Bedaquiline-Pretomanid-Linezolid Regimens for Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: The bedaquiline-pretomanid-linezolid regimen has been reported to have 90% efficacy against highly drug-resistant tuberculosis, but the incidence of adverse events with 1200 mg of linezolid daily has been high. The appropriate dose of linezolid and duration of treatment with this agent to minimize toxic effects while maintaining efficacy against highly drug-resistant tuberculosis are unclear. METHODS: We enrolled participants with extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis (i.e., resistant to rifampin, a fluoroquinolone, and an aminoglycoside), pre-XDR tuberculosis (i.e., resistant to rifampin and to either a fluoroquinolone or an aminoglycoside), or rifampin-resistant tuberculosis that was not responsive to treatment or for which a second-line regimen had been discontinued because of side effects. We randomly assigned the participants to receive bedaquiline for 26 weeks (200 mg daily for 8 weeks, then 100 mg daily for 18 weeks), pretomanid (200 mg daily for 26 weeks), and daily linezolid at a dose of 1200 mg for 26 weeks or 9 weeks or 600 mg for 26 weeks or 9 weeks. The primary end point in the modified intention-to-treat population was the incidence of an unfavorable outcome, defined as treatment failure or disease relapse (clinical or bacteriologic) at 26 weeks after completion of treatment. Safety was also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 181 participants were enrolled, 88% of whom had XDR or pre-XDR tuberculosis. Among participants who received bedaquiline-pretomanid-linezolid with linezolid at a dose of 1200 mg for 26 weeks or 9 weeks or 600 mg for 26 weeks or 9 weeks, 93%, 89%, 91%, and 84%, respectively, had a favorable outcome; peripheral neuropathy occurred in 38%, 24%, 24%, and 13%, respectively; myelosuppression occurred in 22%, 15%, 2%, and 7%, respectively; and the linezolid dose was modified (i.e., interrupted, reduced, or discontinued) in 51%, 30%, 13%, and 13%, respectively. Optic neuropathy developed in 4 participants (9%) who had received linezolid at a dose of 1200 mg for 26 weeks; all the cases resolved. Six of the seven unfavorable microbiologic outcomes through 78 weeks of follow-up occurred in participants assigned to the 9-week linezolid groups. CONCLUSIONS: A total of 84 to 93% of the participants across all four bedaquiline-pretomanid-linezolid treatment groups had a favorable outcome. The overall risk-benefit ratio favored the group that received the three-drug regimen with linezolid at a dose of 600 mg for 26 weeks, with a lower incidence of adverse events reported and fewer linezolid dose modifications. (Funded by the TB Alliance and others; ZeNix ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03086486.).

Practical approaches to Bayesian sample size determination in non-inferiority trials with binary outcomes.

Bayesian analysis of a non-inferiority trial is advantageous in allowing direct probability statements to be made about the relative treatment difference rather than relying on an arbitrary and often poorly justified non-inferiority margin. When the primary analysis will be Bayesian, a Bayesian approach to sample size determination will often be appropriate for consistency with the analysis. We demonstrate three Bayesian approaches to choosing sample size for non-inferiority trials with binary outcomes and review their advantages and disadvantages. First, we present a predictive power approach for determining sample size using the probability that the trial will produce a convincing result in the final analysis. Next, we determine sample size by considering the expected posterior probability of non-inferiority in the trial. Finally, we demonstrate a precision-based approach. We apply these methods to a non-inferiority trial in antiretroviral therapy for treatment of HIV-infected children. A predictive power approach would be most accessible in practical settings, because it is analogous to the standard frequentist approach. Sample sizes are larger than with frequentist calculations unless an informative analysis prior is specified, because appropriate allowance is made for uncertainty in the assumed design parameters, ignored in frequentist calculations. An expected posterior probability approach will lead to a smaller sample size and is appropriate when the focus is on estimating posterior probability rather than on testing. A precision-based approach would be useful when sample size is restricted by limits on recruitment or costs, but it would be difficult to decide on sample size using this approach alone.

Rethinking intercurrent events in defining estimands for tuberculosis trials.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Tuberculosis remains one of the leading causes of death from an infectious disease globally. Both choices of outcome definitions and approaches to handling events happening post-randomisation can change the treatment effect being estimated, but these are often inconsistently described, thus inhibiting clear interpretation and comparison across trials. METHODS: Starting from the ICH E9(R1) addendum's definition of an estimand, we use our experience of conducting large Phase III tuberculosis treatment trials and our understanding of the estimand framework to identify the key decisions regarding how different event types are handled in the primary outcome definition, and the important points that should be considered in making such decisions. A key issue is the handling of intercurrent (i.e. post-randomisation) events (ICEs) which affect interpretation of or preclude measurement of the intended final outcome. We consider common ICEs including treatment changes and treatment extension, poor adherence to randomised treatment, re-infection with a new strain of tuberculosis which is different from the original infection, and death. We use two completed tuberculosis trials (REMoxTB and STREAM Stage 1) as illustrative examples. These trials tested non-inferiority of new tuberculosis treatment regimens versus a control regimen. The primary outcome was a binary composite endpoint, 'favourable' or 'unfavourable', which was constructed from several components. RESULTS: We propose the following improvements in handling the above-mentioned ICEs and loss to follow-up (a post-randomisation event that is not in itself an ICE). First, changes to allocated regimens should not necessarily be viewed as an unfavourable outcome; from the patient perspective, the potential harms associated with a change in the regimen should instead be directly quantified. Second, handling poor adherence to randomised treatment using a per-protocol analysis does not necessarily target a clear estimand; instead, it would be desirable to develop ways to estimate the treatment effects more relevant to programmatic settings. Third, re-infection with a new strain of tuberculosis could be handled with different strategies, depending on whether the outcome of interest is the ability to attain culture negativity from infection with any strain of tuberculosis, or specifically the presenting strain of tuberculosis. Fourth, where possible, death could be separated into tuberculosis-related and non-tuberculosis-related and handled using appropriate strategies. Finally, although some losses to follow-up would result in early treatment discontinuation, patients lost to follow-up before the end of the trial should not always be classified as having an unfavourable outcome. Instead, loss to follow-up should be separated from not completing the treatment, which is an ICE and may be considered as an unfavourable outcome. CONCLUSION: The estimand framework clarifies many issues in tuberculosis trials but also challenges trialists to justify and improve their outcome definitions. Future trialists should consider all the above points in defining their outcomes.

Treatment estimands in clinical trials of patients hospitalised for COVID-19: ensuring trials ask the right questions.

When designing a clinical trial, explicitly defining the treatment estimands of interest (that which is to be estimated) can help to clarify trial objectives and ensure the questions being addressed by the trial are clinically meaningful. There are several challenges when defining estimands. Here, we discuss a number of these in the context of trials of treatments for patients hospitalised with COVID-19 and make suggestions for how estimands should be defined for key outcomes. We suggest that treatment effects should usually be measured as differences in proportions (or risk or odds ratios) for outcomes such as death and requirement for ventilation, and differences in means for outcomes such as the number of days ventilated. We further recommend that truncation due to death should be handled differently depending on whether a patient- or resource-focused perspective is taken; for the former, a composite approach should be used, while for the latter, a while-alive approach is preferred. Finally, we suggest that discontinuation of randomised treatment should be handled from a treatment policy perspective, where non-adherence is ignored in the analysis (i.e. intention to treat).

Toxicity related to standard TB therapy for pulmonary tuberculosis and treatment outcomes in the REMoxTB study according to HIV status.

BACKGROUND: The phase III REMoxTB study prospectively enrolled HIV-positive (with CD4+ count > 250 cells, not on anti-retroviral therapy) and HIV-negative patients. We investigated the incidence of adverse events and cure rates according to HIV status for patients receiving standard TB therapy in the trial. METHODS: Forty-two HIV-positive cases were matched to 220 HIV-negative controls by age, gender, ethnicity, and trial site using coarsened exact matching. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events (AEs) were summarised by MedDRA System Organ Class. Kaplan-Meier curves for time to first grade 3 or 4 AE were constructed according to HIV status with hazard ratios calculated. Patients were considered cured if they were culture negative 18 months after commencing therapy with ≥2 consecutive negative culture results. RESULTS: Twenty of 42 (47.6%) HIV-positive and 34 of 220 (15.5%) HIV-negative patients experienced ≥1 grade 3 or 4 AE, respectively. The majority of these were hepatobiliary disorders that accounted for 12 of 40 (30.0%) events occurring in 6 of 42 (14.3%) HIV-positive patients and for 15 of 60 (25.0%) events occurring in 9 of 220 (4.1%) HIV-negative patients. The median time to first grade 3 or 4 AE was 54 days (IQR 15.5-59.0) for HIV-positive and 29.5 days (IQR 9.0-119.0) for HIV-negative patients, respectively. The hazard ratio for experiencing a grade 3 or 4 AE among HIV-positive patients was 3.25 (95% CI 1.87-5.66, p < 0.01). Cure rates were similar, with 38 of 42 (90.5%) HIV-positive and 195 of 220 (88.6%) HIV-negative patients (p = 0.73) cured at 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: HIV-positive patients receiving standard TB therapy in the REMoxTB study were at greater risk of adverse events during treatment but cure rates were similar when compared to a matched sample of HIV-negative patients.

Toxicity associated with tuberculosis chemotherapy in the REMoxTB study.

BACKGROUND: The incidence and severity of tuberculosis chemotherapy toxicity is poorly characterised. We used data available from patients in the REMoxTB trial to provide an assessment of the risks associated with the standard regimen and two experimental regimens containing moxifloxacin. METHODS: All grade 3 & 4 adverse events (AEs) and their relationship to treatment for patients who had taken at least one dose of therapy in the REMoxTB clinical trial were recorded. Univariable logistic regression was used to test the relationship of baseline characteristics to the incidence of grade 3 & 4 AEs and significant characteristics (p < 0.10) were incorporated into a multivariable model. The timing of AEs during therapy was analysed in standard therapy and the experimental arms. Logistic regression was used to investigate the relationship between AEs (total and related-only) and microbiological cure on treatment. RESULTS: In the standard therapy arm 57 (8.9%) of 639 patients experienced ≥1 related AEs with 80 of the total 113 related events (70.8%) occurring in the intensive phase of treatment. Both four-month experimental arms ("isoniazid arm" with moxifloxacin substituted for ethambutol & "ethambutol arm" with moxifloxacin substituted for isoniazid) had a lower total of related grade 3 & 4 AEs than standard therapy (63 & 65 vs 113 AEs). Female gender (adjOR 1.97, 95% CI 0.91-1.83) and HIV-positive status (adjOR 3.33, 95% CI 1.55-7.14) were significantly associated with experiencing ≥1 related AE (p < 0.05) on standard therapy. The most common adverse events on standard therapy related to hepatobiliary, musculoskeletal and metabolic disorders. Patients who experienced ≥1 related AE were more likely to fail treatment or relapse (adjOR 3.11, 95% CI 1.59-6.10, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Most AEs considered related to standard therapy occurred in the intensive phase of treatment with female patients and HIV-positive patients demonstrating a significantly higher risk of AEs during treatment. Almost a tenth of standard therapy patients had a significant side effect, whereas both experimental arms recorded a lower incidence of toxicity. That patients with one or more AE are more likely to fail treatment suggests that treatment outcomes could be improved by identifying such patients through targeted monitoring.

Disseminating the research findings from the adolescents and adults living with Perinatal HIV (AALPHI) study: an approach from young people living with HIV.

BACKGROUND: The Adolescents and Adults Living with Perinatal HIV (AALPHI) study is one of only three cohort studies worldwide evaluating the impact of HIV on young people living with perinatal HIV (PLHIV) relative to a comparable group of HIV negative young people in close relationship with an HIV positive individual, for example, their mother, sibling or partner. This project aimed to engage young people with the AALPHI study findings, help them take ownership, and decide how they would disseminate the key messages to both study participants and to the wider community. METHODS: In brief, 318 PLHIV and 100 HIV negative adolescents participated in AALPHI, where they each were interviewed twice, around two years apart. They were asked a wide range of psychosocial and risk behaviour questions and their cognitive function was assessed. We invited three AALPHI participants and seven members of the Youth Trials Board at the Children's HIV Association (CHIVA) to attend up to four workshops. They were provided with the key AALPHI research findings and asked to develop them into a format that was accessible and understandable for young people. Some who had not participated before formed a group in the fourth dissemination workshop that confirmed the most important concepts and results. RESULTS: The young people decided to develop a film and a leaflet about the AALPHI findings and co-produced them with a film maker and graphic designer. Challenges included working with the film maker and the venue for the first three dissemination workshops was an office space which was not ideal. CONCLUSION: Engaging young people in the dissemination of the AALPHI findings ensured the results were communicated in a way that was more likely to be relevant, accessible and useful to those affected by the study. This project demonstrates how young people in potentially stigmatised areas of care, such as HIV, can be involved in research dissemination.

Informing young people of the results of a study in which they participated, in a manner they can understand, is an ethical minimum. Increasingly, young people themselves may be involved in this dissemination activity, to ensure that study results are communicated in a way which is more likely to be relevant, accessible and useful to those directly affected by the study. The Adolescents and Adults Living with Perinatal HIV (AALPHI) study is a cohort study evaluating the impact of HIV on young people living with perinatal HIV (PLHIV) relative to HIV negative young people affected by HIV. This project aimed to engage PLHIV with the AALPHI findings, and help them take ownership of their dissemination, deciding how to communicate key messages to study participants and the wider community. We invited three AALPHI participants and seven members of a Youth Trials Board at the Children's HIV Association, (CHIVA), to attend four workshops. We provided them with key AALPHI findings and asked them to develop them into an understandable format for young people. They co-produced the content for a film and a leaflet about the results, working with a film maker and graphic designer. The 4th comprised of three workshop participants and seven new participants from CHIVA. This work shows that young PLHIV can be part of the process of evaluating study results and guiding dissemination by creating outputs that align with young people's priorities. This area of work could be further developed in the future through direct evaluation of participant involvement.

Patients' priorities around drug-resistant tuberculosis treatment: A multi-national qualitative study from Mongolia, South Africa and Georgia.

We conducted qualitative research exploring the treatment experience of people with DR-TB. We held nine focus group discussions with 57 adults undergoing/recently completed treatment for DR-TB in Georgia, Mongolia and South Africa. Translated transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. We identified three higher order themes: (1) Treatment experience and the role of good relationships with healthcare providers: Treatment duration, pill burden and side-effects were challenging aspects of treatment. Side-effects/symptoms that were visible signs of illness were particularly troubling. Good relations with clinical staff helped combat fear and uncertainty regarding treatment. (2) Mental distress and opportunities for wellbeing: The shame, stigma and isolation people experienced as a result of their DR-TB diagnosis was an important cause of mental distress. No longer being infectious enabled people to resume work and socialising. Positive emotions emerged with good treatment outcomes. (3) Fear and worry along the treatment journey: Participants expressed fears about TB: infecting others; whether they would be able to endure treatment; side-effects; health consequences of treatment. Worries mostly disappeared with successful treatment. Alongside measuring side-effects, time to culture conversion and cure rates, future trials of DR-TB treatments should capture how quickly visible symptoms resolve, quality of life measures, and mental health outcomes.

Formalising the induction of patient and public involvement contributors on trial oversight committees.

BACKGROUND: Clinical Trials Units are encouraged to integrate Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) into all aspects of trial design, running and oversight. This research explored the induction and training of PPI Contributors joining trial oversight committees and was used to update the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London's (MRC CTU at UCL) induction pack for new PPI Contributors. METHODS: Published and unpublished materials provided by other CTUs and research organisations on training for PPI Contributors on oversight committees were reviewed, with themes then triangulated to identify the most common topics covered in induction training. A face-to-face workshop with PPI Contributors from the MRC CTU at UCL reviewed a draft updated Induction Pack. Findings from these discussions were incorporated into a revised induction pack which was then re-reviewed by the workshop attendees. RESULTS: No published literature on this subject was found. However, several common themes were identified from unpublished materials. Workshop attendees agreed with most of the themes suggested in the initial draft pack based on the literature search and also provided a number of additional topics for discussion. CONCLUSIONS: There is very little consistency in the induction of PPI Contributors on oversight committees. Whilst most local guidance explains the general role of a PPI Contributor, more context and background of the particular trial needs to be provided to allow for adequate induction of new committee members. The Induction Pack created provides a framework upon which trial managers can build a full picture of their study.

Clinical Trials Units are encouraged to integrate Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) into all aspects of their trials. This research explored the induction and training of PPI Contributors (e.g. patients, carers and members of the public) joining trial oversight committees. These committees regularly review trial progress and ensure participant safety. PPI Contributors sit on the committees to provide important guidance and advice on what the trial is like for a participant taking part.We looked at existing materials and research to find out what is already in use and how useful PPI Contributors felt it may be. We also held a workshop with existing PPI Contributors who had experience of participating in trials and sitting on oversight committees to find out what information they felt would be useful during the induction of a new member.Our research was used to create an induction pack for new PPI Contributors at the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London (MRC CTU at UCL). We have made this resource available to all researchers and in this report we describe how it was created.

Lung injury from e-cigarette use: a foul and pestilent congregation of vapours.

A 62-year-old man presented with worsening dyspnoea, haemoptysis and reduced exercise tolerance. He was found to be hypoxaemic with bilateral basal opacification on chest imaging, but inflammatory markers, respiratory virus PCR and sputum culture demonstrated no signs of infection. The patient reported having initially mild, yet progressive, symptoms since he started vaping 14 months previously. He was treated with oxygen therapy, supportive care and cessation of vaping. Chest imaging at discharge showed marked improvement of previous bilateral opacification and the patient returned to baseline exercise tolerance, with no oxygen requirement. Vaping is becoming more common in the UK and this case demonstrates the importance of considering electronic vaping-associated lung injury in cases of non-infective lung injury.

Bedaquiline, moxifloxacin, pretomanid, and pyrazinamide during the first 8 weeks of treatment of patients with drug-susceptible or drug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis: a multicentre, open-label, partially randomised, phase 2b trial.

BACKGROUND: New anti-tuberculosis regimens that are shorter, simpler, and less toxic than those that are currently available are needed as part of the global effort to address the tuberculosis epidemic. We aimed to investigate the bactericidal activity and safety profile of combinations of bedaquiline, pretomanid, moxifloxacin, and pyrazinamide in the first 8 weeks of treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, partially randomised, phase 2b trial, we prospectively recruited patients with drug-susceptible or rifampicin-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis from seven sites in South Africa, two in Tanzania, and one in Uganda. Patients aged 18 years or older with sputum smear grade 1+ or higher were eligible for enrolment, and a molecular assay (GeneXpert or MTBDRplus) was used to confirm the diagnosis of tuberculosis and to distinguish between drug-susceptible and rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis. Patients who were HIV positive with a baseline CD4 cell count of less than 100 cells per uL were excluded. Patients with drug-susceptible tuberculosis were randomly assigned (1:1:1) using numbered treatment packs with sequential allocation by the pharmacist to receive 56 days of treatment with standard tuberculosis therapy (oral isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol; HRZE), or pretomanid (oral 200 mg daily) and pyrazinamide (oral 1500 mg daily) with either oral bedaquiline 400 mg daily on days 1-14 then 200 mg three times per week (BloadPaZ) or oral bedaquiline 200 mg daily (B200PaZ). Patients with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis received 56 days of the B200PaZ regimen plus moxifloxacin 400 mg daily (BPaMZ). All treatment groups were open label, and randomisation was not stratified. Patients, trial investigators and staff, pharmacists or dispensers, laboratory staff (with the exception of the mycobacteriology laboratory staff), sponsor staff, and applicable contract research organisations were not masked. The primary efficacy outcome was daily percentage change in time to sputum culture positivity (TTP) in liquid medium over days 0-56 in the drug-susceptible tuberculosis population, based on non-linear mixed-effects regression modelling of log10 (TTP) over time. The efficacy analysis population contained patients who received at least one dose of medication and who had efficacy data available and had no major protocol violations. The safety population contained patients who received at least one dose of medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02193776, and all patients have completed follow-up. FINDINGS: Between Oct 24, 2014, and Dec 15, 2015, we enrolled 180 patients with drug-susceptible tuberculosis (59 were randomly assigned to BloadPaZ, 60 to B200PaZ, and 61 to HRZE) and 60 patients with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis. 57 patients in the BloadPaZ group, 56 in the B200PaZ group, and 59 in the HRZE group were included in the primary analysis. B200PaZ produced the highest daily percentage change in TTP (5·17% [95% Bayesian credibility interval 4·61-5·77]), followed by BloadPaZ (4·87% [4·31-5·47]) and HRZE group (4·04% [3·67-4·42]). The bactericidal activity in B200PaZ and BloadPaZ groups versus that in the HRZE group was significantly different. Higher proportions of patients in the BloadPaZ (six [10%] of 59) and B200PaZ (five [8%] of 60) groups discontinued the study drug than in the HRZE group (two [3%] of 61) because of adverse events. Liver enzyme elevations were the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events and resulted in the withdrawal of ten patients (five [8%] in the BloadPaZ group, three [5%] in the B200PaZ group, and two [3%] in the HRZE group). Serious treatment-related adverse events affected two (3%) patients in the BloadPaZ group and one (2%) patient in the HRZE group. Seven (4%) patients with drug-susceptible tuberculosis died and four (7%) patients with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis died. None of the deaths were considered to be related to treatment. INTERPRETATION: B200PaZ is a promising regimen to treat patients with drug-susceptible tuberculosis. The bactericidal activity of both these regimens suggests that they have the potential to shorten treatment, and the simplified dosing schedule of B200PaZ could improve treatment adherence in the field. However, these findings must be investigated further in a phase 3 trial assessing treatment outcomes. FUNDING: TB Alliance, UK Department for International Development, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, US Agency for International Development, Directorate General for International Cooperation of the Netherlands, Irish Aid, Australia Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and the Federal Ministry for Education and Research of Germany.

Models and impact of patient and public involvement in studies carried out by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London: findings from ten case studies.

BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement (PPI) in studies carried out by the UK Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit (MRC CTU) at University College London varies by research type and setting. We developed a series of case studies of PPI to document and share good practice. METHODS: We used purposive sampling to identify studies representing the scope of research at the MRC CTU and different approaches to PPI. We carried out semi-structured interviews with staff and patient representatives. Interview notes were analysed descriptively to categorise the main aims and motivations for involvement; activities undertaken; their impact on the studies and lessons learned. RESULTS: We conducted 19 interviews about ten case studies, comprising one systematic review, one observational study and 8 randomised controlled trials in HIV and cancer. Studies were either open or completed, with start dates between 2003 and 2011. Interviews took place between March and November 2014 and were updated in summer 2015 where there had been significant developments in the study (i.e. if the study had presented results subsequent to the interview taking place). A wide range of PPI models, including representation on trial committees or management groups, community engagement, one-off task-focused activities, patient research partners and participant involvement had been used. Overall, interviewees felt that PPI had a positive impact, leading to improvements, for example in the research question; study design; communication with potential participants; study recruitment; confidence to carry out or complete a study; interpretation and communication of results; and influence on future research. CONCLUSIONS: A range of models of PPI can benefit clinical studies. Researchers should consider different approaches to PPI, based on the desired impact and the people they want to involve. Use of multiple models may increase the potential impacts of PPI in clinical research.