Field evaluation of a point-of-care triage test for active tuberculosis (TriageTB).

BACKGROUND: To improve tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis, the World Health Organisation (WHO) has called for a non-sputum based triage test to focus TB testing on people with a high likelihood of having active pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). Various host or pathogen biomarker-based testing devices are in design stage and require validity assessment. Host biomarkers have shown promise to accurately rule out active TB, but further research is required to determine generalisability. The TriageTB diagnostic test study aims to assess the accuracy of diagnostic test candidates, as well as field-test, finalise the design and biomarker signature, and validate a point-of-care multi-biomarker test (MBT). METHODS: This observational diagnostic study will evaluate sensitivity and specificity of biomarker-based diagnostic candidates including the MBT and Xpert® TB Fingerstick cartridge compared with a gold-standard composite TB outcome classification defined by symptoms, sputum GeneXpert® Ultra, smear and culture, radiological features, response to TB therapy and presence of an alternative diagnosis. The study will be conducted in research sites in South Africa, Uganda, The Gambia and Vietnam which all have high TB prevalence. The two-phase design allows for finalisation of the MBT in Phase 1 in which candidate host proteins will be evaluated on stored serum from Asia, South Africa and South America and on fingerstick blood from 50 newly recruited participants per site. The MBT test will then be locked down and validated in Phase 2 on 250 participants per site. DISCUSSION: By targeting confirmatory TB testing to those with a positive triage test, 75% of negative GXPU may be avoided, thereby reducing diagnostic costs and patient losses during the care cascade. This study builds on previous biomarker research and aims to identify a point-of-care test meeting or exceeding the minimum World Health Organisation target product profile of a 90% sensitivity and 70% specificity. Streamlining TB testing by identifying individuals with a high likelihood of TB should improve TB resources use and, in so doing, improve TB care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04232618 (clinicaltrials.gov) Date of registration: 16 January 2020.

Efficacy of varenicline combined with nicotine replacement therapy vs varenicline alone for smoking cessation: a randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Behavioral approaches and pharmacotherapy are of proven benefit in assisting smokers to quit, but it is unclear whether combining nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) with varenicline to improve abstinence is effective and safe. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of combining varenicline and a nicotine patch vs varenicline alone in smoking cessation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial with a 12-week treatment period and a further 12-week follow-up conducted in 7 centers in South Africa from April 2011 to October 2012. Four hundred forty-six generally healthy smokers were randomized (1:1); 435 were included in the efficacy and safety analyses. INTERVENTIONS: Nicotine or placebo patch treatment began 2 weeks before a target quit date (TQD) and continued for a further 12 weeks. Varenicline was begun 1 week prior to TQD, continued for a further 12 weeks, and tapered off during week 13. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Tobacco abstinence was established and confirmed by exhaled carbon monoxide measurements at TQD and at intervals thereafter up to 24 weeks. The primary end point was the 4-week exhaled carbon monoxide-confirmed continuous abstinence rate for weeks 9 through 12 of treatment, ie, the proportion of participants able to maintain complete abstinence from smoking for the last 4 weeks of treatment, as assessed using multiple imputation analysis. Secondary end points included point prevalence abstinence at 6 months, continuous abstinence rate from weeks 9 through 24, and adverse events. Multiple imputation also was used to address loss to follow-up. RESULTS: The combination treatment was associated with a higher continuous abstinence rate at 12 weeks (55.4% vs 40.9%; odds ratio [OR], 1.85; 95% CI, 1.19-2.89; P = .007) and 24 weeks (49.0% vs 32.6%; OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.25-3.14; P = .004) and point prevalence abstinence rate at 6 months (65.1% vs 46.7%; OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.32-3.43; P = .002). In the combination treatment group, there was a numerically greater incidence of nausea, sleep disturbance, skin reactions, constipation, and depression, with only skin reactions reaching statistical significance (14.4% vs 7.8%; P = .03); the varenicline-alone group experienced more abnormal dreams and headaches. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Varenicline in combination with NRT was more effective than varenicline alone at achieving tobacco abstinence at 12 weeks (end of treatment) and at 6 months. Further studies are needed to assess long-term efficacy and safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01444131.