A Risk Profile Using Simple Hematologic Parameters to Assess Benefits From Baricitinib in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial-2.

BACKGROUND: The ACTT risk profile, which was developed from ACTT-1 (Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial-1), demonstrated that hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the high-risk quartile (characterized by low absolute lymphocyte count [ALC], high absolute neutrophil count [ANC], and low platelet count at baseline) benefited most from treatment with the antiviral remdesivir. It is unknown which patient characteristics are associated with benefit from treatment with the immunomodulator baricitinib. OBJECTIVE: To apply the ACTT risk profile to the ACTT-2 cohort to investigate potential baricitinib-related treatment effects by risk quartile. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of ACTT-2, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04401579). SETTING: Sixty-seven trial sites in 8 countries. PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19 (n = 999; 85% U.S. participants). INTERVENTION: Baricitinib+remdesivir versus placebo+remdesivir. MEASUREMENTS: Mortality, progression to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death, and recovery, all within 28 days; ALC, ANC, and platelet count trajectories. RESULTS: In the high-risk quartile, baricitinib+remdesivir was associated with reduced risk for death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.38 [95% CI, 0.16 to 0.86]; P = 0.020), decreased progression to IMV or death (HR, 0.57 [CI, 0.35 to 0.93]; P = 0.024), and improved recovery rate (HR, 1.53 [CI, 1.16 to 2.02]; P = 0.002) compared with placebo+remdesivir. After 5 days, participants receiving baricitinib+remdesivir had significantly larger increases in ALC and significantly larger decreases in ANC compared with control participants, with the largest effects observed in the high-risk quartile. LIMITATION: Secondary analysis of data collected before circulation of current SARS-CoV-2 variants. CONCLUSION: The ACTT risk profile identifies a subgroup of hospitalized patients who benefit most from baricitinib treatment and captures a patient phenotype of treatment response to an immunomodulator and an antiviral. Changes in ALC and ANC trajectory suggest a mechanism whereby an immunomodulator limits severe COVID-19. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

SARS-CoV-2 RNA and nucleocapsid antigen are blood biomarkers associated with severe disease outcomes that improve in response to remdesivir.

BACKGROUND: Although antivirals remain important for the treatment COVID-19, methods to assess treatment efficacy are lacking. Here, we investigated the impact of remdesivir on viral dynamics and their contribution to understanding antiviral efficacy in the multicenter ACTT-1 clinical trial that randomized patients to remdesivir or placebo. METHODS: Longitudinal specimens collected during hospitalization from a substudy of 642 COVID-19 patients were measured for viral RNA (upper respiratory tract and plasma), viral nucleocapsid antigen (serum), and host immunologic markers. Associations with clinical outcomes and response to therapy were assessed. RESULTS: Higher baseline plasma viral loads were associated with poorer clinical outcomes, and decreases in viral RNA and antigen in blood but not the upper respiratory tract correlated with enhanced benefit from remdesivir. The treatment effect of remdesivir was most pronounced in patients with elevated baseline nucleocapsid antigen levels: the recovery rate ratio was 1.95 (95%CI 1.40-2.71) for levels >245 pg/ml vs 1.04 (95%CI 0.76-1.42) for levels < 245 pg/ml. Remdesivir also accelerated the rate of viral RNA and antigen clearance in blood, and patients whose blood levels decreased were more likely to recover and survive. CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in SARS-CoV-2 RNA and antigen levels in blood correlated with clinical benefit from antiviral therapy.

Group sequential designs for clinical trials when the maximum sample size is uncertain.

Motivated by the experience of COVID-19 trials, we consider clinical trials in the setting of an emerging disease in which the uncertainty of natural disease course and potential treatment effects makes advance specification of a sample size challenging. One approach to such a challenge is to use a group sequential design to allow the trial to stop on the basis of interim analysis results as soon as a conclusion regarding the effectiveness of the treatment under investigation can be reached. As such a trial may be halted before a formal stopping boundary is reached, we consider the final analysis under such a scenario, proposing alternative methods for when the decision to halt the trial is made with or without knowledge of interim analysis results. We address the problems of ensuring that the type I error rate neither exceeds nor falls unnecessarily far below the nominal level. We also propose methods in which there is no maximum sample size, the trial continuing either until the stopping boundary is reached or it is decided to halt the trial.

Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Final Report.

BACKGROUND: Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), no antiviral agents have yet been shown to be efficacious. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only. RESULTS: A total of 1062 patients underwent randomization (with 541 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo). Those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 10 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 11), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 18) among those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.49; P<0.001, by a log-rank test). In an analysis that used a proportional-odds model with an eight-category ordinal scale, the patients who received remdesivir were found to be more likely than those who received placebo to have clinical improvement at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.9, after adjustment for actual disease severity). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality were 6.7% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo by day 15 and 11.4% with remdesivir and 15.2% with placebo by day 29 (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.03). Serious adverse events were reported in 131 of the 532 patients who received remdesivir (24.6%) and in 163 of the 516 patients who received placebo (31.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACTT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04280705.).

Deconstructing the Treatment Effect of Remdesivir in the Adaptive Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Treatment Trial-1: Implications for Critical Care Resource Utilization.

BACKGROUND: The Adaptive Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Treatment Trial-1 (ACTT-1) found that remdesivir therapy hastened recovery in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, but the pathway for this improvement was not explored. We investigated how the dynamics of clinical progression changed along 4 pathways: recovery, improvement in respiratory therapy requirement, deterioration in respiratory therapy requirement, and death. METHODS: We analyzed trajectories of daily ordinal severity scores reflecting oxygen requirements of 1051 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who participated in ACTT-1. We developed competing risks models that estimate the effect of remdesivir therapy on cumulative incidence of clinical improvement and deterioration, and multistate models that utilize the entirety of each patient's clinical course to characterize the effect of remdesivir on progression along the 4 pathways above. RESULTS: Based on a competing risks analysis, remdesivir reduced clinical deterioration (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: .59-.91) and increased clinical improvement (HR, 1.22; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.39) relative to baseline. Our multistate models indicate that remdesivir inhibits worsening to ordinal scores of greater clinical severity among patients on room air or low-flow oxygen (HR, 0.74; 95% CI: .57-.94) and among patients receiving mechanical ventilation or high-flow oxygen/noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (HR, 0.73; 95% CI: .53-1.00) at baseline. We also find that remdesivir reduces expected intensive care respiratory therapy utilization among patients not mechanically ventilated at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir speeds time to recovery by preventing worsening to clinical states that would extend the course of hospitalization and increase intensive respiratory support, thereby reducing the overall demand for hospital care.

Remdesivir for the Prevention of Invasive Mechanical Ventilation or Death in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Post Hoc Analysis of the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial-1 Cohort Data.

This post hoc analysis of the Adaptive Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Treatment Trial-1 (ACTT-1) shows a treatment effect of remdesivir (RDV) on progression to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death. Additionally, we create a risk profile that better predicts progression than baseline oxygen requirement alone. The highest risk group derives the greatest treatment effect from RDV.

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Ebola Virus Disease Therapeutics.

BACKGROUND: Although several experimental therapeutics for Ebola virus disease (EVD) have been developed, the safety and efficacy of the most promising therapies need to be assessed in the context of a randomized, controlled trial. METHODS: We conducted a trial of four investigational therapies for EVD in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where an outbreak began in August 2018. Patients of any age who had a positive result for Ebola virus RNA on reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction assay were enrolled. All patients received standard care and were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to intravenous administration of the triple monoclonal antibody ZMapp (the control group), the antiviral agent remdesivir, the single monoclonal antibody MAb114, or the triple monoclonal antibody REGN-EB3. The REGN-EB3 group was added in a later version of the protocol, so data from these patients were compared with those of patients in the ZMapp group who were enrolled at or after the time the REGN-EB3 group was added (the ZMapp subgroup). The primary end point was death at 28 days. RESULTS: A total of 681 patients were enrolled from November 20, 2018, to August 9, 2019, at which time the data and safety monitoring board recommended that patients be assigned only to the MAb114 and REGN-EB3 groups for the remainder of the trial; the recommendation was based on the results of an interim analysis that showed superiority of these groups to ZMapp and remdesivir with respect to mortality. At 28 days, death had occurred in 61 of 174 patients (35.1%) in the MAb114 group, as compared with 84 of 169 (49.7%) in the ZMapp group (P = 0.007), and in 52 of 155 (33.5%) in the REGN-EB3 group, as compared with 79 of 154 (51.3%) in the ZMapp subgroup (P = 0.002). A shorter duration of symptoms before admission and lower baseline values for viral load and for serum creatinine and aminotransferase levels each correlated with improved survival. Four serious adverse events were judged to be potentially related to the trial drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Both MAb114 and REGN-EB3 were superior to ZMapp in reducing mortality from EVD. Scientifically and ethically sound clinical research can be conducted during disease outbreaks and can help inform the outbreak response. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; PALM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03719586.).

Noninferiority testing with censoring when the event rate is low.

The PREDICT TB trial tests noninferiority of an abbreviated treatment regimen (arm A) vs a conventional treatment regimen (arm C). Treatment trials of drug-susceptible tuberculosis are expected to have low event rates (ie, relapse probabilities around 3-5%). We examine the question of what is the "best" way to test for noninferiority in a setting with low event rates. In a series of simulations supported by theoretical arguments, we examine operating characteristics of five tests, including normal approximation, exact, and simulation-based tests. Two of these tests are constructed from Kaplan-Meier based-estimators, which account for variable follow-up time (and those lost to follow-up). We evaluate the effect of loss to follow-up via simulations. We also examine the results of the five tests on a data set similar to PREDICT TB, the REMoxTB trial. We find that the normal approximation tests perform well, albeit with small type I error rate inflation. We also find that the Kaplan-Meier methods generally have larger power than the other tests, especially when there is between 10-30% loss to follow-up.

Endpoints for randomized controlled clinical trials for COVID-19 treatments.

BACKGROUND: Endpoint choice for randomized controlled trials of treatments for novel coronavirus-induced disease (COVID-19) is complex. Trials must start rapidly to identify treatments that can be used as part of the outbreak response, in the midst of considerable uncertainty and limited information. COVID-19 presentation is heterogeneous, ranging from mild disease that improves within days to critical disease that can last weeks to over a month and can end in death. While improvement in mortality would provide unquestionable evidence about the clinical significance of a treatment, sample sizes for a study evaluating mortality are large and may be impractical, particularly given a multitude of putative therapies to evaluate. Furthermore, patient states in between "cure" and "death" represent meaningful distinctions. Clinical severity scores have been proposed as an alternative. However, the appropriate summary measure for severity scores has been the subject of debate, particularly given the variable time course of COVID-19. Outcomes measured at fixed time points, such as a comparison of severity scores between treatment and control at day 14, may risk missing the time of clinical benefit. An endpoint such as time to improvement (or recovery) avoids the timing problem. However, some have argued that power losses will result from reducing the ordinal scale to a binary state of "recovered" versus "not recovered." METHODS: We evaluate statistical power for possible trial endpoints for COVID-19 treatment trials using simulation models and data from two recent COVID-19 treatment trials. RESULTS: Power for fixed time-point methods depends heavily on the time selected for evaluation. Time-to-event approaches have reasonable statistical power, even when compared with a fixed time-point method evaluated at the optimal time. DISCUSSION: Time-to-event analysis methods have advantages in the COVID-19 setting, unless the optimal time for evaluating treatment effect is known in advance. Even when the optimal time is known, a time-to-event approach may increase power for interim analyses.

Increased Metabolic Activity on 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Associated Immune Reconstitution Inflammatory Syndrome.

Background: Immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS) represents an unexpected inflammatory response shortly after initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in some human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients with underlying neoplasia or opportunistic infections, including tuberculosis. We hypothesized that IRIS is associated with increased glycolysis and that 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) could help identify high-risk subjects. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, 30 HIV-infected patients (CD4+ count <100 cells/µL) underwent FDG-PET/CT scans at baseline and 4-8 weeks after ART initiation. Ten patients developed IRIS (6 mycobacterial). Results: At baseline, total glycolytic activity, total lesion volume, and maximum standardized uptake values (SUVs) of pathologic FDG uptake (reflective of opportunistic disease burden) were significantly higher in IRIS vs non-IRIS (P = .010, .017, and .029, respectively) and significantly correlated with soluble inflammatory biomarkers (interferon-γ, myeloperoxidase, tumor necrosis factor, interleukin 6, soluble CD14). Baseline bone marrow (BM) and spleen FDG uptake was higher in mycobacterial IRIS specifically. After ART initiation, BM and spleen mean SUV decreased in non-IRIS (P = .004, .013) but not IRIS subjects. Our results were supported by significantly higher glucose transporter 1 (Glut-1) expression of CD4+ cells and monocytes after ART initiation in IRIS/mycobacterial IRIS compared with non-IRIS patients. Conclusions: We conclude that increased pathologic metabolic activity on FDG-PET/CT prior to ART initiation is associated with IRIS development and correlates with inflammatory biomarkers. Abnormally elevated BM and spleen metabolism is associated with mycobacterial IRIS, HIV viremia, and Glut-1 expression on CD4+ cells and monocytes. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02147405.

Re-randomization tests in clinical trials.

As randomization methods use more information in more complex ways to assign patients to treatments, analysis of the resulting data becomes challenging. The treatment assignment vector and outcome vector become correlated whenever randomization probabilities depend on data correlated with outcomes. One straightforward analysis method is a re-randomization test that fixes outcome data and creates a reference distribution for the test statistic by repeatedly re-randomizing according to the same randomization method used in the trial. This article reviews re-randomization tests, especially in nonstandard settings like covariate-adaptive and response-adaptive randomization. We show that re-randomization tests provide valid inference in a wide range of settings. Nonetheless, there are simple examples demonstrating limitations.

Controlling the family-wise error rate in multi-arm, multi-stage trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Multi-arm, multi-stage trials have recently gained attention as a means to improve the efficiency of the clinical trials process. Many designs have been proposed, but few explicitly consider the inherent issue of multiplicity and the associated type I error rate inflation. It is our aim to propose a straightforward design that controls family-wise error rate while still providing improved efficiency. METHODS: In this article, we provide an analytical method for calculating the family-wise error rate for a multi-arm, multi-stage trial and highlight the potential for considerable error rate inflation in uncontrolled designs. We propose a simple method to control the error rate that also allows for computation of power and expected sample size. RESULTS: Family-wise error rate can be controlled in a variety of multi-arm, mutli-stage trial designs using our method. Additionally, our design can substantially decrease the expected sample size of a study while maintaining adequate power. CONCLUSION: Multi-arm, multi-stage designs have the potential to reduce the time and other resources spent on clinical trials. Our relatively simple design allows this to be achieved while weakly controlling family-wise error rate and without sacrificing much power.

Design of a Randomized Controlled Trial for Ebola Virus Disease Medical Countermeasures: PREVAIL II, the Ebola MCM Study.

BACKGROUND: Unique challenges posed by emerging infectious diseases often expose inadequacies in the conventional phased investigational therapeutic development paradigm. The recent Ebola outbreak in West Africa presents a critical case-study highlighting barriers to faster development. During the outbreak, clinical trials were implemented with unprecedented speed. Yet, in most cases, this fast-tracked approach proved too slow for the rapidly evolving epidemic. Controversy abounded as to the most appropriate study designs to yield safety and efficacy data, potentially causing delays in pivotal studies. Preparation for research during future outbreaks may require acceptance of a paradigm that circumvents, accelerates, or reorders traditional phases, without losing sight of the traditional benchmarks by which drug candidates must be assessed for activity, safety and efficacy. METHODS: We present the design of an adaptive, parent protocol, ongoing in West Africa until January 2016. The exigent circumstances of the outbreak and limited prior clinical experience with experimental treatments, led to more direct bridging from preclinical studies to human trials than the conventional paradigm would typically have sanctioned, and required considerable design flexibility. RESULTS: Preliminary evaluation of the "barely Bayesian" design was provided through computer simulation studies. The understanding and public discussion of the study design will help its future implementation.

A phase 1 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial of DAS181 (Fludase®) in adult subjects with well-controlled asthma.

BACKGROUND: Influenza virus (IFV) infection is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in people with underlying lung disease. Treatment options for IFV are currently limited and antiviral resistance is a growing concern. DAS181, an inhaled antiviral with a unique mechanism of action, has shown promise in early clinical trials involving generally healthy human subjects. This study was undertaken to assess the safety and tolerability of DAS181 in individuals with underlying reactive airway disease. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover phase 1 study of DAS181-F02. Dry particle inhaler administration of 10 mg was done on 3 consecutive days in ten adult volunteers with well-controlled asthma. The primary outcome was the frequency of adverse events (AEs), grade 1 or higher that occurred during each study period. RESULTS: There were 280 AEs among ten evaluable subjects (56.8 % active; 43.2 % placebo); 90.7 % were grade 1. No grade 3 or higher AEs occurred. A statistically significant association between exposure to DAS181 and experiencing any AE, a grade 1 AE, or a grade 2 AE was not detected. Overall, the majority of AEs were classified as possibly related (35.7 %), unlikely related (38.9 %), or unrelated (15.4 %) to study drug administration. However, there was a statistically significant association between exposure to DAS181 and experiencing a definitely or probably related AE. Respiratory effects, including dyspnea, dry cough, and chest discomfort related to respirations, accounted for all of the definitely related AEs and one of the most common probably related AEs. CONCLUSIONS: DAS181 was safe in this small study of otherwise healthy subjects with well-controlled asthma. However, the generalizability of these results is limited by the small sample size and generally mild nature of the subjects' asthma at baseline. The increased association of respiratory events classified as probably or definitely related to DAS181 administration suggests caution may need to be employed when administering DAS181 to individuals with less stable reactive airway disease. Further investigation in a controlled setting of the safety and efficacy of DAS181 in a larger population of asthmatic subjects with varying disease activity is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01113034 Trial Registration Date: April 27, 2010.

Statistical considerations for a trial of Ebola virus disease therapeutics.

The 2014 West African outbreak of Ebola virus ravaged Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea, causing hemorrhagic fever and death. The need to identify effective therapeutics was acute. The usual drug development paradigm of phase I, followed by phase II, and then phase III trials would take too long. These and other factors led to the design of a clinical trial of Ebola virus disease therapeutics that differs from more conventional clinical trial designs. This article describes the Ebola virus disease medical countermeasures trial design and the thinking behind it.

A sterilizing tuberculosis treatment regimen is associated with faster clearance of bacteria in cavitary lesions in marmosets.

Shortening the lengthy treatment duration for tuberculosis patients is a major goal of current drug development efforts. The common marmoset develops human-like disease pathology and offers an attractive model to better understand the basis for relapse and test regimens for effective shorter duration therapy. We treated Mycobacterium tuberculosis-infected marmosets with two drug regimens known to differ in their relapse rates in human clinical trials: the standard four-drug combination of isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (HRZE) that has very low relapse rates and the combination of isoniazid and streptomycin that is associated with higher relapse rates. As early as 2 weeks, the more sterilizing regimen significantly reduced the volume of lung disease by computed tomography (P = 0.035) and also significantly reduced uptake of [(18)F]-2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose by positron emission tomography (P = 0.049). After 6 weeks of therapy, both treatments caused similar reductions in granuloma bacterial load, but the more sterilizing, four-drug regimen caused greater reduction in bacterial load in cavitary lesions (P = 0.009). These findings, combined with the association in humans between cavitary disease and relapse, suggest that the basis for improved sterilizing activity of the four-drug combination is both its faster disease volume resolution and its stronger sterilizing effect on cavitary lesions. Definitive data from relapse experiments are needed to support this observation.

A modest proposal for dropping poor arms in clinical trials.

This paper presents a simple procedure for clinical trials comparing several arms with control. Demand for streamlining the evaluation of new treatments has led to phase III clinical trials with more arms than would have been used in the past. In such a setting, it is reasonable that some arms may not perform as well as an active control. We introduce a simple procedure that takes advantage of negative results in some comparisons to lessen the required strength of evidence for other comparisons. We evaluate properties analytically and use them to support claims made about multi-arm multi-stage designs.

Predictors of pulmonary tuberculosis treatment outcomes in South Korea: a prospective cohort study, 2005-2012.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis remains an important health concern in many countries. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of unfavorable outcomes at the end of treatment (EOT) and at the end of study (EOS; 40 months after EOT) in South Korea. METHODS: New or previously treated tuberculosis patients were recruited into a prospective observational cohort study at two hospitals in South Korea. To identify predictors of unfavorable outcomes at EOT and EOS, logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: The proportion of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) was 8.2% in new cases and 57.9% in previously treated cases. Of new cases, 68.6% were cured, as were 40.7% of previously treated cases. At EOT, diabetes, ≥3 previous TB episodes, ≥1 significant regimen change, and MDR-TB were significantly associated with treatment failure or death. At EOS, age ≥35, body-mass index (BMI) <18.5, diabetes, and MDR-TB were significantly associated with treatment failure, death, or relapse. Among cases that were cured at EOT, age ≥50 and a BMI <18.5 were associated with subsequent death or relapse during follow-up to EOS. Treatment interruption was associated with service sector employees or laborers, bilateral lesions on chest X-ray, and previous treatment failure or treatment interruption history. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors for poor treatment outcomes at EOT and EOS include both patient factors (diabetes status, age, BMI) and disease factors (history of multiple previous treatment episodes, MDR-TB). In this longitudinal, observational cohort study, diabetes mellitus and MDR-TB were risk factors for poor treatment outcomes and relapse. Measures to help ensure that the first tuberculosis treatment episode is also the last one may improve treatment outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00341601.