Association between Covishield vaccine and menstrual disturbance. Findings from a cross-sectional study among participants of Zero TB cohort in India.

BACKGROUND: The association between covid-19 vaccine and menstrual disturbance is unclear. METHODS: An in-person cross-sectional survey among female members ≥ 18 years enrolled in an ongoing Zero TB prospective cohort in Northern India who had received one or two doses of covid-19 vaccine was conducted to study the characteristics and association of menstrual disturbance within six months of receiving Covishield. RESULTS: Between June 29 and September 5, 2021, 339 females ≥ 18 years of age were administered the survey. Median age was 30 (IQR: 22-39) years; 84 % were between 18 and 49 and 16 % were ≥ 50 years old. There were 152 college students, 27 healthcare workers, and 160 nuns. Forty-two women (12 %) had received one dose and 297 (88 %) had received two doses of Covishield. Overall, 66 (20 %) women reported experiencing menstrual disturbance after receiving Covishield vaccine. The problems included early menstruation: 6 % (n = 19/339); late menstruation: 4 % (n = 14/339); and heavier bleeding: 5 % (n = 17/339). Disturbances lasted for less than seven days and cycles normalized in 1-3 months. There was no post-menopausal bleeding. There was no significant difference in menstrual disturbance based on receiving one vs. two doses of Covishield (OR: 1.58; 95 % CI: 0.55-4.57; p = 0.381). History of SARS-CoV-2 infection was not associated with the development of menstrual disturbance among the vaccinees (OR: 0.63; 95 % CI: 0.24-1.73; p = 0.379). Presence of emotional disturbance at baseline (OR: 31; 95 % CI: 3.52-267; p = 0.002) or previous history of dysmenorrhea (OR: 41; 95 % CI: 8.7-196; p < 0.001) was associated with menstrual disturbance in the vaccinees, indicating their potential to confound or bias study results. CONCLUSION: Menstrual problems were reported by Covishield vaccinees, but they were minor and reversible within three months and do not constitute a ground for vaccine hesitancy. Studies designed to assess causal link taking care to avoid selection bias or confounding are needed.

Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Evidence from a Phase 3 Trial to Support Flat-Dosing of Rifampicin for Tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal dosing strategy for rifampicin in treating drug-susceptible tuberculosis (TB) is still highly debated. In the Phase 3 clinical trial Study 31/ACTG 5349 (NCT02410772), all participants in the control regimen arm received 600 mg rifampicin daily as a flat dose. Here, we evaluated relationships between rifampicin exposure and efficacy and safety outcomes. METHODS: We analyzed rifampicin concentration time profiles using population nonlinear mixed-effects models. We compared simulated rifampicin exposure from flat- and weight-banded dosing. We evaluated the effect of rifampicin exposure on stable culture conversion at 6 months, TB-related unfavorable outcomes at 9, 12, and 18 months using Cox proportional hazard models, and all trial-defined safety outcomes using logistic regression. RESULTS: Our model derived rifampicin exposure ranged from 4.57 mg·h/L to 140.0 mg·h/L with a median of 41.8 mg·h/L. Pharmacokinetic simulations demonstrated that flat-dosed rifampicin provided exposure coverage similar to weight-banded dose. Exposure-efficacy analysis (N=680) showed that participants with rifampicin exposure below the median experienced similar hazards of stable culture conversion and TB-related unfavorable outcomes compared to those with exposure above the median. Exposure-safety analysis (N=722) showed that increased rifampicin exposure was not associated with increased grade 3 or higher adverse events, or serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Flat-dosing of rifampicin at 600 mg daily may be a reasonable alternative to the incumbent weight-banded dosing strategy for the standard of care 6-month regimen. Future research should assess the optimal dosing strategy for rifampicin, at doses higher than the current recommendation.

Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes Among Women with Human Immunodeficiency Virus Taking Isoniazid Preventive Therapy During the First Trimester.

BACKGROUND: Isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) is recommended for tuberculosis prevention yet data on the safety of first-trimester pregnancy exposure are limited. METHODS: Planned secondary analysis in a TB prevention trial of adverse pregnancy outcomes among participants assigned to 9-month IPT who became pregnant during (IPT-exposed) or after (unexposed) IPT. Regression models compared binary outcomes of a composite adverse outcome (any non-live birth, excluding induced abortion); preterm delivery <37 weeks; and low birth weight <2500 g) among exposure groups. Models were adjusted for latent TB infection, maternal age, CD4 count, and antiretroviral therapy (ART). RESULTS: In total, 128 participants had a known pregnancy outcome; 39 IPT-exposed and 89 unexposed. At pregnancy outcome, ART use was lower in IPT-exposed (79%) than unexposed women (98%). Overall, 29 pregnancies ended in a composite adverse outcome (25 spontaneous abortions, 2 stillbirths and 2 ectopic pregnancies), 15 preterm deliveries, and 10 infants with low birth weight. IPT was associated with the composite adverse outcome adjusting for covariates at enrollment (adjusted relative risk [aRR] 1.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15, 3.41), but the effect was attenuated when adjusted for covariates at pregnancy outcome (aRR 1.47; 95% CI .84, 2.55); IPT was not associated with preterm delivery (relative risk [RR] 0.87; 95% CI .32-2.42) or low birth weight (RR 1.01; 95% CI .29, 3.56). CONCLUSIONS: First-trimester IPT exposure was associated with nearly two-fold increased risk of fetal demise, mostly spontaneous abortion, though the association was attenuated when adjusted for covariates proximal to pregnancy outcome including ART use. Further study is needed to inform TB prevention guidelines.

US Guidelines Fall Short on Short-Course Tuberculosis-Preventive Therapy.

The provision of tuberculosis-preventive therapy (TPT) to vulnerable populations is critical for global control. Shorter-course TPT regimens are highly effective and improve completion rates. Despite incorporation of 1 month of rifapentine and isoniazid into global guidelines, current US TPT guidelines do not include this as a recommended regimen, but should.

Pragmatic cluster-randomized trial of home-based preventive treatment for TB in Ethiopia and South Africa (CHIP-TB).

BACKGROUND: Each year, 1 million children develop TB resulting in over 200,000 child deaths. TB preventive treatment (TPT) is highly effective in preventing TB but remains poorly implemented for household child contacts. Home-based child contact management and TPT services may improve access to care. In this study, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of home-based contact management with TPT initiation in two TB high-burden African countries, Ethiopia and South Africa. METHODS: This pragmatic cluster randomized trial compares home-based versus facility-based care delivery models for contact management. Thirty-six clinics with decentralized TB services (18 in Ethiopia and 18 in South Africa) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to conduct either home-based or facility-based contact management. The study will attempt to enroll all eligible close child contacts of infectious drug-sensitive TB index patients diagnosed and treated for TB by one of the study clinics. Child TB contact management, including contact tracing, child evaluation, and TPT initiation and follow-up, will take place in the child's home for the intervention arm and at the clinic for the control arm. The primary outcome is the cluster-level ratio of the number of household child contacts less than 15 years of age in Ethiopia and less than 5 years of age in South Africa initiated on TPT per index patient, comparing the intervention to the control arm. Secondary outcomes include child contact identification and the TB prevention continuum of care. Other implementation outcomes include acceptability, feasibility, fidelity, cost, and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. DISCUSSION: This implementation research trial will determine whether home-based contact management identifies and initiates more household child contacts on TPT than facility-based contact management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04369326 . Registered on April 30, 2020.

Impact and cost-effectiveness of short-course tuberculosis preventive treatment for household contacts and people with HIV in 29 high-incidence countries: a modelling analysis.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines and implementation of tuberculosis preventive treatment (TPT) vary by age and HIV status. Specifically, TPT is strongly recommended for people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) and household contacts younger than 5 years but only conditionally recommended for older contacts. Cost remains a major barrier to implementation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TPT for household contacts and PLWHA. METHODS: We developed a state-transition model to simulate short-course TPT for household contacts and PLWHA in 29 high-incidence countries based on data from previous studies and public databases. Our primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, expressed as incremental discounted costs (2020 US$, including contact investigation costs) per incremental discounted disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted, compared with a scenario without any TPT or contact investigation. We propagated uncertainty in all model parameters using probabilistic sensitivity analysis and also evaluated the sensitivity of results to the screening algorithm used to rule out active disease, the choice of TPT regimen, the modelling time horizon, assumptions about TPT coverage, antiretroviral therapy discontinuation, and secondary transmission. FINDINGS: Between 2023 and 2035, scaling up TPT prevented 0·9 (95% uncertainty interval 0·4-1·6) people from developing tuberculosis and 0·13 (0·05-0·27) tuberculosis deaths per 100 PLWHA, at an incremental cost of $15 (9-21) per PLWHA. For household contacts, TPT (with contact investigation) averted 1·1 (0·5-2·0) cases and 0·7 (0·4-1·0) deaths per 100 contacts, at a cost of $21 (17-25) per contact. Cost-effectiveness was most favourable for household contacts younger than 5 years ($22 per DALY averted) and contacts aged 5-14 years ($104 per DALY averted) but also fell within conservative cost-effectiveness thresholds in many countries for PLWHA ($722 per DALY averted) and adult contacts ($309 per DALY averted). Costs per DALY averted tended to be lower when compared with a scenario with contact investigation but no TPT. The cost-effectiveness of TPT was not substantially altered in sensitivity analyses, except that TPT was more favourable in analysis that considered a longer time horizon or included secondary transmission benefits. INTERPRETATION: In many high-incidence countries, short-course TPT is likely to be cost-effective for PLWHA and household contacts of all ages, regardless of whether contact investigation is already in place. Failing to implement tuberculosis contact investigation and TPT will incur a large burden of avertable illness and mortality in the next decade. FUNDING: Unitaid.

Completion, safety, and efficacy of tuberculosis preventive treatment regimens containing rifampicin or rifapentine: an individual patient data network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: 3 months of weekly rifapentine plus isoniazid (3HP) and 4 months of daily rifampicin (4R) are recommended for tuberculosis preventive treatment. As these regimens have not been compared directly, we used individual patient data and network meta-analysis methods to compare completion, safety, and efficacy between 3HP and 4R. METHODS: We conducted a network meta-analysis of individual patient data by searching PubMed for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between Jan 1, 2000, and Mar 1, 2019. Eligible studies compared 3HP or 4R to 6 months or 9 months of isoniazid and reported treatment completion, adverse events, or incidence of tuberculosis disease. Deidentified individual patient data from eligible studies were provided by study investigators and outcomes were harmonised. Methods for network meta-analysis were used to generate indirect adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) and risk differences (aRDs) with their 95% CIs. FINDINGS: We included 17 572 participants from 14 countries in six trials. In the network meta-analysis, treatment completion was higher for people on 3HP than for those on 4R (aRR 1·06 [95% CI 1·02-1·10]; aRD 0·05 [95% CI 0·02-0·07]). For treatment-related adverse events leading to drug discontinuation, risks were higher for 3HP than for 4R for adverse events of any severity (aRR 2·86 [2·12-4·21]; aRD 0·03 [0·02-0·05]) and for grade 3-4 adverse events (aRR 3·46 [2·09-6·17]; aRD 0·02 [0·01-0·03]). Similar increased risks with 3HP were observed with other definitions of adverse events and were consistent across age groups. No difference in the incidence of tuberculosis disease between 3HP and 4R was found. INTERPRETATION: In the absence of RCTs, our individual patient data network meta-analysis indicates that 3HP provided an increase in treatment completion over 4R, but was associated with a higher risk of adverse events. Although findings should be confirmed, the trade-off between completion and safety must be considered when selecting a regimen for tuberculosis preventive treatment. FUNDING: None. TRANSLATIONS: For the French and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

A Standardized Approach for Collection of Objective Data to Support Outcome Determination for Late-Phase Tuberculosis Clinical Trials.

Rationale: We developed a standardized method, possible poor treatment response (PPTR), to help ascertain efficacy endpoints in Study S31/A5349 (NCT02410772), an open-label trial comparing two 4-month rifapentine-based regimens with a standard 6-month regimen for the treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). Objectives: We describe the use of the PPTR process and evaluate whether the goals of minimizing bias in efficacy endpoint assessment and attainment of relevant data to determine outcomes for all participants were achieved. Methods: A PPTR event was defined as the occurrence of one or more prespecified triggers. Each PPTR required initiation of a standardized evaluation process that included obtaining multiple sputum samples for microbiology. Measurements and Main Results: Among 2,343 participants with culture-confirmed drug-susceptible TB, 454 individuals (19.4%) had a total of 534 individual PPTR events, of which 76.6% were microbiological (positive smear or culture at or after 17 wk). At least one PPTR event was experienced by 92.4% (133 of 144) of participants with TB-related unfavorable outcome and between 13.8% and 14.7% of participants with favorable and not-assessable outcomes. A total of 75% of participants with TB-related unfavorable outcomes had microbiological confirmation of failure to achieve a disease-free cure. Conclusions: Standardized methodologies, such as our PPTR approach, could facilitate unbiased efficacy outcome determinations, improve discrimination between outcomes that are related and unrelated to regimen efficacy, and enhance the ability to conduct pooled analyses of contemporary trials.

High Isoniazid Exposures When Administered with Rifapentine Once Weekly for Latent Tuberculosis in Individuals with Human Immunodeficiency Virus.

Isoniazid pharmacokinetics are not yet well-described during once weekly, high-dose administrations with rifapentine (3HP) for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). Fewer data describe 3HP with dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The only prior report of 3HP with dolutegravir reported elevated isoniazid exposures. We measured the plasma isoniazid levels in 30 adults receiving 3HP and dolutegravir for the treatment of LTBI and HIV. The patients were genotyped to determine NAT2 acetylator status, and a population PK model was estimated by nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. The results were compared to previously reported data describing 3HP with dolutegravir, 3HP alone, and isoniazid with neither dolutegravir nor rifapentine. The isoniazid concentrations were adequately described by a one compartment model with a transit compartment absorption process. The isoniazid clearance for slow (8.33 L/h) and intermediate (12 L/h) acetylators were similar to previously reported values. Rapid acetylators (N = 4) had clearance similar to those of intermediate acetylators and much slower than typically reported, but the small sample size was limiting. The absorption rate was lower than usual, likely due to the coadministration with food, and it was faster among individuals with a low body weight. Low-body weight participants were also observed to have greater oral bioavailability. The isoniazid exposures were consistent with, or greater than, the previously reported "elevated" concentrations among individuals receiving 3HP and dolutegravir. The concentrations were substantially greater than those presented in previous reports among individuals receiving 3HP or isoniazid without rifapentine or dolutegravir. We discuss the implications of these findings and the possibility of a drug-drug interaction that is mediated by cellular transport. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT03435146 and has South African National Clinical Trial Registration no. DOH-27-1217-5770.).

Rifapentine With and Without Moxifloxacin for Pulmonary Tuberculosis in People With Human Immunodeficiency Virus (S31/A5349).

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) Trials Consortium Study 31/AIDS Clinical Trials Group A5349, an international randomized open-label phase 3 noninferiority trial showed that a 4-month daily regimen substituting rifapentine for rifampin and moxifloxacin for ethambutol had noninferior efficacy and was safe for the treatment of drug-susceptible pulmonary TB (DS-PTB) compared with the standard 6-month regimen. We explored results among the prespecified subgroup of people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (PWH). METHODS: PWH and CD4+ counts ≥100 cells/µL were eligible if they were receiving or about to initiate efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy (ART). Primary endpoints of TB disease-free survival 12 months after randomization (efficacy) and ≥ grade 3 adverse events (AEs) on treatment (safety) were compared, using a 6.6% noninferiority margin for efficacy. Randomization was stratified by site, pulmonary cavitation, and HIV status. PWH were enrolled in a staged fashion to support cautious evaluation of drug-drug interactions between rifapentine and efavirenz. RESULTS: A total of 2516 participants from 13 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, and the Americas were enrolled. Among 194 (8%) microbiologically eligible PWH, the median CD4+ count was 344 cells/µL (interquartile range: 223-455). The rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen was noninferior to control (absolute difference in unfavorable outcomes -7.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI] -20.8% to 6.0%); the rifapentine regimen was not noninferior to control (+7.5% [95% CI, -7.3% to +22.4%]). Fewer AEs were reported in rifapentine-based regimens (15%) than the control regimen (21%). CONCLUSIONS: In people with HIV-associated DS-PTB with CD4+ counts ≥100 cells/µL on efavirenz-based ART, the 4-month daily rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen was noninferior to the 6-month control regimen and was safe. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02410772.

Cost-effectiveness of 3-months isoniazid and rifapentine compared to 9-months isoniazid for latent tuberculosis infection: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review examining the cost effectiveness of a 3-month course of isoniazid and rifapentine, known as 3HP, given by directly observed treatment, compared to 9 months of isoniazid that is directly observed or self-administered, for latent tuberculosis infection. 3HP has shown to be effective in reducing progression to active tuberculosis and like other short-course regimens, has higher treatment completion rates compared to standard regimens such as 9 months of isoniazid. Decision makers would benefit from knowing if the higher up-front costs of rifapentine and of the human resources needed for directly observed treatment are worth the investment for improved outcomes. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, and Web of Science up to February 2022 with search concepts combining latent tuberculosis infection, directly observed treatment, and cost or cost-effectiveness. Studies included were in English or French, on human subjects, with latent tuberculosis infection, provided information on specified anti-tubercular therapy regimens, had a directly observed treatment arm, and described outcomes with some cost or economic data. We excluded posters and abstracts, treatment for multiple drug resistant tuberculosis, and combined testing and treatment strategies. We then restricted our findings to studies examining directly-observed 3HP for comparison. The primary outcome was the cost and cost-effectiveness of directly-observed 3HP. RESULTS: We identified 3 costing studies and 7 cost-effectiveness studies. The 3 costing studies compared directly-observed 3HP to directly-observed 9 months of isoniazid. Of the 7 cost-effectiveness studies, 4 were modelling studies based in high-income countries; one study was modelled on a high tuberculosis incidence population in the Canadian Arctic, using empiric costing data from that setting; and 2 studies were conducted in a low-income, high HIV-coinfection rate population. In five studies, directly-observed 3HP compared to self-administered isoniazid for 9 months in high-income countries, has incremental cost-effectiveness ratios that range from cost-saving to $5418 USD/QALY gained. While limited, existing evidence suggests 3HP may not be cost-effective in low-income, high HIV-coinfection settings. CONCLUSION: Cost-effectiveness should continue to be assessed for programmatic planning and scale-up, and may vary depending on existing systems and local context, including prevalence rates and patient expectations and preferences.

Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Simulation of Rifapentine Supports Concomitant Antiretroviral Therapy with Efavirenz and Non-Weight Based Dosing.

The Brief Rifapentine-Isoniazid Efficacy for TB Prevention/A5279 trial demonstrated a 1-month daily regimen of rifapentine and isoniazid was noninferior to 9 months of isoniazid alone for preventing TB in persons living with HIV (PLWH). Our objective was to evaluate rifapentine pharmacokinetics in trial participants receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) and perform simulations to compare weight-based rifapentine dosing with a standard, fixed dose. Nonlinear mixed effect modeling was used to estimate rifapentine and 25-desacetyl rifapentine population pharmacokinetic characteristics. The pharmacokinetic model was validated using a nonparametric bootstrap and visual predictive checks. Monte Carlo simulations were performed to compare weight-based and fixed dose regimens. Rifapentine and 25-desacetyl rifapentine concentrations (347 of each; 185 participants) were each described with a one-compartment model with one-way conversion between rifapentine and 25-desacetyl rifapentine. The absorption rate was nearly doubled in fed versus fasting states. Rifapentine clearance was increased 31% in those receiving efavirenz (EFV)-based versus nevirapine-based ART. Metabolite clearance was allometrically scaled with fat-free mass. Simulations showed lower rifapentine exposures with weight-based compared with fixed dosing. With 10 mg/kg weight-based regimens, 26% and 62% of simulated exposures in <35 kg and 35-45 kg weight classes were above target (AUC0 to 24 h of 257 mg*hr/L); 85% of simulated exposures across all weight classes with fixed dosing were above target. These data support fixed dosing with rifapentine 600 mg daily for TB prevention regardless of weight for PLWH 13 years or older receiving the 4-week regimen and no need for dose adjustment when given with EFV-based ART. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT01404312.

Pregnancy in Women With HIV in a Tuberculosis Preventive Therapy Trial.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis preventive therapy (TPT) is recommended for people with HIV infection, including during pregnancy. The effect of TPT exposure at conception and during pregnancy is poorly documented. METHODS: We report pregnancy outcomes among South African women with HIV enrolled in a randomized trial of 4 TPT regimens (two 3-month regimens, rifapentine/isoniazid [3HP] or rifampin/isoniazid [3HR], isoniazid for 6 months, or isoniazid continuously). Descriptive statistics and risk ratios were assessed to examine relationships between study regimens and outcomes. RESULTS: 216/896 women (24%) conceived during the study. Women who conceived were younger (27.9 vs 31.3 years) and had higher mean CD4 counts (589.1 vs 536.7). The odds of pregnancy were higher in women in the rifamycin-isoniazid arms than those in the isoniazid arms (3HP: relative risk [RR] 1.73, P = 0.001; 3HR:RR 1.55, P = 0.017) despite increased contraceptive use compared with the standard 6H therapy. Thirty-four women became pregnant while taking preventive treatment (8 rifamycin and 26 isoniazid monotherapy). Pregnancy outcomes in these women were as follows: 17 (50%) mother/baby healthy, 3 (9%) spontaneous abortions, 6 (18%) elective abortions, 1 (3%) premature delivery, 2 (6%) neonatal deaths [1 rifamycin-isoniazid and 1 isoniazid], and 5 (15%) unknown. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy was common in women who had received TPT and more frequent in women who had received rifamycin-isoniazid-based regimens.

First and second doses of Covishield vaccine provided high level of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in highly transmissible settings: results from a prospective cohort of participants residing in congregate facilities in India.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of Covishield vaccine among residents of congregate residential facilities. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study in congregate residential facilities. SETTING: Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, India, from December 2020 to July 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Residents of all ages in seven facilities-three monasteries, two old age homes and two learning centres-were enrolled. EXPOSURES: First and second doses of Covishield vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infection. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Primary outcome was development of COVID-19. Secondary outcome was unfavourable outcomes, defined as a composite of shortness of breath, hospitalisation or death. Vaccine effectiveness (%) was calculated as (1-HR)×100. RESULTS: There were 1114 residents (median age 31 years) participating in the study, 82% males. Twenty-eight per cent (n=308/1114) were unvaccinated, 50% (n=554/1114) had received one dose and 23% (n=252/1114) had received two doses of Covishield. The point prevalence of COVID-19 for the facilities ranged from 11% to 57%. Incidence rates (95% CI) of COVID-19 were 76 (63 to 90)/1000 person-months in the unvaccinated, 25 (18 to 35)/1000 person-months in recipients of one dose and 9 (4 to 19)/1000 person-months in recipients of two doses. The effectiveness of first and second doses of Covishield were 71% (adjusted HR (aHR) 0.29; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.46; p<0.001) and 80% (aHR 0.20; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.44; p<0.001), respectively, against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 86% (aHR 0.24; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.82; p=0.023) and 99% (aHR 0.01; 95% CI 0.002 to 0.10; p<0.001), respectively, against unfavourable outcome. The effectiveness was higher after 14 days of receiving the first and second doses, 93% and 98%, respectively. Risk of infection was higher in persons with chronic hepatitis B (aHR 1.78; p=0.034) and previous history of tuberculosis (aHR 1.62; p=0.047). CONCLUSION: Covishield was effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and reducing disease severity in highly transmissible settings during the second wave of the pandemic driven by the Delta variant.

The Mid-Atlantic Centers for AIDS Research Consortium: Promoting HIV Science Through Regional Collaboration.

The Centers for AIDS Research (CFAR) program was established by the National Institutes of Health in 1988 to catalyze and support high-impact HIV research and to develop the next generation of HIV investigators at academic institutions throughout the United States. In 2014, the Penn CFAR, the Johns Hopkins University CFAR and the District of Columbia CFAR developed a partnership-the Mid-Atlantic CFAR Consortium (MACC)-to promote cross-CFAR scientific collaboration, mentoring, and communication and to address the regional HIV epidemic. Over the past 6 years, the creation of the MACC has resulted in a rich web of interconnectivity, which has fostered scientific collaboration through working groups on the black men who have sex with men (MSM) and Latinx regional HIV epidemics, joint peer-reviewed publications, and successful collaborative grant applications on topics ranging from HIV prevention in young MSM, transgender women, implementation science, and clinical epidemiology; supported developmental activities through the MACC Scholars program, cross-CFAR mentoring, joint symposia, cross-CFAR seminar participation, and keynote speakers; and promoted strategic communication through advisory committees, best practices consultations, and the social and behavioral science research network. The MACC has been highly impactful by promoting HIV science through regional collaboration, supporting a diverse network of scholars across three cities and focusing on the epidemic in underrepresented and marginalized communities. Lessons learned from this consortium may have implications for scientific research centers beyond the field of HIV.

Efavirenz Pharmacokinetics and Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 (HIV-1) Viral Suppression Among Patients Receiving Tuberculosis Treatment Containing Daily High-Dose Rifapentine.

BACKGROUND: A 4-month regimen containing rifapentine and moxifloxacin has noninferior efficacy compared to the standard 6-month regimen for drug-sensitive tuberculosis. We evaluated the effect of regimens containing daily, high-dose rifapentine on efavirenz pharmacokinetics and viral suppression in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-associated tuberculosis (TB). METHODS: In the context of a Phase 3 randomized controlled trial, HIV-positive individuals already virally suppressed on efavirenz--containing antiretroviral therapy (ART) (EFV1), or newly initiating efavirenz (EFV2) received TB treatment containing rifapentine (1200 mg), isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and either ethambutol or moxifloxacin. Mid-interval efavirenz concentrations were measured (a) during ART and TB cotreatment (Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 17, different by EFV group) and (b) when ART was taken alone (pre- or post-TB treatment, Weeks 0 and 22). Apparent oral clearance (CL/F) was estimated and compared. Target mid-interval efavirenz concentrations were > 1 mg/L. Co-treatment was considered acceptable if > 80% of participants had mid-interval efavirenz concentrations meeting this target. RESULTS: EFV1 and EFV2 included 70 and 41 evaluable participants, respectively. The geometric mean ratio comparing efavirenz CL/F with vs without TB drugs was 0.79 (90% confidence interval [CI] .72-.85) in EFV1 and 0.84 [90% CI .69-.97] in EFV2. The percent of participants with mid-interval efavirenz concentrations > 1mg/L in EFV1 at Weeks 0, 4, 8, and 17 was 96%, 96%, 88%, and 89%, respectively. In EFV2, at approximately 4 and 8 weeks post efavirenz initiation, the value was 98%. CONCLUSIONS: TB treatment containing high-dose daily rifapentine modestly decreased (rather than increased) efavirenz clearance and therapeutic targets were met supporting the use of efavirenz with these regimens, without dose adjustment. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02410772.

Tuberculosis screening among ambulatory people living with HIV: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The WHO-recommended tuberculosis screening and diagnostic algorithm in ambulatory people living with HIV is a four-symptom screen (known as the WHO-recommended four symptom screen [W4SS]) followed by a WHO-recommended molecular rapid diagnostic test (eg Xpert MTB/RIF [hereafter referred to as Xpert]) if W4SS is positive. To inform updated WHO guidelines, we aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of alternative screening tests and strategies for tuberculosis in this population. METHODS: In this systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, we updated a search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, the Cochrane Library, and conference abstracts for publications from Jan 1, 2011, to March 12, 2018, done in a previous systematic review to include the period up to Aug 2, 2019. We screened the reference lists of identified pieces and contacted experts in the field. We included prospective cross-sectional, observational studies and randomised trials among adult and adolescent (age ≥10 years) ambulatory people living with HIV, irrespective of signs and symptoms of tuberculosis. We extracted study-level data using a standardised data extraction form, and we requested individual participant data from study authors. We aimed to compare the W4SS with alternative screening tests and strategies and the WHO-recommended algorithm (ie, W4SS followed by Xpert) with Xpert for all in terms of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity), overall and in key subgroups (eg, by antiretroviral therapy [ART] status). The reference standard was culture. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020155895. FINDINGS: We identified 25 studies, and obtained data from 22 studies (including 15 666 participants; 4347 [27·7%] of 15 663 participants with data were on ART). W4SS sensitivity was 82% (95% CI 72-89) and specificity was 42% (29-57). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) had similar sensitivity to (77% [61-88]), but higher specificity (74% [61-83]; n=3571) than, W4SS. Cough (lasting ≥2 weeks), haemoglobin (<10 g/dL), body-mass index (<18·5 kg/m2), and lymphadenopathy had high specificities (80-90%) but low sensitivities (29-43%). The WHO-recommended algorithm had a sensitivity of 58% (50-66) and a specificity of 99% (98-100); Xpert for all had a sensitivity of 68% (57-76) and a specificity of 99% (98-99). In the one study that assessed both, the sensitivity of sputum Xpert Ultra was higher than sputum Xpert (73% [62-81] vs 57% [47-67]) and specificities were similar (98% [96-98] vs 99% [98-100]). Among outpatients on ART (4309 [99·1%] of 4347 people on ART), W4SS sensitivity was 53% (35-71) and specificity was 71% (51-85). In this population, a parallel strategy (two tests done at the same time) of W4SS with any chest x-ray abnormality had higher sensitivity (89% [70-97]) and lower specificity (33% [17-54]; n=2670) than W4SS alone; at a tuberculosis prevalence of 5%, this strategy would require 379 more rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but detect 18 more tuberculosis cases. Among outpatients not on ART (11 160 [71·8%] of 15 541 outpatients), W4SS sensitivity was 85% (76-91) and specificity was 37% (25-51). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) alone had a similar sensitivity to (83% [79-86]), but higher specificity (67% [60-73]; n=3187) than, W4SS and a sequential strategy (both test positive) of W4SS then C-reactive protein (≥5 mg/L) had a similar sensitivity to (84% [75-90]), but higher specificity than (64% [57-71]; n=3187), W4SS alone; at 10% tuberculosis prevalence, these strategies would require 272 and 244 fewer rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but miss two and one more tuberculosis cases, respectively. INTERPRETATION: C-reactive protein reduces the need for further rapid diagnostic tests without compromising sensitivity and has been included in the updated WHO tuberculosis screening guidelines. However, C-reactive protein data were scarce for outpatients on ART, necessitating future research regarding the utility of C-reactive protein in this group. Chest x-ray can be useful in outpatients on ART when combined with W4SS. The WHO-recommended algorithm has suboptimal sensitivity; Xpert for all offers slight sensitivity gains and would have major resource implications. FUNDING: World Health Organization.