Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment failure detection depends on monitoring interval and microbiological method.

Debate persists about monitoring method (culture or smear) and interval (monthly or less frequently) during treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB). We analysed existing data and estimated the effect of monitoring strategies on timing of failure detection.We identified studies reporting microbiological response to MDR-TB treatment and solicited individual patient data from authors. Frailty survival models were used to estimate pooled relative risk of failure detection in the last 12 months of treatment; hazard of failure using monthly culture was the reference.Data were obtained for 5410 patients across 12 observational studies. During the last 12 months of treatment, failure detection occurred in a median of 3 months by monthly culture; failure detection was delayed by 2, 7, and 9 months relying on bimonthly culture, monthly smear and bimonthly smear, respectively. Risk (95% CI) of failure detection delay resulting from monthly smear relative to culture is 0.38 (0.34-0.42) for all patients and 0.33 (0.25-0.42) for HIV-co-infected patients.Failure detection is delayed by reducing the sensitivity and frequency of the monitoring method. Monthly monitoring of sputum cultures from patients receiving MDR-TB treatment is recommended. Expanded laboratory capacity is needed for high-quality culture, and for smear microscopy and rapid molecular tests.

Treatment outcomes of patients with multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis according to drug susceptibility testing to first- and second-line drugs: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Individualized treatment for multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis depends upon reliable and valid drug susceptibility testing (DST) for pyrazinamide, ethambutol, and second-line tuberculosis drugs. However, the reliability of these tests is uncertain, due to unresolved methodological issues. We estimated the association of DST results for pyrazinamide, ethambutol, and second-line drugs with treatment outcomes in patients with MDR tuberculosis and XDR tuberculosis. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of individual patient data assembled from 31 previously published cohort studies of patients with MDR and XDR tuberculosis. We used data on patients' clinical characteristics including DST results, treatment received, outcomes, and laboratory methods in each center. RESULTS: DST methods and treatment regimens used in different centers varied considerably. Among 8955 analyzed patients, in vitro susceptibility to individual drugs was consistently and significantly associated with higher odds of treatment success (compared with resistance to the drug), if that drug was used in the treatment regimen. Various adjusted and sensitivity analyses suggest that this was not explained by confounding. The adjusted odds of treatment success for ethambutol, pyrazinamide, and the group 4 drugs ranged from 1.7 to 2.3, whereas for second-line injectables and fluoroquinolones, odds ranged from 2.4 to 4.6. CONCLUSIONS: DST for ethambutol, pyrazinamide, and second-line tuberculosis drugs appears to provide clinically useful information to guide selection of treatment regimens for MDR and XDR tuberculosis.

Early treatment outcomes and HIV status of patients with extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis in South Africa: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Data from Kwazulu Natal, South Africa, suggest that almost all patients with extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis are HIV-positive, with a fatal outcome. Since, there are few data for the treatment-related outcomes of XDR tuberculosis in settings with a high HIV prevalence, we investigated the associations of these diseases in such settings to formulate recommendations for control programmes. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study, we analysed the case records of patients (>16 years old) with XDR tuberculosis (culture-proven at diagnosis) between August, 2002, and February, 2008, at four designated provincial treatment facilities in South Africa. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to assess risk factors associated with the outcomes-mortality and culture conversion. FINDINGS: 195 of 227 patients were analysed. 21 died before initiation of any treatment, and 174 patients (82 with HIV infection) were treated. 62 (36%) of these patients died during follow-up. The number of deaths was not significantly different in patients with or without HIV infection: 34 (41%) of 82 versus 28 (30%) of 92 (p=0.13). Treatment with moxifloxacin (hazard ratio 0.11, 95% CI 0.01-0.82; p=0.03), previous culture-proven multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (5.21, 1.93-14.1; p=0.001), and number of drugs used in a regimen (0.59, 0.45-0.78, p<0.0001) were independent predictors of death. Fewer deaths occurred in patients with HIV infection given highly active antiretroviral therapy than in those who were not (0.38, 0.18-0.80; p=0.01). 33 (19%) of 174 patients showed culture conversion, of which 23 (70%) converted within 6 months of initiation of treatment. INTERPRETATION: In South Africa, patients with XDR tuberculosis, a substantial proportion of whom are not infected with HIV, have poor management outcomes. Nevertheless, survival in patients with HIV infection is better than previously reported. The priorities for the country are still prevention of XDR tuberculosis, and early detection and management of multidrug-resistant and XDR tuberculosis through strengthened programmes and laboratory capacity. FUNDING: South African Medical Research Council, European Union Framework 7 program, and European Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership.