Melissa Bauer

WHO guidelines for the programmatic management of drug-resistant tuberculosis: 2011 update

The production of guidelines for the management of drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) fits the mandate of the World Health Organization (WHO) to support countries in the reinforcement of patient care. WHO commissioned external reviews to summarise evidence on priority questions regarding case-finding, treatment regimens for multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB), monitoring the response to MDR-TB treatment, and models of care. A multidisciplinary expert panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to develop recommendations. The recommendations support the wider use of rapid drug susceptibility testing for isoniazid and rifampicin or rifampicin alone using molecular techniques. Monitoring by sputum culture is important for early detection of failure during treatment. Regimens lasting ≥20 months and containing pyrazinamide, a fluoroquinolone, a second-line injectable drug, ethionamide (or prothionamide), and either cycloserine or p-aminosalicylic acid are recommended. The guidelines promote the early use of antiretroviral agents for TB patients with HIV on second-line drug regimens. Systems that primarily employ ambulatory models of care are recommended over others based mainly on hospitalisation. Scientific and medical associations should promote the recommendations among practitioners and public health decision makers involved in MDR-TB care. Controlled trials are needed to improve the quality of existing evidence, particularly on the optimal composition and duration of MDR-TB treatment regimens.

Multidrug Resistant Pulmonary Tuberculosis Treatment Regimens and Patient Outcomes: An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis of 9,153 Patients

Dick Menzies and colleagues report findings from a collaborative, individual patient-level meta-analysis of treatment outcomes among patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.

Resistance to fluoroquinolones and second-line injectable drugs: impact on multidrug-resistant TB outcomes

A meta-analysis for response to treatment was undertaken using individual data of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) (resistance to isoniazid and rifampicin) patients from 26 centres. The analysis assessed the impact of additional resistance to fluoroquinolones and/or second-line injectable drugs on treatment outcome. Compared with treatment failure, relapse and death, treatment success was higher in MDR-TB patients infected with strains without additional resistance (n=4763; 64%, 95% CI 57–72%) or with resistance to second-line injectable drugs only (n=1130; 56%, 95% CI 45–66%), than in those having resistance to fluoroquinolones alone (n=426; 48%, 95% CI 36–60%) or to fluoroquinolones plus second-line injectable drugs (extensively drug resistant (XDR)-TB) (n=405; 40%, 95% CI 27–53%). In XDR-TB patients, treatment success was highest if at least six drugs were used in the intensive phase (adjusted OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.4–16.6; reference fewer than three drugs) and four in the continuation phase (OR 6.1, 95% CI 1.4–26.3). The odds of success in XDR-TB patients was maximised when the intensive phase reached 6.6–9.0 months duration and the total duration of treatment 20.1–25.0 months. In XDR-TB patients, regimens containing more drugs than those recommended in MDR-TB but given for a similar duration were associated with the highest odds of success. All data were from observational studies and methodologies varied between centres, therefore, the bias may be substantial. Better quality evidence is needed to optimise regimens.

Drug resistance beyond extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis: individual patient data meta-analysis

The broadest pattern of tuberculosis drug resistance for which a consensus definition exists is extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB). It is not known if additional drug resistance portends worsened patient outcomes. This study compares treatment outcomes of XDR-TB patients with and without additional resistance to explore the need for a new definition. Individual patient data on XDR-TB outcomes were included in a meta-analysis comparing outcomes between XDR-alone and three non-mutually exclusive XDR-TB patient groups: XDR plus resistance to all the second-line injectables (sli) capreomycin and kanamycin/amikacin (XDR+2sli); XDR plus resistance to second-line injectables and to ≥1 Group 4 drug, i.e. : ethionamide/prothionamide, cycloserine/terizidone or PAS (XDR+sliG4); and XDR+sliG4 plus resistance to ethambutol and/or pyrazinamide (XDR+sliG4EZ). Of 405 XDR-TB cases, 301 were XDR-alone; 68 XDR+2sli; 48 XDR+sliG4; and 42 XDR+sliG4EZ. In multivariate analysis, the odds of cure were significantly lower in XDR+2sli (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR): 0.4; 95% Confidence Interval: 0.2–0.8) compared to XDR-alone, while odds of failure+death were higher in all XDR patients with additional resistance (aOR range: 2.6–2.8). Patients with additional resistance beyond XDR-TB showed poorer outcomes. Limitations in availability, accuracy and reproducibility of current DST methods preclude the adoption of a useful definition beyond the one currently used for XDR-TB.The broadest pattern of tuberculosis (TB) drug resistance for which a consensus definition exists is extensively drug-resistant (XDR)-TB. It is not known if additional drug resistance portends worsened patient outcomes. This study compares treatment outcomes of XDR-TB patients with and without additional resistance in order to explore the need for a new definition. Individual patient data on XDR-TB outcomes were included in a meta-analysis comparing outcomes between XDR alone and three nonmutually exclusive XDR-TB patient groups: XDR plus resistance to all the second-line injectables (sli) and capreomycin and kanamycin/amikacin (XDR+2sli) XDR plus resistance to second-line injectables and to more than one group 4 drug, i.e. ethionamide/protionamide, cycloserine/terizidone or para-aminosalicylic acid (XDR+sliG4) and XDR+sliG4 plus resistance to ethambutol and/or pyrazinamide (XDR+sliG4EZ). Of 405 XDR-TB cases, 301 were XDR alone, 68 XDR+2sli, 48 XDR+sliG4 and 42 XDR+sliG4EZ. In multivariate analysis, the odds of cure were significantly lower in XDR+2sli (adjusted OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2–0.8) compared to XDR alone, while odds of failure and death were higher in all XDR patients with additional resistance (adjusted OR 2.6–2.8). Patients with additional resistance beyond XDR-TB showed poorer outcomes. Limitations in availability, accuracy and reproducibility of current drug susceptibility testing methods preclude the adoption of a useful definition beyond the one currently used for XDR-TB.

Resistance to fluoroquinolones and second-line injectable drugs: impact on MDR-TB outcomes

A meta-analysis for response to treatment was undertaken using individual data of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) (resistance to isoniazid and rifampicin) patients from 26 centres. The analysis assessed the impact of additional resistance to fluoroquinolones and/or second-line injectable drugs on treatment outcome. Compared with treatment failure, relapse and death, treatment success was higher in MDR-TB patients infected with strains without additional resistance (n=4763; 64%, 95% CI 57–72%) or with resistance to second-line injectable drugs only (n=1130; 56%, 95% CI 45–66%), than in those having resistance to fluoroquinolones alone (n=426; 48%, 95% CI 36–60%) or to fluoroquinolones plus second-line injectable drugs (extensively drug resistant (XDR)-TB) (n=405; 40%, 95% CI 27–53%). In XDR-TB patients, treatment success was highest if at least six drugs were used in the intensive phase (adjusted OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.4–16.6; reference fewer than three drugs) and four in the continuation phase (OR 6.1, 95% CI 1.4–26.3). The odds of success in XDR-TB patients was maximised when the intensive phase reached 6.6–9.0 months duration and the total duration of treatment 20.1–25.0 months. In XDR-TB patients, regimens containing more drugs than those recommended in MDR-TB but given for a similar duration were associated with the highest odds of success. All data were from observational studies and methodologies varied between centres, therefore, the bias may be substantial. Better quality evidence is needed to optimise regimens.

Drug resistance beyond XDR-TB: results from a large individual patient data meta-analysis

The broadest pattern of tuberculosis drug resistance for which a consensus definition exists is extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB). It is not known if additional drug resistance portends worsened patient outcomes. This study compares treatment outcomes of XDR-TB patients with and without additional resistance to explore the need for a new definition. Individual patient data on XDR-TB outcomes were included in a meta-analysis comparing outcomes between XDR-alone and three non-mutually exclusive XDR-TB patient groups: XDR plus resistance to all the second-line injectables (sli) capreomycin and kanamycin/amikacin (XDR+2sli); XDR plus resistance to second-line injectables and to ≥1 Group 4 drug, i.e. : ethionamide/prothionamide, cycloserine/terizidone or PAS (XDR+sliG4); and XDR+sliG4 plus resistance to ethambutol and/or pyrazinamide (XDR+sliG4EZ). Of 405 XDR-TB cases, 301 were XDR-alone; 68 XDR+2sli; 48 XDR+sliG4; and 42 XDR+sliG4EZ. In multivariate analysis, the odds of cure were significantly lower in XDR+2sli (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR): 0.4; 95% Confidence Interval: 0.2–0.8) compared to XDR-alone, while odds of failure+death were higher in all XDR patients with additional resistance (aOR range: 2.6–2.8). Patients with additional resistance beyond XDR-TB showed poorer outcomes. Limitations in availability, accuracy and reproducibility of current DST methods preclude the adoption of a useful definition beyond the one currently used for XDR-TB.The broadest pattern of tuberculosis (TB) drug resistance for which a consensus definition exists is extensively drug-resistant (XDR)-TB. It is not known if additional drug resistance portends worsened patient outcomes. This study compares treatment outcomes of XDR-TB patients with and without additional resistance in order to explore the need for a new definition. Individual patient data on XDR-TB outcomes were included in a meta-analysis comparing outcomes between XDR alone and three nonmutually exclusive XDR-TB patient groups: XDR plus resistance to all the second-line injectables (sli) and capreomycin and kanamycin/amikacin (XDR+2sli) XDR plus resistance to second-line injectables and to more than one group 4 drug, i.e. ethionamide/protionamide, cycloserine/terizidone or para-aminosalicylic acid (XDR+sliG4) and XDR+sliG4 plus resistance to ethambutol and/or pyrazinamide (XDR+sliG4EZ). Of 405 XDR-TB cases, 301 were XDR alone, 68 XDR+2sli, 48 XDR+sliG4 and 42 XDR+sliG4EZ. In multivariate analysis, the odds of cure were significantly lower in XDR+2sli (adjusted OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2–0.8) compared to XDR alone, while odds of failure and death were higher in all XDR patients with additional resistance (adjusted OR 2.6–2.8). Patients with additional resistance beyond XDR-TB showed poorer outcomes. Limitations in availability, accuracy and reproducibility of current drug susceptibility testing methods preclude the adoption of a useful definition beyond the one currently used for XDR-TB.

Group 5 drugs for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: individual patient data meta-analysis

The role of so-called “group 5” second-line drugs as a part of antibiotic therapy for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is widely debated. We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of several group 5 drugs including amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, thioacetazone, the macrolide antibiotics, linezolid, clofazimine and terizidone for treatment of patients with MDR-TB. Detailed individual patient data were obtained from 31 published cohort studies of MDR-TB therapy. Pooled treatment outcomes for each group 5 drug were calculated using a random effects meta-analysis. Primary analyses compared treatment success to a combined outcome of failure, relapse or death. Among 9282 included patients, 2191 received at least one group 5 drug. We found no improvement in treatment success among patients taking clofazimine, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid or macrolide antibiotics, despite applying a number of statistical approaches to control confounding. Thioacetazone was associated with increased treatment success (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.1–6.1) when matched controls were selected from studies in which the group 5 drugs were not used at all, although this result was heavily influenced by a single study. The development of more effective antibiotics to treat drug-resistant TB remains an urgent priority. A meta-analysis of patient data found that group 5 drugs have limited benefit in treating patients with MDR-TB http://ow.ly/TIrH304QBci

Propensity Score-Based Approaches to Confounding by Indication in Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis: Non-Standardized Treatment for Multidrug Resistant Tuberculosis

Background In the absence of randomized clinical trials, meta-analysis of individual patient data (IPD) from observational studies may provide the most accurate effect estimates for an intervention. However, confounding by indication remains an important concern that can be addressed by incorporating individual patient covariates in different ways. We compared different analytic approaches to account for confounding in IPD from patients treated for multi-drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB). Methods Two antibiotic classes were evaluated, fluoroquinolones—considered the cornerstone of effective MDR-TB treatment—and macrolides, which are known to be safe, yet are ineffective in vitro. The primary outcome was treatment success against treatment failure, relapse or death. Effect estimates were obtained using multivariable and propensity-score based approaches. Results Fluoroquinolone antibiotics were used in 28 included studies, within which 6,612 patients received a fluoroquinolone and 723 patients did not. Macrolides were used in 15 included studies, within which 459 patients received this class of antibiotics and 3,670 did not. Both standard multivariable regression and propensity score-based methods resulted in similar effect estimates for early and late generation fluoroquinolones, while macrolide antibiotics use was associated with reduced treatment success. Conclusions In this individual patient data meta-analysis, standard multivariable and propensity-score based methods of adjusting for individual patient covariates for observational studies yielded produced similar effect estimates. Even when adjustment is made for potential confounding, interpretation of adjusted estimates must still consider the potential for residual bias.

Drug resistance beyond extensively drugresistant tuberculosis

The broadest pattern of tuberculosis drug resistance for which a consensus definition exists is extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB). It is not known if additional drug resistance portends worsened patient outcomes. This study compares treatment outcomes of XDR-TB patients with and without additional resistance to explore the need for a new definition. Individual patient data on XDR-TB outcomes were included in a meta-analysis comparing outcomes between XDR-alone and three non-mutually exclusive XDR-TB patient groups: XDR plus resistance to all the second-line injectables (sli) capreomycin and kanamycin/amikacin (XDR+2sli); XDR plus resistance to second-line injectables and to ≥1 Group 4 drug, i.e. : ethionamide/prothionamide, cycloserine/terizidone or PAS (XDR+sliG4); and XDR+sliG4 plus resistance to ethambutol and/or pyrazinamide (XDR+sliG4EZ). Of 405 XDR-TB cases, 301 were XDR-alone; 68 XDR+2sli; 48 XDR+sliG4; and 42 XDR+sliG4EZ. In multivariate analysis, the odds of cure were significantly lower in XDR+2sli (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR): 0.4; 95% Confidence Interval: 0.2–0.8) compared to XDR-alone, while odds of failure+death were higher in all XDR patients with additional resistance (aOR range: 2.6–2.8). Patients with additional resistance beyond XDR-TB showed poorer outcomes. Limitations in availability, accuracy and reproducibility of current DST methods preclude the adoption of a useful definition beyond the one currently used for XDR-TB.The broadest pattern of tuberculosis (TB) drug resistance for which a consensus definition exists is extensively drug-resistant (XDR)-TB. It is not known if additional drug resistance portends worsened patient outcomes. This study compares treatment outcomes of XDR-TB patients with and without additional resistance in order to explore the need for a new definition. Individual patient data on XDR-TB outcomes were included in a meta-analysis comparing outcomes between XDR alone and three nonmutually exclusive XDR-TB patient groups: XDR plus resistance to all the second-line injectables (sli) and capreomycin and kanamycin/amikacin (XDR+2sli) XDR plus resistance to second-line injectables and to more than one group 4 drug, i.e. ethionamide/protionamide, cycloserine/terizidone or para-aminosalicylic acid (XDR+sliG4) and XDR+sliG4 plus resistance to ethambutol and/or pyrazinamide (XDR+sliG4EZ). Of 405 XDR-TB cases, 301 were XDR alone, 68 XDR+2sli, 48 XDR+sliG4 and 42 XDR+sliG4EZ. In multivariate analysis, the odds of cure were significantly lower in XDR+2sli (adjusted OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2–0.8) compared to XDR alone, while odds of failure and death were higher in all XDR patients with additional resistance (adjusted OR 2.6–2.8). Patients with additional resistance beyond XDR-TB showed poorer outcomes. Limitations in availability, accuracy and reproducibility of current drug susceptibility testing methods preclude the adoption of a useful definition beyond the one currently used for XDR-TB.

Resistance to fluoroquinolones and second-line injectable drugs

A meta-analysis for response to treatment was undertaken using individual data of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) (resistance to isoniazid and rifampicin) patients from 26 centres. The analysis assessed the impact of additional resistance to fluoroquinolones and/or second-line injectable drugs on treatment outcome. Compared with treatment failure, relapse and death, treatment success was higher in MDR-TB patients infected with strains without additional resistance (n=4763; 64%, 95% CI 57–72%) or with resistance to second-line injectable drugs only (n=1130; 56%, 95% CI 45–66%), than in those having resistance to fluoroquinolones alone (n=426; 48%, 95% CI 36–60%) or to fluoroquinolones plus second-line injectable drugs (extensively drug resistant (XDR)-TB) (n=405; 40%, 95% CI 27–53%). In XDR-TB patients, treatment success was highest if at least six drugs were used in the intensive phase (adjusted OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.4–16.6; reference fewer than three drugs) and four in the continuation phase (OR 6.1, 95% CI 1.4–26.3). The odds of success in XDR-TB patients was maximised when the intensive phase reached 6.6–9.0 months duration and the total duration of treatment 20.1–25.0 months. In XDR-TB patients, regimens containing more drugs than those recommended in MDR-TB but given for a similar duration were associated with the highest odds of success. All data were from observational studies and methodologies varied between centres, therefore, the bias may be substantial. Better quality evidence is needed to optimise regimens.