regimen used, and inappropriate TB treatment combined with steroid use for pericarditis can lead to deterioration. With lack of samples, the treatment decision relies on the drug resistance pattern of the close contact if available. Therapeutic challenges of MDR-TB management in a child involve use of toxic drugs that need to be judiciously handled. We report a 2 years 4 months old male child who was diagnosed with TB pericarditis and treated based on the resistance pattern of his mother who was on treatment for pulmonary MDR-TB., Case Presentation: This 2 years 4 months old male child was diagnosed with TB involving his pericardium. Getting him started on an appropriate regimen was delayed due to the difficulty in establishing microbiological confirmation and drug susceptibility. He was commenced on a regimen based on his mother's drug resistance pattern and required surgery due to cardiac failure during the course of his treatment. He successfully completed 2 years of therapy., Conclusions: This child's case demonstrates that despite unique challenges in diagnosis and management of drug resistant extra pulmonary tuberculosis in children, treatment of even complex forms can be successful. The need for high suspicion of MDR-TB, especially when there is close contact with pulmonary TB, careful design of an effective regimen that is tolerated by the child, indications for invasive surgical management of pericarditis, appropriate follow-up and management of adverse effects are emphasised.

We sought to compare the effectiveness of two World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended regimens for the treatment of rifampin- or multidrug-resistant (RR/MDR) tuberculosis (TB): a standardised regimen of 9-12 months (the "shorter regimen") and individualised regimens of ≥20 months ("longer regimens").We collected individual patient data from observational studies identified through systematic reviews and a public call for data. We included patients meeting WHO eligibility criteria for the shorter regimen: not previously treated with second-line drugs, and with fluoroquinolone- and second-line injectable agent-susceptible RR/MDR-TB. We used propensity score matched, mixed effects meta-regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios and adjusted risk differences (aRDs) for failure or relapse, death within 12 months of treatment initiation and loss to follow-up.We included 2625 out of 3378 (77.7%) individuals from nine studies of shorter regimens and 2717 out of 13 104 (20.7%) individuals from 53 studies of longer regimens. Treatment success was higher with the shorter regimen than with longer regimens (pooled proportions 80.0% versus 75.3%), due to less loss to follow-up with the former (aRD -0.15, 95% CI -0.17- -0.12). The risk difference for failure or relapse was slightly higher with the shorter regimen overall (aRD 0.02, 95% CI 0-0.05) and greater in magnitude with baseline resistance to pyrazinamide (aRD 0.12, 95% CI 0.07-0.16), prothionamide/ethionamide (aRD 0.07, 95% CI -0.01-0.16) or ethambutol (aRD 0.09, 95% CI 0.04-0.13).In patients meeting WHO criteria for its use, the standardised shorter regimen was associated with substantially less loss to follow-up during treatment compared with individualised longer regimens and with more failure or relapse in the presence of resistance to component medications. Our findings support the need to improve access to reliable drug susceptibility testing., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: S. Abidi has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Achar has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M.M. Assao Neino has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Bang has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Benedetti has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S. Brode reports grants from Insmed and the Canadian Institutes for Health Research, personal fees for educational presentations from Boehringer Ingelheim and AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: J.R. Campbell has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: E. Casas has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: F. Conradie has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: G. Dravniece has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: P. du Cros reports he was previously a member of the steering committee and protocol writing committee for the PRACTECAL randomised controlled trial of three novel 6-month MDR-TB regimens; and has undertaken a paid consultancy between TB Alliance and Burnet Institute to investigate applicability of the TB-Nix regimen (a novel short MDR-TB regimen) to Papua New Guinea. Conflict of interest: D. Falzon has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: E. Jaramillo has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C. Kuaban has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: Z. Lan has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C. Lange reports personal fees for lectures from Chiesi, Gilead, Janssen, Lucane, Novartis, Oxoid, Berlin-Chemie and Thermo Fisher, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: P.Z. Li has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Makhmudova has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A.K.J. Maug has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Menzies has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: G.B. Migliori has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Miller reports that The Eli Lilly Foundation MDR-TB Partnership provided partial salary support in 2015–2016 through a grant to Salmaan Keshavjee, Harvard Medical School, although none of the work in the current paper or analysis was supported through that mechanism; the grant also paid for travel to a meeting in July of 2016. Conflict of interest: B. Myrzaliev has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N. Ndjeka has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Noeske has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N. Parpieva has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Piubello has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: V. Schwoebel has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: W. Sikhondze has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Singla has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M.B. Souleymane has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Trébucq has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Van Deun has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: K. Viney has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: K. Weyer has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: B.J. Zhang has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: F. Ahmad Khan reports grants from the World Health Organization during the conduct of the study., (The content of this work is copyright of the authors or their employers. Design and branding are copyright ©ERS 2020.)

Background: An estimated 32,000 children develop multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB; Mycobacterium tuberculosis resistant to isoniazid and rifampin) each year. Little is known about the optimal treatment for these children., Methods and Findings: To inform the pediatric aspects of the revised World Health Organization (WHO) MDR-TB treatment guidelines, we performed a systematic review and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis, describing treatment outcomes in children treated for MDR-TB. To identify eligible reports we searched PubMed, LILACS, Embase, The Cochrane Library, PsychINFO, and BioMedCentral databases through 1 October 2014. To identify unpublished data, we reviewed conference abstracts, contacted experts in the field, and requested data through other routes, including at national and international conferences and through organizations working in pediatric MDR-TB. A cohort was eligible for inclusion if it included a minimum of three children (aged <15 years) who were treated for bacteriologically confirmed or clinically diagnosed MDR-TB, and if treatment outcomes were reported. The search yielded 2,772 reports; after review, 33 studies were eligible for inclusion, with IPD provided for 28 of these. All data were from published or unpublished observational cohorts. We analyzed demographic, clinical, and treatment factors as predictors of treatment outcome. In order to obtain adjusted estimates, we used a random-effects multivariable logistic regression (random intercept and random slope, unless specified otherwise) adjusted for the following covariates: age, sex, HIV infection, malnutrition, severe extrapulmonary disease, or the presence of severe disease on chest radiograph. We analyzed data from 975 children from 18 countries; 731 (75%) had bacteriologically confirmed and 244 (25%) had clinically diagnosed MDR-TB. The median age was 7.1 years. Of 910 (93%) children with documented HIV status, 359 (39%) were infected with HIV. When compared to clinically diagnosed patients, children with confirmed MDR-TB were more likely to be older, to be infected with HIV, to be malnourished, and to have severe tuberculosis (TB) on chest radiograph (p < 0.001 for all characteristics). Overall, 764 of 975 (78%) had a successful treatment outcome at the conclusion of therapy: 548/731 (75%) of confirmed and 216/244 (89%) of clinically diagnosed children (absolute difference 14%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 8%-19%, p < 0.001). Treatment was successful in only 56% of children with bacteriologically confirmed TB who were infected with HIV who did not receive any antiretroviral treatment (ART) during MDR-TB therapy, compared to 82% in children infected with HIV who received ART during MDR-TB therapy (absolute difference 26%, 95% CI 5%-48%, p = 0.006). In children with confirmed MDR-TB, the use of second-line injectable agents and high-dose isoniazid (15-20 mg/kg/day) were associated with treatment success (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.9, 95% CI 1.0-8.3, p = 0.041 and aOR 5.9, 95% CI 1.7-20.5, p = 0.007, respectively). These findings for high-dose isoniazid may have been affected by site effect, as the majority of patients came from Cape Town. Limitations of this study include the difficulty of estimating the treatment effects of individual drugs within multidrug regimens, only observational cohort studies were available for inclusion, and treatment decisions were based on the clinician's perception of illness, with resulting potential for bias., Conclusions: This study suggests that children respond favorably to MDR-TB treatment. The low success rate in children infected with HIV who did not receive ART during their MDR-TB treatment highlights the need for ART in these children. Our findings of individual drug effects on treatment outcome should be further evaluated., Competing Interests: I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: DF, MG, and MvDB are staff members of the World Health Organization (WHO). AJGP's institution, Stellenbosch University, has received funds from the US National Institutes of Health for an observational study of the pharmacokinetics and safety of key second-line TB medications in children, for which AJGP is the Principal Investigator. AJGP's institution has also received funds from Otsuka Pharmaceuticals for implementation of pediatric trial of the novel TB drug delamanid; AJGP is the PI for his site for this trial.

We describe 27 children and adolescents <18 years of age who received bedaquiline during treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. We report good treatment responses and no cessation attributable to adverse effects. Bedaquiline could be considered for use with this age group for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis when treatment options are limited.

It is estimated that 33,000 children develop multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) each year. In spite of these numbers, children and adolescents have limited access to the new and repurposed MDR-TB drugs. There is also little clinical guidance for the use of these drugs and for the shorter MDR-TB regimen in the pediatric population. This is despite the fact that these drugs and regimens are associated with improved interim outcomes and acceptable safety profiles in adults. This review fills a gap in the pediatric MDR-TB literature by providing practice-based recommendations for the use of the new (delamanid and bedaquiline) and repurposed (linezolid and clofazimine) MDR-TB drugs and the new shorter MDR-TB regimen in children and adolescents.

Background: Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is a major threat to global TB control. MDR-TB treatment regimens typically have a high pill burden, last 20 months or more and often lead to unsatisfactory outcomes. A 9-11 month regimen with seven antibiotics has shown high success rates among selected MDR-TB patients in different settings and is conditionally recommended by the World Health Organization., Methods: We construct a transmission-dynamic model of TB to estimate the likely impact of a shorter MDR-TB regimen when applied in a low HIV prevalence region of Uzbekistan (Karakalpakstan) with high rates of drug resistance, good access to diagnostics and a well-established community-based MDR-TB treatment programme providing treatment to around 400 patients. The model incorporates acquisition of additional drug resistance and incorrect regimen assignment. It is calibrated to local epidemiology and used to compare the impact of shorter treatment against four alternative programmatic interventions., Results: Based on empirical outcomes among MDR-TB patients and assuming no improvement in treatment success rates, the shorter regimen reduced MDR-TB incidence from 15.2 to 9.7 cases per 100,000 population per year and MDR-TB mortality from 3.0 to 1.7 deaths per 100,000 per year, achieving comparable or greater gains than the alternative interventions. No significant increase in the burden of higher levels of resistance was predicted. Effects are probably conservative given that the regimen is likely to improve success rates., Conclusions: In addition to benefits to individual patients, we find that shorter MDR-TB treatment regimens also have the potential to reduce transmission of resistant strains. These findings are in the epidemiological setting of treatment availability being an important bottleneck due to high numbers of patients being eligible for treatment, and may differ in other contexts. The high proportion of MDR-TB with additional antibiotic resistance simulated was not exacerbated by programmatic responses and greater gains may be possible in contexts where the regimen is more widely applicable.