Search

ABSTRACT Objective: Many biologic agents cause some degree of immunosuppression, which can increase the risk of reactivation of tuberculosis infection (TBI). This risk is variable between individual biologics. We aimed to assess current (and recommended) clinical practice of TBI screening and treatment among patients initiating treatment with biologic agents. Methods: An online questionnaire was distributed via email to members of the Global Tuberculosis Network and associated professional organisations to seek insights into the screening for and treatment of TBI in patients treated with biologics. Results: A total of 163 respondents in 27 countries answered at least one question. For all biologics described in the questionnaire, respondents advised increasing screening relative to current practice. Observed and supported TBI screening rates in patients treated with TNF-a inhibitors were high, especially for older TNF-a inhibitors. Most participants supported TBI screening in patients treated with B- or T-cell inhibitors but not in those treated with interleukin inhibitors. Guideline awareness was higher for TNF-a inhibitors than for other biologic classes (79% vs. 34%). Conclusions: Although respondents stated that TBI screening rates are lower than what they consider ideal, there was a tendency to recommend TBI screening in patients treated with biologics not known to be associated with an increased risk of TBI. As a result, there is a potential risk of over-screening and over-treatment of TBI, potentially causing harm, in patients treated with biologics other than TNF-a inhibitors. There is a need to research the risk of TBI associated with biologics and for guidelines to address the spectrum of TBI risk across all types of biologics.

Several studies showed that assessing levels of specific circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) is a non-invasive, rapid, and accurate method for diagnosing diseases or detecting alterations in physiological conditions. We aimed to identify a serum miRNA signature to be used for the diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB). To account for variations due to the genetic makeup, we enrolled adults from two study settings in Europe and Africa. The following categories of subjects were considered: healthy (H), active pulmonary TB (PTB), active pulmonary TB, HIV co-infected (PTB/HIV), latent TB infection (LTBI), other pulmonary infections (OPI), and active extra-pulmonary TB (EPTB). Sera from 10 subjects of the same category were pooled and, after total RNA extraction, screened for miRNA levels by TaqMan low-density arrays. After identification of "relevant miRNAs", we refined the serum miRNA signature discriminating between H and PTB on individual subjects. Signatures were analyzed for their diagnostic performances using a multivariate logistic model and a Relevance Vector Machine (RVM) model. A leave-one-out-cross-validation (LOOCV) approach was adopted for assessing how both models could perform in practice. The analysis on pooled specimens identified selected miRNAs as discriminatory for the categories analyzed. On individual serum samples, we showed that 15 miRNAs serve as signature for H and PTB categories with a diagnostic accuracy of 82% (CI 70.2-90.0), and 77% (CI 64.2-85.9) in a RVM and a logistic classification model, respectively. Considering the different ethnicity, by selecting the specific signature for the European group (10 miRNAs) the diagnostic accuracy increased up to 83% (CI 68.1-92.1), and 81% (65.0-90.3), respectively. The African-specific signature (12 miRNAs) increased the diagnostic accuracy up to 95% (CI 76.4-99.1), and 100% (83.9-100.0), respectively. Serum miRNA signatures represent an interesting source of biomarkers for TB disease with the potential to discriminate between PTB and LTBI, but also among the other categories.

Even if major improvements in therapeutic regimens and treatment outcomes have been progressively achieved, tuberculosis (TB) remains the leading cause of death from a single infectious microorganism. To improve TB treatment success as well as patients' quality of life, drug-drug-interactions (DDIs) need to be wisely managed. Comprehensive knowledge of anti-TB drugs, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) parameters, potential patients’ changes in absorption and distribution, possible side effects and interactions, is mandatory to built effective anti-TB regimens. Optimization of treatments and adherence to international guidelines can help bend the curve of TB-related mortality and, ultimately, decrease the likelihood of treatment failure and drop-out during anti-TB treatment. Aim of this paper is to describe the most relevant DDIs between anti-TB and other drugs used in daily clinical practice, providing an updated and “easy-to-use” guide to minimize adverse effects, drop-outs and, in the long run, increase treatment success.

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of bedaquiline plus background drug regimens (BR) for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB) in Italy. Methods: A Markov model was adapted to the Italian setting to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of bedaquiline plus BR (BBR) versus BR in the treatment of MDR-TB and XDR-TB over 10 years, from both the National Health Service (NHS) and societal perspective. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated in terms of life-years gained (LYG). Clinical data were sourced from trials; resource consumption for compared treatments was modelled according to advice from an expert clinicians panel. NHS tariffs for inpatient and outpatient resource consumption were retrieved from published Italian sources. Drug costs were provided by reference centres for disease treatment in Italy. A 3% annual discount was applied to both cost and effectiveness. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: Over 10 years, BBR vs. BR alone is cost-effective, with ICERs of €16,639/LYG and €4081/LYG for the NHS and society, respectively. The sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results from both considered perspectives. Conclusion: In Italy, BBR vs. BR alone has proven to be cost-effective in the treatment of MDR-TB and XDR-TB under a range of scenarios.