Search

Background Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) strains resistant to isoniazid and rifampin (multidrug-resistant tuberculosis [MDR-TB]) are increasingly reported worldwide, requiring renewed focus on the nuances of drug resistance. Patients with low-level moxifloxacin resistance may benefit from higher doses, but limited clinical data on this strategy are available. Methods We conducted a 5-year observational cohort study of MDR-TB patients at a tertiary care center in India. Participants with Mtb isolates resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, and moxifloxacin (at the 0.5 µg/mL threshold) were analyzed according to receipt of high-dose moxifloxacin (600 mg daily) as part of a susceptibility-guided treatment regimen. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models assessed the relationship between high-dose moxifloxacin and unfavorable treatment outcomes. Results Of 354 participants with MDR-TB resistant to moxifloxacin, 291 (82.2%) received high-dose moxifloxacin. The majority experienced good treatment outcomes (200 [56.5%]), which was similar between groups (56.7% vs 54.0%, P  = .74). Unfavorable outcomes were associated with greater extent of radiographic disease, lower initial body mass index, and concurrent treatment with fewer drugs with confirmed phenotypic susceptibility. Treatment with high-dose moxifloxacin was not associated with improved outcomes in either unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR], 1.2 [95% confidence interval {CI},.6–2.4]) or adjusted (HR, 0.8 [95% CI,.5–1.4]) models but was associated with joint pain (HR, 3.2 [95% CI, 1.2–8.8]). Conclusions In a large observational cohort, adding high-dose (600 mg) moxifloxacin to a drug susceptibility test–based treatment regimen for MDR-TB was associated with increased treatment-associated side effects without improving overall outcomes and should be avoided for empiric treatment of moxifloxacin-resistant MDR-TB. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the increasing cohort of COVID-19 survivors worldwide, we now realize the proportionate rise in post-COVID-19 syndrome. In this review article, we try to define, summarize, and classify this syndrome systematically. This would help clinicians to identify and manage this condition more efficiently. We propose a tool kit that might be useful in recording follow-up data of COVID-19 survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background India accounts for one-fifth of the global incident cases of tuberculosis(TB). The country presently has the world's largest directly observed treatment, short course (DOTS) programme, that has shown impressive results and covers almost 100% of the billion-plus Indian population. Despite such a successful programme, the majority of Indian patients with tuberculosis prefer private healthcare, although repeated audits of this sector have shown the quality to be poor. We aimed to ascertain the level of awareness and knowledge of private patients with tuberculosis attending our clinic at a tertiary private healthcare institute with regards to the DOTS programme, understanding the reasons behind their preference for private healthcare, and evaluating their perceptions and reasons for accepting or failing to accept directly observed therapy as a treatment option. Methods A structured interview schedule was administered to private patients with tuberculosis at the P.D. Hinduja Hospital and Medical Research Centre, Mumbai, India between January 2006 to November 2007. Results Only 30 of 200 patients (15%) were aware of the DOTS programme. After being explained what directly observed therapy was, 136 patients (68%) found this form of treatment unacceptable.183 patients (91.5%) preferred buying the drugs themselves to visiting a DOTS centre. 90 patients (45%) were not prepared to be observed while swallowing their TB drugs, finding it an intrusion of privacy. Conclusions Our study reveals a poor knowledge and awareness of the DOTS programme among the cohort of TB patients that we interviewed. The control of TB in India will undoubtedly benefit from more patients being attracted to and treated by the existing DOTS programmes. However, directly observed treatment, in its present form, is considered too rigid and intrusive and is unlikely to be accepted by a majority of patients seeking private healthcare. Novel strategies and more flexible options will have to be devised to ensure higher cure rates without compromising patient choice.

Background and objective: Lack of consensus on diagnosis of ACO limits our understanding of the impact, management and outcomes of ACO. The present observational study aims to describe the prevalence, clinical characteristics and course of individuals with ACO based on various definitions used in clinical practice. Methods: We included individuals with COPD from the prospective, multisite CanCOLD study and defined subjects with ACO using seven definitions commonly used in the literature. Results: Data including questionnaires, lung function and CT scans were analysed from 522 individuals with COPD who were randomly recruited from the population. Among them, 264 fulfilled at least one of the seven definitions of ACO. Prevalence of ACO varied from 3.8% to 31%. Regardless of the definition, individuals with ACO had worse outcomes (lung function and higher percentage of fast decliners, symptoms and exacerbations, health‐related quality of life and comorbidities) than the remaining patients with COPD. Conversely, patients with non‐ACO had higher emphysema and bronchiolitis scores. The three definitions that included atopy and/or physician diagnosis of asthma identified subjects who differed significantly from patients with COPD. The two ACO definitions with post‐bronchodilator reversibility were concordant with COPD and were the least stable, with less than 50% of the patients from each group maintaining reversibility over visits. Conclusion: Atopy and physician‐diagnosed asthma are more distinguishing characteristics to identify ACO. This finding needs to be validated using measures of airway inflammation and other specific biomarkers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dr. Mahashur and Dr. Zarir Udwadia built a pulmonology service that has become synonymous with evidence-based ethical clinical practices, with a research track record that not too many private hospitals in the country can claim. The Indian Chest Society, which represents thousands of chest physicians across the country, and has become a leading force for pulmonary medicine in India, and across the world, was founded by Dr. Mahashur and his colleagues in 1981. I realize how incredibly challenging it is to be a physician, researcher, teacher, family man, and friend, and Dr. Mahashur was a rare embodiment of success in each of these roles. [Extracted from the article]