The path to tuberculosis elimination: a renewed vision.

Tuberculosis (TB) elimination and pre-elimination, with thresholds of 1 and 10 incident cases per million population, respectively, were considered achievable for low TB incidence countries in the 1990s, when they were conceived. However, it has since become clear that, even in low TB incidence settings with effective programmes and sufficient resources, achieving pre-elimination in the next decade will require a dramatic acceleration of efforts. In this review, we describe the history of the TB elimination concept and existing country experiences, as well as the interventions available to accelerate the progress towards this threshold. We then propose a framework for near-term progress towards the more aspirational goal of TB pre-elimination. This framework consists of five stages (high incidence, moderate incidence, low incidence, nearing pre-elimination and pre-elimination) that are benchmarked to specific levels of TB incidence in each country. Using this framework, countries can set 5-year targets of achieving certain reductions in TB incidence and/or reaching the next stage, through the use of strategies tailored to both local epidemiology and available organisation and infrastructure. TB elimination remains as an aspirational goal in all stages, but certain activities can be prioritised in the short term to make more rapid progress, ensure local-level buy-in and increase accountability. As TB pre-elimination is approached, certain ethical and social concerns are likely to rise in importance; these concerns are also discussed. Our aim in setting this framework is to guide clinicians, public health experts and decision makers in taking actionable next steps in the trajectory towards TB pre-elimination and elimination.

Worldwide Effects of Coronavirus Disease Pandemic on Tuberculosis Services, January-April 2020.

Coronavirus disease has disrupted tuberculosis services globally. Data from 33 centers in 16 countries on 5 continents showed that attendance at tuberculosis centers was lower during the first 4 months of the pandemic in 2020 than for the same period in 2019. Resources are needed to ensure tuberculosis care continuity during the pandemic.

Epidemic and pandemic viral infections: impact on tuberculosis and the lung: A consensus by the World Association for Infectious Diseases and Immunological Disorders (WAidid), Global Tuberculosis Network (GTN), and members of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Study Group for Mycobacterial Infections (ESGMYC).

Major epidemics, including some that qualify as pandemics, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), HIV, influenza A (H1N1)pdm/09 and most recently COVID-19, affect the lung. Tuberculosis (TB) remains the top infectious disease killer, but apart from syndemic TB/HIV little is known regarding the interaction of viral epidemics and pandemics with TB. The aim of this consensus-based document is to describe the effects of viral infections resulting in epidemics and pandemics that affect the lung (MERS, SARS, HIV, influenza A (H1N1)pdm/09 and COVID-19) and their interactions with TB. A search of the scientific literature was performed. A writing committee of international experts including the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control Public Health Emergency (ECDC PHE) team, the World Association for Infectious Diseases and Immunological Disorders (WAidid), the Global Tuberculosis Network (GTN), and members of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) Study Group for Mycobacterial Infections (ESGMYC) was established. Consensus was achieved after multiple rounds of revisions between the writing committee and a larger expert group. A Delphi process involving the core group of authors (excluding the ECDC PHE team) identified the areas requiring review/consensus, followed by a second round to refine the definitive consensus elements. The epidemiology and immunology of these viral infections and their interactions with TB are discussed with implications for diagnosis, treatment and prevention of airborne infections (infection control, viral containment and workplace safety). This consensus document represents a rapid and comprehensive summary on what is known on the topic.

Treatment correlates of successful outcomes in pulmonary multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment outcomes for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis remain poor. We aimed to estimate the association of treatment success and death with the use of individual drugs, and the optimal number and duration of treatment with those drugs in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. METHODS: In this individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify potentially eligible observational and experimental studies published between Jan 1, 2009, and April 30, 2016. We also searched reference lists from all systematic reviews of treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis published since 2009. To be eligible, studies had to report original results, with end of treatment outcomes (treatment completion [success], failure, or relapse) in cohorts of at least 25 adults (aged >18 years). We used anonymised individual patient data from eligible studies, provided by study investigators, regarding clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcomes. Using propensity score-matched generalised mixed effects logistic, or linear regression, we calculated adjusted odds ratios and adjusted risk differences for success or death during treatment, for specific drugs currently used to treat multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, as well as the number of drugs used and treatment duration. FINDINGS: Of 12 030 patients from 25 countries in 50 studies, 7346 (61%) had treatment success, 1017 (8%) had failure or relapse, and 1729 (14%) died. Compared with failure or relapse, treatment success was positively associated with the use of linezolid (adjusted risk difference 0·15, 95% CI 0·11 to 0·18), levofloxacin (0·15, 0·13 to 0·18), carbapenems (0·14, 0·06 to 0·21), moxifloxacin (0·11, 0·08 to 0·14), bedaquiline (0·10, 0·05 to 0·14), and clofazimine (0·06, 0·01 to 0·10). There was a significant association between reduced mortality and use of linezolid (-0·20, -0·23 to -0·16), levofloxacin (-0·06, -0·09 to -0·04), moxifloxacin (-0·07, -0·10 to -0·04), or bedaquiline (-0·14, -0·19 to -0·10). Compared with regimens without any injectable drug, amikacin provided modest benefits, but kanamycin and capreomycin were associated with worse outcomes. The remaining drugs were associated with slight or no improvements in outcomes. Treatment outcomes were significantly worse for most drugs if they were used despite in-vitro resistance. The optimal number of effective drugs seemed to be five in the initial phase, and four in the continuation phase. In these adjusted analyses, heterogeneity, based on a simulated I2 method, was high for approximately half the estimates for specific drugs, although relatively low for number of drugs and durations analyses. INTERPRETATION: Although inferences are limited by the observational nature of these data, treatment outcomes were significantly better with use of linezolid, later generation fluoroquinolones, bedaquiline, clofazimine, and carbapenems for treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. These findings emphasise the need for trials to ascertain the optimal combination and duration of these drugs for treatment of this condition. FUNDING: American Thoracic Society, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, European Respiratory Society, Infectious Diseases Society of America.

Reducing tuberculosis transmission: a consensus document from the World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe.

Evidence-based guidance is needed on 1) how tuberculosis (TB) infectiousness evolves in response to effective treatment and 2) how the TB infection risk can be minimised to help countries to implement community-based, outpatient-based care.This document aims to 1) review the available evidence on how quickly TB infectiousness responds to effective treatment (and which factors can lower or boost infectiousness), 2) review policy options on the infectiousness of TB patients relevant to the World Health Organization European Region, 3) define limitations of the available evidence and 4) provide recommendations for further research.The consensus document aims to target all professionals dealing with TB (e.g TB specialists, pulmonologists, infectious disease specialists, primary healthcare professionals, and other clinical and public health professionals), as well as health staff working in settings where TB infection is prevalent.

ERS/ECDC Statement: European Union standards for tuberculosis care, 2017 update.

The International Standards for Tuberculosis Care define the essential level of care for managing patients who have or are presumed to have tuberculosis, or are at increased risk of developing the disease. The resources and capacity in the European Union (EU) and the European Economic Area permit higher standards of care to secure quality and timely TB diagnosis, prevention and treatment. On this basis, the European Union Standards for Tuberculosis Care (ESTC) were published in 2012 as standards specifically tailored to the EU setting. Since the publication of the ESTC, new scientific evidence has become available and, therefore, the standards were reviewed and updated.A panel of international experts, led by a writing group from the European Respiratory Society (ERS) and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), updated the ESTC on the basis of new published evidence. The underlying principles of these patient-centred standards remain unchanged. The second edition of the ESTC includes 21 standards in the areas of diagnosis, treatment, HIV and comorbidities, and public health and prevention.The ESTC target clinicians and public health workers, provide an easy-to-use resource and act as a guide through all the required activities to ensure optimal diagnosis, treatment and prevention of TB.

Multi and extensively drug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis: advances in diagnosis and management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis (TB) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR)-TB epidemics are key obstacles towards TB control and elimination. RECENT FINDINGS: Diagnosis of MDR/XDR-TB is difficult and requires several weeks. New diagnostic tools are being tested and proposed allowing for shorter time to diagnosis and reduced delays in starting an adequate treatment regimen. MDR/XDR-TB treatment strategies are currently on an evolving stage. New shortened treatments based on the recommended 'Bangladesh regimen' or on the newer anti-TB drugs, delamanid and bedaquiline may represent part of the future scenario. In addition, more information on safety and efficacy of delamanid and bedaquiline has been published, allowing to better position these drugs. Recent information on treatment regimens for the paediatric age, with or without delamanid or bedaquiline, has become available. This is of great help in designing safer and more efficacious regimens for the treatment of MDR/XDR-TB in children and adolescents. SUMMARY: The accessibility, sustainability and scale-up of new diagnostic technologies are lagging behind and more efforts are needed. In addition, we need high-quality information on safety and efficacy of various combinations of drugs to obtain the best possible regimens to treat the largest possible proportion of patients.

New and Repurposed Drugs for Pediatric Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis. Practice-based Recommendations.

It is estimated that 33,000 children develop multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) each year. In spite of these numbers, children and adolescents have limited access to the new and repurposed MDR-TB drugs. There is also little clinical guidance for the use of these drugs and for the shorter MDR-TB regimen in the pediatric population. This is despite the fact that these drugs and regimens are associated with improved interim outcomes and acceptable safety profiles in adults. This review fills a gap in the pediatric MDR-TB literature by providing practice-based recommendations for the use of the new (delamanid and bedaquiline) and repurposed (linezolid and clofazimine) MDR-TB drugs and the new shorter MDR-TB regimen in children and adolescents.

Bedaquiline and Delamanid Combination Treatment of 5 Patients with Pulmonary Extensively Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis.

We report the experiences of 5 patients taking bedaquiline with delamanid in combination: 1 patient was cured; 3 culture converted, with 2 continuing and 1 changing therapy; and 1 died from respiratory insufficiency. For 2 patients, QT-interval prolongation but no arrhythmias occurred. Use of this therapy is justified for patients with limited options.

Effectiveness and safety of clofazimine in multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: a nationwide report from Brazil.

Although clofazimine is used to treat multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB), there is scant information on its effectiveness and safety. The aim of this retrospective, observational study was to evaluate these factors as well as the tolerability of clofazimine in populations in Brazil, where it was administered at a daily dose of 100 mg·day-1 (body weight ≥45 kg) as part of a standardised MDR-TB treatment regimen until 2006 (thereafter pyrazinamide was used).All MDR-TB patients included in the Sistema de Informação de Tratamentos Especiais da Tuberculose (SITETB) individual electronic register were analysed. The effectiveness of clofazimine was assessed by comparing the treatment outcomes of patients undergoing clofazimine-containing regimens against those undergoing clofazimine-free regimens and its safety by describing clofazimine-attributed adverse events. A total of 1446 patients were treated with clofazimine-containing regimens and 1096 with pyrazinamide-containing regimens.Although success rates were similar in patients treated with clofazimine versus those treated with pyrazinamide (880 out of 1446, 60.9%, versus 708 out of 1096, 64.6%; p=0.054), clofazimine-treated cases exhibited higher death rates due to tuberculosis than pyrazinamide-treated ones (314 out of 1446, 21.7%, versus 120 out of 1096, 10.9%) but fewer failures (78 out of 1446, 5.4%, versus 95 out of 1096, 8.7%) and less loss to follow-up (144 out of 1446, 10.0%, versus 151 out of 1096, 13.8%). No relevant differences were detected when comparing adverse events in patients treated with clofazimine-containing regimens to those treated with clofazimine-free regimens. However, the incidence of side-effects was less than previously reported (gastro-intestinal complaints: 10.5%; hyper-pigmentation: 50.2%; neurological disturbances: 9-13%).

Effectiveness and safety of bedaquiline-containing regimens in the treatment of MDR- and XDR-TB: a multicentre study.

Large studies on bedaquiline used to treat multidrug-resistant (MDR-) and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB) are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of bedaquiline-containing regimens in a large, retrospective, observational study conducted in 25 centres and 15 countries in five continents.428 culture-confirmed MDR-TB cases were analysed (61.5% male; 22.1% HIV-positive, 45.6% XDR-TB). MDR-TB cases were admitted to hospital for a median (interquartile range (IQR)) 179 (92-280) days and exposed to bedaquiline for 168 (86-180) days. Treatment regimens included, among others, linezolid, moxifloxacin, clofazimine and carbapenems (82.0%, 58.4%, 52.6% and 15.3% of cases, respectively).Sputum smear and culture conversion rates in MDR-TB cases were 63.6% and 30.1%, respectively at 30 days, 81.1% and 56.7%, respectively at 60 days; 85.5% and 80.5%, respectively at 90 days and 88.7% and 91.2%, respectively at the end of treatment. The median (IQR) time to smear and culture conversion was 34 (30-60) days and 60 (33-90) days. Out of 247 culture-confirmed MDR-TB cases completing treatment, 71.3% achieved success (62.4% cured; 8.9% completed treatment), 13.4% died, 7.3% defaulted and 7.7% failed. Bedaquiline was interrupted due to adverse events in 5.8% of cases. A single case died, having electrocardiographic abnormalities that were probably non-bedaquiline related.Bedaquiline-containing regimens achieved high conversion and success rates under different nonexperimental conditions.

Combined Use of Delamanid and Bedaquiline to Treat Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review.

The new drugs delamanid and bedaquiline are increasingly being used to treat multidrug-resistant (MDR-) and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB). The World Health Organization, based on lack of evidence, recommends their use under specific conditions and not in combination. No systematic review has yet evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of delamanid and bedaquiline used in combination. A search of peer-reviewed, scientific evidence was carried out, aimed at evaluating the efficacy/effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of delamanid and bedaquiline-containing regimens in individuals with pulmonary/extrapulmonary disease, which were bacteriologically confirmed as M/XDR-TB. We used PubMed to identify any relevant manuscripts in English up to the 23 December 2016, excluding editorials and reviews. Three out of 75 manuscripts retrieved satisfied the inclusion criteria, whilst 72 were excluded for dealing with only one drug (three studies), being recommendations (one study) or identifying need for their use (one study), focusing on drug resistance aspects (six studies) or being generic reviews/other studies (61 papers). The studies retrieved reported two XDR-TB cases observed for six months and achieving consistent sputum smear and culture conversion. Case 2 experienced a short break of bedaquiline, which was re-started after introducing verapamil. After a transient and symptom-free increase of the QT interval from week 5 to 17, it then decreased below the 500 ms threshold.

Tuberculosis care among refugees arriving in Europe: a ERS/WHO Europe Region survey of current practices.

No evidence exists on tuberculosis (TB) and latent TB infection (LTBI) management policies among refugees in European countries.A questionnaire investigating screening and management practices among refugees was sent to 38 national TB programme representatives of low and intermediate TB incidence European countries/territories of the WHO European Region.Out of 36 responding countries, 31 (86.1%) reported screening for active TB, 19 for LTBI, and eight (22.2%) reporting outcomes of LTBI treatment. Screening for TB is based on algorithms including different combinations of symptom-based questionnaires, bacteriology and chest radiography and LTBI screening on different combinations of tuberculin skin test and interferon-γ release assays. In 22 (61.1%) countries, TB and LTBI screening are performed in refugee centres. In 22 (61.1%) countries, TB services are organised in collaboration with the private sector. 27 (75%) countries answered that screening for TB is performed as per national and international guidelines, while 19 (52.7%) gave the same answer with regards to LTBI screening. Infection control measures are inadequate in several of the countries surveyed.There is need for improved coordination of TB screening in Europe to implement the End TB Strategy and achieve TB elimination.

Effectiveness and safety of meropenem/clavulanate-containing regimens in the treatment of MDR- and XDR-TB.

No large study has ever evaluated the efficacy, safety and tolerability of meropenem/clavulanate to treat multidrug- and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR- and XDR-TB). The aim of this observational study was to evaluate the therapeutic contribution, effectiveness, safety and tolerability profile of meropenem/clavulanate added to a background regimen when treating MDR- and XDR-TB cases.Patients treated with a meropenem/clavulanate-containing regimen (n=96) showed a greater drug resistance profile than those exposed to a meropenem/clavulanate-sparing regimen (n=168): in the former group XDR-TB was more frequent (49% versus 6.0%, p<0.0001) and the median (interquartile range (IQR)) number of antibiotic resistances was higher (8 (6-9)versus 5 (4-6)). Patients were treated with a meropenem/clavulanate-containing regimen for a median (IQR) of 85 (49-156) days.No statistically significant differences were observed in the overall MDR-TB cohort and in the subgroups with and without the XDR-TB patients; in particular, sputum smear and culture conversion rates were similar in XDR-TB patients exposed to meropenem/clavulanate-containing regimens (88.0% versus 100.0%, p=1.00 and 88.0% versus 100.0%, p=1.00, respectively). Only six cases reported adverse events attributable to meropenem/clavulanate (four of them then restarting treatment).The nondifferent outcomes and bacteriological conversion rate observed in cases who were more severe than controls might imply that meropenem/clavulanate could be active in treating MDR- and XDR-TB cases.

Comparison of effectiveness and safety of imipenem/clavulanate- versus meropenem/clavulanate-containing regimens in the treatment of MDR- and XDR-TB.

No large study to date has ever evaluated the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of imipenem/clavulanate versus meropenem/clavulanate to treat multidrug- and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR- and XDR-TB). The aim of this observational study was to compare the therapeutic contribution of imipenem/clavulanate versus meropenem/clavulanate added to background regimens to treat MDR- and XDR-TB cases.84 patients treated with imipenem/clavulanate-containing regimens showed a similar median number of antibiotic resistances (8 versus 8) but more fluoroquinolone resistance (79.0% versus 48.9%, p<0.0001) and higher XDR-TB prevalence (67.9% versus 49.0%, p=0.01) in comparison with 96 patients exposed to meropenem/clavulanate-containing regimens. Patients were treated with imipenem/clavulanate- and meropenem/clavulanate-containing regimens for a median (interquartile range) of 187 (60-428) versus 85 (49-156) days, respectively.Statistically significant differences were observed on sputum smear and culture conversion rates (79.7% versus 94.8%, p=0.02 and 71.9% versus 94.8%, p<0.0001, respectively) and on success rates (59.7% versus 77.5%, p=0.03). Adverse events to imipenem/clavulanate and meropenem/clavulanate were reported in 5.4% and 6.5% of cases only.Our study suggests that meropenem/clavulanate is more effective than imipenem/clavulanate in treating MDR/XDR-TB patients.

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.

Carbapenems to Treat Multidrug and Extensively Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Carbapenems (ertapenem, imipenem, meropenem) are used to treat multidrug-resistant (MDR-) and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB), even if the published evidence is limited, particularly when it is otherwise difficult to identify the recommended four active drugs to be included in the regimen. No systematic review to date has ever evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of carbapenems. METHODS: A search of peer-reviewed, scientific evidence was carried out, aimed at evaluating the efficacy/effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of carbapenem-containing regimens in individuals with pulmonary/extra-pulmonary disease which was bacteriologically confirmed as M/XDR-TB. We used PubMed to identify relevant full-text, English manuscripts up to the 20 December 2015, excluding editorials and reviews. RESULTS: Seven out of 160 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria: two on ertapenem, one on imipenem, and four on meropenem, all published between 2005 and 2016. Of seven studies, six were retrospective, four were performed in a single center, two enrolled children, two had a control group, and six reported a proportion of XDR-TB cases higher than 20%. Treatment success was higher than 57% in five studies with culture conversion rates between 60% and 94.8%. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and tolerability is very good, with the proportion of adverse events attributable to carbapenems below 15%.

Perspectives on Advances in Tuberculosis Diagnostics, Drugs, and Vaccines.

Despite concerted efforts over the past 2 decades at developing new diagnostics, drugs, and vaccines with expanding pipelines, tuberculosis remains a global emergency. Several novel diagnostic technologies show promise of better point-of-care rapid tests for tuberculosis including nucleic acid-based amplification tests, imaging, and breath analysis of volatile organic compounds. Advances in new and repurposed drugs for use in multidrug-resistant (MDR) or extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis have focused on development of several new drug regimens and their evaluation in clinical trials and now influence World Health Organization guidelines. Since the failure of the MVA85A vaccine 2 years ago, there have been no new tuberculosis vaccine candidates entering clinical testing. The current status quo of the lengthy treatment duration and poor treatment outcomes associated with MDR/XDR tuberculosis and with comorbidity of tuberculosis with human immunodeficiency virus and noncommunicable diseases is unacceptable. New innovations and political and funder commitment for early rapid diagnosis, shortening duration of therapy, improving treatment outcomes, and prevention are urgently required.