Drug interaction potential of high-dose rifampicin in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis.

Accumulating evidence supports the use of higher doses of rifampicin for tuberculosis (TB) treatment. Rifampicin is a potent inducer of metabolic enzymes and drug transporters, resulting in clinically relevant drug interactions. To assess the drug interaction potential of higher doses of rifampicin, we compared the effect of high-dose rifampicin (40 mg/kg daily, RIF40) and standard-dose rifampicin (10 mg/kg daily, RIF10) on the activities of major cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes and P-glycoprotein (P-gp). In this open-label, single-arm, two-period, fixed-order phenotyping cocktail study, adult participants with pulmonary TB received RIF10 (days 1-15), followed by RIF40 (days 16-30). A single dose of selective substrates (probe drugs) was administered orally on days 15 and 30: caffeine (CYP1A2), tolbutamide (CYP2C9), omeprazole (CYP2C19), dextromethorphan (CYP2D6), midazolam (CYP3A), and digoxin (P-gp). Intensive pharmacokinetic blood sampling was performed over 24 hours after probe drug intake. In all, 25 participants completed the study. Geometric mean ratios (90% confidence interval) of the total exposure (area under the concentration versus time curve, RIF40 versus RIF10) for each of the probe drugs were as follows: caffeine, 105% (96%-115%); tolbutamide, 80% (74%-86%); omeprazole, 55% (47%-65%); dextromethorphan, 77% (68%-86%); midazolam, 62% (49%-78%), and 117% (105%-130%) for digoxin. In summary, high-dose rifampicin resulted in no additional effect on CYP1A2, mild additional induction of CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6, and CYP3A, and marginal inhibition of P-gp. Existing recommendations on managing drug interactions with rifampicin can remain unchanged for the majority of co-administered drugs when using high-dose rifampicin. Clinical Trials registration number NCT04525235.

Four-Month Rifapentine Regimens with or without Moxifloxacin for Tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: Rifapentine-based regimens have potent antimycobacterial activity that may allow for a shorter course in patients with drug-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis. METHODS: In an open-label, phase 3, randomized, controlled trial involving persons with newly diagnosed pulmonary tuberculosis from 13 countries, we compared two 4-month rifapentine-based regimens with a standard 6-month regimen consisting of rifampin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (control) using a noninferiority margin of 6.6 percentage points. In one 4-month regimen, rifampin was replaced with rifapentine; in the other, rifampin was replaced with rifapentine and ethambutol with moxifloxacin. The primary efficacy outcome was survival free of tuberculosis at 12 months. RESULTS: Among 2516 participants who had undergone randomization, 2343 had a culture positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis that was not resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, or fluoroquinolones (microbiologically eligible population; 768 in the control group, 791 in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 784 in the rifapentine group), of whom 194 were coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus and 1703 had cavitation on chest radiography. A total of 2234 participants could be assessed for the primary outcome (assessable population; 726 in the control group, 756 in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 752 in the rifapentine group). Rifapentine with moxifloxacin was noninferior to the control in the microbiologically eligible population (15.5% vs. 14.6% had an unfavorable outcome; difference, 1.0 percentage point; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.6 to 4.5) and in the assessable population (11.6% vs. 9.6%; difference, 2.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.1 to 5.1). Noninferiority was shown in the secondary and sensitivity analyses. Rifapentine without moxifloxacin was not shown to be noninferior to the control in either population (17.7% vs. 14.6% with an unfavorable outcome in the microbiologically eligible population; difference, 3.0 percentage points [95% CI, -0.6 to 6.6]; and 14.2% vs. 9.6% in the assessable population; difference, 4.4 percentage points [95% CI, 1.2 to 7.7]). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred during the on-treatment period in 19.3% of participants in the control group, 18.8% in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 14.3% in the rifapentine group. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of a 4-month rifapentine-based regimen containing moxifloxacin was noninferior to the standard 6-month regimen in the treatment of tuberculosis. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and others; Study 31/A5349 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02410772.).

Drug susceptibility patterns of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from adults with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis and implications for a household contact preventive therapy trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug susceptibility testing (DST) patterns of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) from patients with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB) or multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB; or resistant to rifampicin and isoniazid (INH)), are important to guide preventive therapy for their household contacts (HHCs). METHODS: As part of a feasibility study done in preparation for an MDR-TB preventive therapy trial in HHCs, smear, Xpert MTB/RIF, Hain MTBDRplus, culture and DST results of index MDR-TB patients were obtained from routine TB programs. A sputum sample was collected at study entry and evaluated by the same tests. Not all tests were performed on all specimens due to variations in test availability. RESULTS: Three hundred eight adults with reported RR/MDR-TB were enrolled from 16 participating sites in 8 countries. Their median age was 36 years, and 36% were HIV-infected. Routine testing on all 308 were confirmed as having RR-TB, but only 75% were documented as having MDR-TB. The majority of those not classified as having MDR-TB were because only rifampicin resistance was tested. At study entry (median 59 days after MDR-TB treatment initiation), 280 participants (91%) were able to produce sputum for the study, of whom 147 (53%) still had detectable MTB. All but 2 of these 147 had rifampicin DST done, with resistance detected in 89%. Almost half (47%) of the 147 specimens had INH DST done, with 83% resistance. Therefore, 20% of the 280 study specimens had MDR-TB confirmed. Overall, DST for second-line drugs were available in only 35% of the 308 routine specimens and 15% of 280 study specimens. CONCLUSIONS: RR-TB was detected in all routine specimens but only 75% had documented MDR-TB, illustrating the need for expanded DST beyond Xpert MTB/RIF to target preventive therapy for HHC.

Fourteen-Day Bactericidal Activity, Safety, and Pharmacokinetics of Linezolid in Adults with Drug-Sensitive Pulmonary Tuberculosis.

Linezolid is increasingly used for the treatment of tuberculosis resistant to first-line agents, but the most effective dosing strategy is yet unknown. From November 2014 to November 2016, we randomized 114 drug-sensitive treatment-naive pulmonary tuberculosis patients from Cape Town, South Africa, to one of six 14-day treatment arms containing linezolid at 300 mg once daily (QD), 300 mg twice daily (BD), 600 mg QD, 600 mg BD, 1,200 mg QD, 1,200 mg three times per week (TIW), or a combination of isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol. Sixteen-hour sputum samples were collected overnight, and bactericidal activity was characterized by the daily percentage change in time to positivity (TTP) and the daily rate of change in log10(CFU). We also assessed the safety and pharmacokinetics of the study treatments. We found that bactericidal activity increased with increasing doses of linezolid. Based on the daily percentage change in TTP, activity was highest for 1,200 mg QD (4.5%; 95% Bayesian confidence interval [BCI], 3.3 to 5.6), followed by 600 mg BD (4.1%; BCI, 2.5 to 5.7), 600 mg QD (4.1%; BCI, 2.9 to 5.3), 300 mg BD (3.3%; BCI, 1.9 to 4.7), 300 mg QD (2.3%; BCI, 1.1 to 3.5), and 1,200 mg TIW (2.2%; BCI, 1.1 to 3.3). Similar results were seen with bactericidal activity characterized by the daily rate of change in CFU count. Antimycobacterial activity correlated positively with plasma drug exposure and percentage time over MIC. There were no unexpected adverse events. All linezolid doses showed bactericidal activity. For the same total daily dose, once-daily dosing proved to be at least as effective as a divided twice-daily dose. An intermittent dosing regimen, with 1,200 mg given three times weekly, showed the least activity. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT02279875.).

High-dose rifampicin, moxifloxacin, and SQ109 for treating tuberculosis: a multi-arm, multi-stage randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis is the world's leading infectious disease killer. We aimed to identify shorter, safer drug regimens for the treatment of tuberculosis. METHODS: We did a randomised controlled, open-label trial with a multi-arm, multi-stage design. The trial was done in seven sites in South Africa and Tanzania, including hospitals, health centres, and clinical trial centres. Patients with newly diagnosed, rifampicin-sensitive, previously untreated pulmonary tuberculosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1:2 ratio to receive (all orally) either 35 mg/kg rifampicin per day with 15-20 mg/kg ethambutol, 20 mg/kg rifampicin per day with 400 mg moxifloxacin, 20 mg/kg rifampicin per day with 300 mg SQ109, 10 mg/kg rifampicin per day with 300 mg SQ109, or a daily standard control regimen (10 mg/kg rifampicin, 5 mg/kg isoniazid, 25 mg/kg pyrazinamide, and 15-20 mg/kg ethambutol). Experimental treatments were given with oral 5 mg/kg isoniazid and 25 mg/kg pyrazinamide per day for 12 weeks, followed by 14 weeks of 5 mg/kg isoniazid and 10 mg/kg rifampicin per day. Because of the orange discoloration of body fluids with higher doses of rifampicin it was not possible to mask patients and clinicians to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was time to culture conversion in liquid media within 12 weeks. Patients without evidence of rifampicin resistance on phenotypic test who took at least one dose of study treatment and had one positive culture on liquid or solid media before or within the first 2 weeks of treatment were included in the primary analysis (modified intention to treat). Time-to-event data were analysed using a Cox proportional-hazards regression model and adjusted for minimisation variables. The proportional hazard assumption was tested using Schoelfeld residuals, with threshold p<0·05 for non-proportionality. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01785186). FINDINGS: Between May 7, 2013, and March 25, 2014, we enrolled and randomly assigned 365 patients to different treatment arms (63 to rifampicin 35 mg/kg, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol; 59 to rifampicin 10 mg/kg, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, SQ109; 57 to rifampicin 20 mg/kg, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and SQ109; 63 to rifampicin 10 mg/kg, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and moxifloxacin; and 123 to the control arm). Recruitment was stopped early in the arms containing SQ109 since prespecified efficacy thresholds were not met at the planned interim analysis. Time to stable culture conversion in liquid media was faster in the 35 mg/kg rifampicin group than in the control group (median 48 days vs 62 days, adjusted hazard ratio 1·78; 95% CI 1·22-2·58, p=0·003), but not in other experimental arms. There was no difference in any of the groups in time to culture conversion on solid media. 11 patients had treatment failure or recurrent disease during post-treatment follow-up: one in the 35 mg/kg rifampicin arm and none in the moxifloxacin arm. 45 (12%) of 365 patients reported grade 3-5 adverse events, with similar proportions in each arm. INTERPRETATION: A dose of 35 mg/kg rifampicin was safe, reduced the time to culture conversion in liquid media, and could be a promising component of future, shorter regimens. Our adaptive trial design was successfully implemented in a multi-centre, high tuberculosis burden setting, and could speed regimen development at reduced cost. FUNDING: The study was funded by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials partnership (EDCTP), the German Ministry for Education and Research (BmBF), and the Medical Research Council UK (MRC).