A Standardized Approach for Collection of Objective Data to Support Outcome Determination for Late-Phase Tuberculosis Clinical Trials.

Rationale: We developed a standardized method, possible poor treatment response (PPTR), to help ascertain efficacy endpoints in Study S31/A5349 (NCT02410772), an open-label trial comparing two 4-month rifapentine-based regimens with a standard 6-month regimen for the treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). Objectives: We describe the use of the PPTR process and evaluate whether the goals of minimizing bias in efficacy endpoint assessment and attainment of relevant data to determine outcomes for all participants were achieved. Methods: A PPTR event was defined as the occurrence of one or more prespecified triggers. Each PPTR required initiation of a standardized evaluation process that included obtaining multiple sputum samples for microbiology. Measurements and Main Results: Among 2,343 participants with culture-confirmed drug-susceptible TB, 454 individuals (19.4%) had a total of 534 individual PPTR events, of which 76.6% were microbiological (positive smear or culture at or after 17 wk). At least one PPTR event was experienced by 92.4% (133 of 144) of participants with TB-related unfavorable outcome and between 13.8% and 14.7% of participants with favorable and not-assessable outcomes. A total of 75% of participants with TB-related unfavorable outcomes had microbiological confirmation of failure to achieve a disease-free cure. Conclusions: Standardized methodologies, such as our PPTR approach, could facilitate unbiased efficacy outcome determinations, improve discrimination between outcomes that are related and unrelated to regimen efficacy, and enhance the ability to conduct pooled analyses of contemporary trials.

Bacterial Factors That Predict Relapse after Tuberculosis Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 5% of patients with drug-susceptible tuberculosis have a relapse after 6 months of first-line therapy, as do approximately 20% of patients after 4 months of short-course therapy. We postulated that by analyzing pretreatment isolates of Mycobacterium tuberculosis obtained from patients who subsequently had a relapse or were cured, we could determine any correlations between the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of a drug below the standard resistance breakpoint and the relapse risk after treatment. METHODS: Using data from the Tuberculosis Trials Consortium Study 22 (development cohort), we assessed relapse and cure isolates to determine the MIC values of isoniazid and rifampin that were below the standard resistance breakpoint (0.1 µg per milliliter for isoniazid and 1.0 µg per milliliter for rifampin). We combined this analysis with clinical, radiologic, and laboratory data to generate predictive relapse models, which we validated by analyzing data from the DMID 01-009 study (validation cohort). RESULTS: In the development cohort, the mean (±SD) MIC of isoniazid below the breakpoint was 0.0334±0.0085 µg per milliliter in the relapse group and 0.0286±0.0092 µg per milliliter in the cure group, which represented a higher value in the relapse group by a factor of 1.17 (P=0.02). The corresponding MIC values of rifampin were 0.0695±0.0276 and 0.0453±0.0223 µg per milliliter, respectively, which represented a higher value in the relapse group by a factor of 1.53 (P<0.001). Higher MIC values remained associated with relapse in a multivariable analysis that included other significant between-group differences. In an analysis of receiver-operating-characteristic curves of relapse based on these MIC values, the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.779. In the development cohort, the AUC in a multivariable model that included MIC values was 0.875. In the validation cohort, the MIC values either alone or combined with other patient characteristics were also predictive of relapse, with AUC values of 0.964 and 0.929, respectively. The use of a model score for the MIC values of isoniazid and rifampin to achieve 75.0% sensitivity in cross-validation analysis predicted relapse with a specificity of 76.5% in the development cohort and a sensitivity of 70.0% and a specificity of 100% in the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In pretreatment isolates of M. tuberculosis with decrements of MIC values of isoniazid or rifampin below standard resistance breakpoints, higher MIC values were associated with a greater risk of relapse than lower MIC values. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.).

Elevated Plasma Moxifloxacin Concentrations and SLCO1B1 g.-11187G>A Polymorphism in Adults with Pulmonary Tuberculosis.

Moxifloxacin exhibits concentration-dependent prolongation of human QTc intervals and bactericidal activity against Mycobacterium tuberculosis However, moxifloxacin plasma concentrations are variable between patients. We evaluated whether human gene polymorphisms affect moxifloxacin plasma concentrations in tuberculosis patients from two geographic regions. We enrolled a convenience sample of 49 adults with drug-sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis from Africa and the United States enrolled in two treatment trials of moxifloxacin as part of multidrug therapy. Pharmacokinetic parameters were evaluated by noncompartmental techniques. Human single-nucleotide polymorphisms of transporter genes were evaluated by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) on moxifloxacin exposure and the peak (maximum) concentration (Cmax). The moxifloxacin area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC0-24) and Cmax were significantly increased by the drug milligram-per-kilogram dosage and the genotype of variant g.-11187G>A in the SLCO1B1 gene (rs4149015) but not by geographic region. The median moxifloxacin AUC0-24 was 46% higher and the median Cmax was 30% higher in 4 (8%) participants who had the SLCO1B1 g.-11187 AG genotype than in 45 participants who had the wild-type GG genotype (median AUC0-24 from the model, 34.4 versus 23.6 µg · h/ml [P = 0.005, ANCOVA]; median Cmax from the model, 3.5 versus 2.7 µg/ml [P = 0.009, ANCOVA]). Because moxifloxacin exhibits concentration-dependent prolongation of human QTc intervals and prolonged QTc intervals are associated with cardiac arrhythmia, further study is needed to evaluate the risk associated with the SLCO1B1 g.-11187G>A variant. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT00164463.).

Central monitoring in a randomized, open-label, controlled phase 3 clinical trial for a treatment-shortening regimen for pulmonary tuberculosis.

INTRODUCTION: With the growing use of online study management systems and rapid availability of data, timely data review and quality assessments are necessary to ensure proper clinical trial implementation. In this report we describe central monitoring used to ensure protocol compliance and accurate data reporting, implemented during a large phase 3 clinical trial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The Tuberculosis Trials Consortium (TBTC) Study 31/AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) study A5349 (S31) is an international, multi-site, randomized, open-label, controlled, non-inferiority phase 3 clinical trial comparing two 4-month regimens to a standard 6 month regimen for treatment of drug-susceptible tuberculosis (TB) among adolescents and adults with a sample size of 2500 participants. RESULTS: Central monitoring utilized primary study data in a five-tiered approach, including (1) real-time data checks & topic-specific intervention reports, (2) missing forms reports, (3) quality assurance metrics, (4) critical data reports and (5) protocol deviation identification, aimed to detect and resolve quality challenges. Over the course of the study, 240 data checks and reports were programed across the five tiers used. DISCUSSION: This use of primary study data to identify issues rapidly allowed the study sponsor to focus quality assurance and data cleaning activities on prioritized data, related to protocol compliance and accurate reporting of study results. Our approach enabled us to become more efficient and effective as we informed sites about deviations, resolved missing or inconsistent data, provided targeted guidance, and gained a deeper understanding of challenges experienced at clinical trial sites. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02410772) on April 8, 2015.