Grant Theron
Stellenbosch University
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Grant Theron.
The Lancet | 2014
Grant Theron; Lynn S. Zijenah; Duncan Chanda; Petra Clowes; Andrea Rachow; Maia Lesosky; Wilbert Bara; Stanley Mungofa; Madhukar Pai; Michael Hoelscher; David W. Dowdy; Alex Pym; Peter Mwaba; Peter R. Mason; Jonny Peter; Keertan Dheda
BACKGROUND The Xpert MTB/RIF test for tuberculosis is being rolled out in many countries, but evidence is lacking regarding its implementation outside laboratories, ability to inform same-day treatment decisions at the point of care, and clinical effect on tuberculosis-related morbidity. We aimed to assess the feasibility, accuracy, and clinical effect of point-of-care Xpert MTB/RIF testing at primary-care health-care facilities in southern Africa. METHODS In this pragmatic, randomised, parallel-group, multicentre trial, we recruited adults with symptoms suggestive of active tuberculosis from five primary-care health-care facilities in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Tanzania. Eligible patients were randomly assigned using pregenerated tables to nurse-performed Xpert MTB/RIF at the clinic or sputum smear microscopy. Participants with a negative test result were empirically managed according to local WHO-compliant guidelines. Our primary outcome was tuberculosis-related morbidity (measured with the TBscore and Karnofsky performance score [KPS]) in culture-positive patients who had begun anti-tuberculosis treatment, measured at 2 months and 6 months after randomisation, analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01554384. FINDINGS Between April 12, 2011, and March 30, 2012, we randomly assigned 758 patients to smear microscopy (182 culture positive) and 744 to Xpert MTB/RIF (185 culture positive). Median TBscore in culture-positive patients did not differ between groups at 2 months (2 [IQR 0-3] in the smear microscopy group vs 2 [0·25-3] in the MTB/RIF group; p=0·85) or 6 months (1 [0-3] vs 1 [0-3]; p=0·35), nor did median KPS at 2 months (80 [70-90] vs 90 [80-90]; p=0·23) or 6 months (100 [90-100] vs 100 [90-100]; p=0·85). Point-of-care MTB/RIF had higher sensitivity than microscopy (154 [83%] of 185 vs 91 [50%] of 182; p=0·0001) but similar specificity (517 [95%] 544 vs 540 [96%] of 560; p=0·25), and had similar sensitivity to laboratory-based MTB/RIF (292 [83%] of 351; p=0·99) but higher specificity (952 [92%] of 1037; p=0·0173). 34 (5%) of 744 tests with point-of-care MTB/RIF and 82 (6%) of 1411 with laboratory-based MTB/RIF failed (p=0·22). Compared with the microscopy group, more patients in the MTB/RIF group had a same-day diagnosis (178 [24%] of 744 vs 99 [13%] of 758; p<0·0001) and same-day treatment initiation (168 [23%] of 744 vs 115 [15%] of 758; p=0·0002). Although, by end of the study, more culture-positive patients in the MTB/RIF group were on treatment due to reduced dropout (15 [8%] of 185 in the MTB/RIF group did not receive treatment vs 28 [15%] of 182 in the microscopy group; p=0·0302), the proportions of all patients on treatment in each group by day 56 were similar (320 [43%] of 744 in the MTB/RIF group vs 317 [42%] of 758 in the microscopy group; p=0·6408). INTERPRETATION Xpert MTB/RIF can be accurately administered by a nurse in primary-care clinics, resulting in more patients starting same-day treatment, more culture-positive patients starting therapy, and a shorter time to treatment. However, the benefits did not translate into lower tuberculosis-related morbidity, partly because of high levels of empirical-evidence-based treatment in smear-negative patients. FUNDING European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, National Research Foundation, and Claude Leon Foundation.
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine | 2011
Grant Theron; Jonny Peter; Richard van Zyl-Smit; Hridesh Mishra; Elizabeth M. Streicher; Samuel Murray; Rodney Dawson; Andrew Whitelaw; Michael Hoelscher; Surendra Sharma; Madhukar Pai; Robin M. Warren; Keertan Dheda
RATIONALE Xpert MTB/RIF is a novel automated molecular diagnostic recently endorsed by the World Health Organization. However, performance-related data from high HIV prevalence settings are limited. OBJECTIVES The impact of sample-related factors on performance and the significance of Xpert MTB/RIF-positive culture-negative discordance remain unclear. METHODS Xpert MTB/RIF was evaluated using single archived spot-sputum samples from 496 South African patients with suspected TB. Mycobacterium tuberculosis culture positivity and phenotypic resistance to rifampicin served as reference standards. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Overall, Xpert MTB/RIF detected 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88-98%; 89 of 94) of smear-positive culture-positive cases and the specificity was 94% (91-96%; 320 of 339). The sensitivity in smear-negative cases was 55% (35-73%; 12 of 22) when the analysis was restricted to 1 ml of unprocessed sputum and culture time-to-positivity of less than or equal to 28 days. Compared with smear microscopy (n=94), Xpert MTB/RIF detected an additional 17 cases (n=111) representing an 18% (11-27%; 111 vs. 94) relative increase in the rapid TB case detection rate. Moreover, compared with smear microscopy, the inclusion of Xpert MTB/RIF-positive culture-negative TB cases (ruled-in by an alternative diagnostic method) resulted in the detection of a further 16 cases (n=127), thus significantly increasing the rapid TB case detection rate to 35% (95% CI, 26-45%; 94 to 111 vs. 94 to 127; P<0.01), the overall specificity to 99.1% (97-100%; 320 of 323; P<0.001), and sensitivity in smear-negative TB to 60% (P=0.12). Performance strongly correlated with smear status and culture time-to-positivity. In patients infected with HIV compared with patients uninfected with HIV Xpert MTB/RIF showed a trend to reduced sensitivity (P=0.09) and significantly reduced negative predictive value (P=0.01). The negative predictive value for rifampicin resistance was 99.4%. CONCLUSIONS XpertMTB/RIF outperformed smear microscopy, established a diagnosis in a significant proportion of patients with smear-negative TB, detected many highly likely TB cases missed by culture, and accurately ruled out rifampicin-resistant TB. Sample-specific factors had limited impact on performance. Performance in patients infected with HIV, especially those with advanced immunosuppression, warrants further study.
The Lancet Respiratory Medicine | 2014
Keertan Dheda; Tawanda Gumbo; Neel R. Gandhi; Megan Murray; Grant Theron; Zarir F. Udwadia; Giovanni Battista Migliori; Robin M. Warren
Extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis is a burgeoning global health crisis mainly affecting economically active young adults, and has high mortality irrespective of HIV status. In some countries such as South Africa, drug-resistant tuberculosis represents less than 3% of all cases but consumes more than a third of the total national budget for tuberculosis, which is unsustainable and threatens to destabilise national tuberculosis programmes. However, concern about drug-resistant tuberculosis has been eclipsed by that of totally and extremely drug-resistant tuberculosis--ie, resistance to all or nearly all conventional first-line and second-line antituberculosis drugs. In this Review, we discuss the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, management, implications for health-care workers, and ethical and medicolegal aspects of extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis and other resistant strains. Finally, we discuss the emerging problem of functionally untreatable tuberculosis, and the issues and challenges that it poses to public health and clinical practice. The emergence and growth of highly resistant strains of tuberculosis make the development of new drugs and rapid diagnostics for tuberculosis--and increased funding to strengthen global control efforts, research, and advocacy--even more pressing.
PLOS ONE | 2013
Anil Pooran; Elize Pieterson; Malika Davids; Grant Theron; Keertan Dheda
Background Drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) is undermining TB control in South Africa. However, there are hardly any data about the cost of treating DR-TB in high burden settings despite such information being quintessential for the rational planning and allocation of resources by policy-makers, and to inform future cost-effectiveness analyses. Methodology We analysed the comparative 2011 United States dollar (
The Lancet Respiratory Medicine | 2017
Keertan Dheda; Tawanda Gumbo; Gary Maartens; Kelly E. Dooley; Ruth McNerney; Megan Murray; Jennifer Furin; Edward A. Nardell; Leslie London; Erica Lessem; Grant Theron; Paul D. van Helden; Stefan Niemann; Matthias Merker; David W. Dowdy; Annelies Van Rie; Gilman K. H. Siu; Jotam G. Pasipanodya; Camilla Rodrigues; Taane G. Clark; Frik A. Sirgel; Aliasgar Esmail; Hsien-Ho Lin; Sachin Atre; H. Simon Schaaf; Kwok Chiu Chang; Christoph Lange; Payam Nahid; Zarir F. Udwadia; C. Robert Horsburgh
) cost of diagnosis and treatment of drug sensitive TB (DS-TB), MDR-TB and XDR-TB, based on National South African TB guidelines, from the perspective of the National TB Program using published clinical outcome data. Principal Findings Assuming adherence to national DR-TB management guidelines, the per patient cost of XDR-TB was
European Respiratory Journal | 2012
Jonathan G. Peter; Grant Theron; Richard van Zyl-Smit; Asheen Haripersad; Lynelle Mottay; Sarah Kraus; Anke Binder; Richard Meldau; Anneli Hardy; Keertan Dheda
26,392, four times greater than MDR-TB (
Respirology | 2013
Keertan Dheda; Morten Ruhwald; Grant Theron; Jonathan C. Peter; Wing-Cheong Yam
6772), and 103 times greater than drug-sensitive TB (
Lancet Infectious Diseases | 2014
Grant Theron; Jonny Peter; David W. Dowdy; Ivor Langley; S. Bertel Squire; Keertan Dheda
257). Despite DR-TB comprising only 2.2% of the case burden, it consumed ∼32% of the total estimated 2011 national TB budget of US
The Lancet | 2016
Jonny Peter; Lynn S. Zijenah; Duncan Chanda; Petra Clowes; Maia Lesosky; Phindile Gina; Nirja Mehta; Greg Calligaro; Carl Lombard; Gerard Kadzirange; Tsitsi Bandason; Abidan Chansa; Namakando Liusha; Chacha Mangu; Bariki Mtafya; Henry Msila; Andrea Rachow; Michael Hoelscher; Peter Mwaba; Grant Theron; Keertan Dheda
218 million. 45% and 25% of the DR-TB costs were attributed to anti-TB drugs and hospitalization, respectively. XDR-TB consumed 28% of the total DR-TB diagnosis and treatment costs. Laboratory testing and anti-TB drugs comprised the majority (71%) of MDR-TB costs while hospitalization and anti-TB drug costs comprised the majority (92%) of XDR-TB costs. A decentralized XDR-TB treatment programme could potentially reduce costs by
PLOS ONE | 2012
Jonathan G. Peter; Grant Theron; Tapuwa E. Muchinga; Ureshnie Govender; Keertan Dheda
6930 (26%) per case and reduce the total amount spent on DR-TB by ∼7%. Conclusion/Significance Although DR-TB forms a very small proportion of the total case burden it consumes a disproportionate and substantial amount of South Africa’s total annual TB budget. These data inform rational resource allocation and selection of management strategies for DR-TB in high burden settings.