Clinical standards for the management of adverse effects during treatment for TB.

BACKGROUND: Adverse effects (AE) to TB treatment cause morbidity, mortality and treatment interruption. The aim of these clinical standards is to encourage best practise for the diagnosis and management of AE.METHODS: 65/81 invited experts participated in a Delphi process using a 5-point Likert scale to score draft standards.RESULTS: We identified eight clinical standards. Each person commencing treatment for TB should: Standard 1, be counselled regarding AE before and during treatment; Standard 2, be evaluated for factors that might increase AE risk with regular review to actively identify and manage these; Standard 3, when AE occur, carefully assessed and possible allergic or hypersensitivity reactions considered; Standard 4, receive appropriate care to minimise morbidity and mortality associated with AE; Standard 5, be restarted on TB drugs after a serious AE according to a standardised protocol that includes active drug safety monitoring. In addition: Standard 6, healthcare workers should be trained on AE including how to counsel people undertaking TB treatment, as well as active AE monitoring and management; Standard 7, there should be active AE monitoring and reporting for all new TB drugs and regimens; and Standard 8, knowledge gaps identified from active AE monitoring should be systematically addressed through clinical research.CONCLUSION: These standards provide a person-centred, consensus-based approach to minimise the impact of AE during TB treatment.

Clinical standards for the dosing and management of TB drugs.

BACKGROUND: Optimal drug dosing is important to ensure adequate response to treatment, prevent development of drug resistance and reduce drug toxicity. The aim of these clinical standards is to provide guidance on 'best practice´ for dosing and management of TB drugs.METHODS: A panel of 57 global experts in the fields of microbiology, pharmacology and TB care were identified; 51 participated in a Delphi process. A 5-point Likert scale was used to score draft standards. The final document represents the broad consensus and was approved by all participants.RESULTS: Six clinical standards were defined: Standard 1, defining the most appropriate initial dose for TB treatment; Standard 2, identifying patients who may be at risk of sub-optimal drug exposure; Standard 3, identifying patients at risk of developing drug-related toxicity and how best to manage this risk; Standard 4, identifying patients who can benefit from therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM); Standard 5, highlighting education and counselling that should be provided to people initiating TB treatment; and Standard 6, providing essential education for healthcare professionals. In addition, consensus research priorities were identified.CONCLUSION: This is the first consensus-based Clinical Standards for the dosing and management of TB drugs to guide clinicians and programme managers in planning and implementation of locally appropriate measures for optimal person-centred treatment to improve patient care.

Outcome of treatment of MDR-TB or drug-resistant patients treated with bedaquiline and delamanid: Results from a large global cohort.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends countries introduce new anti-TB drugs in the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. The aim of the study is to prospectively evaluate the effectiveness of bedaquiline (and/or delamanid)- containing regimens in a large cohort of consecutive TB patients treated globally. This observational, prospective study is based on data collected and provided by Global Tuberculosis Network (GTN) centres and analysed twice a year. All consecutive patients (including children/adolescents) treated with bedaquiline and/or delamanid were enrolled, and managed according to WHO and national guidelines. Overall, 52 centres from 29 countries/regions in all continents reported 883 patients as of January 31st 2021, 24/29 countries/regions providing data on 100% of their consecutive patients (10-80% in the remaining 5 countries). The drug-resistance pattern of the patients was severe (>30% with extensively drug-resistant -TB; median number of resistant drugs 5 (3-7) in the overall cohort and 6 (4-8) among patients with a final outcome). For the patients with a final outcome (477/883, 54.0%) the median (IQR) number of months of anti-TB treatment was 18 (13-23) (in days 553 (385-678)). The proportion of patients achieving sputum smear and culture conversion ranged from 93.4% and 92.8% respectively (whole cohort) to 89.3% and 88.8% respectively (patients with a final outcome), a median (IQR) time to sputum smear and culture conversion of 58 (30-90) days for the whole cohort and 60 (30-100) for patients with a final outcome and, respectively, of 55 (30-90) and 60 (30-90) days for culture conversion. Of 383 patients treated with bedaquiline but not delamanid, 284 (74.2%) achieved treatment success, while 25 (6.5%) died, 11 (2.9%) failed and 63 (16.5%) were lost to follow-up.

Cost-utility analysis of high-dose treatment for intermediate-susceptible, dose-dependent tuberculosis patients.

SETTING: We proposed to: 1) introduce an intermediate-susceptible, dose-dependent (ISDD) category for Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection; and 2) treat patients with M. tuberculosis infection in this category with a high dose of rifampicin (RMP) and isoniazid (INH). OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of our strategy on quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and costs in a low-income country with a high prevalence of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) (Belarus) and a high-income, low MDR-TB prevalence country (The Netherlands). DESIGN: A Markov model comprising 14 health states was used to simulate treatment outcomes and costs accrued over 5 years for a hypothetical cohort of 10 000 patients. One-way sensitivity analysis, probabilistic sensitivity analysis and a scenario analysis were also performed. RESULTS: Our strategy was shown to be cost-effective for Belarus, but not for the Netherlands. At a willingness-to-pay of 50 000 euros per QALY, the probability of our strategy being cost-effective was 50% for the Netherlands and 57% for Belarus. CONCLUSION: The study shows that our strategy could be cost-effective and more efficacious. However, more studies are needed on the outcomes of using higher doses of INH and RMP.