A prospective patient registry to monitor safety, effectiveness, and utilisation of bedaquiline in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in South Korea.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) represents a major public health concern, with an ongoing need for new effective treatments. Bedaquiline is an oral diarylquinoline that has shown encouraging treatment success and culture conversion rates in MDR-TB. METHODS: A South Korean patient registry was set up across 19 centres between 2016 and 2018 for the prospective collection of data from patients with MDR-TB who received either a bedaquiline-containing or a non-bedaquiline-containing regimen. Treatment was at the physician's discretion (bedaquiline use requiring approval by special committee) and was based on patient characteristics, disease status, and local treatment guidelines. RESULTS: The safety population included 172 patients (88 bedaquiline and 84 non-bedaquiline). The mean (standard deviation, SD) duration of follow-up was 24.3 (9.5) months. Mean (SD) durations of treatment were 5.4 (1.8) months in bedaquiline-treated patients and 15.7 (6.7) months in the non-bedaquiline group. Treatment success (cured and treatment completed according to WHO 2013 treatment outcome definitions) was achieved by 56.3% of bedaquiline-treated and 45.2% of non-bedaquiline-treated patients. Sputum culture conversion rates were 90.4% and 83.7% with and without bedaquiline, respectively. Diarrhoea and nausea were the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in the bedaquiline group (27.3% [24/88] and 22.7% [20/88], respectively). The most frequent bedaquiline-related TEAEs were prolonged QT interval (10.2%; 9/88), and diarrhoea and nausea (9.1% each; 8/88). QT interval prolongation was reported in 19.3% (17/88) of bedaquiline-treated and 2.4% (2/84) of non-bedaquiline-treated patients, but bedaquiline was not discontinued for any patient for this reason. There were 13 (14.7%) and three (3.6%) deaths in the bedaquiline-treated and non-bedaquiline groups, respectively. Review of fatal cases revealed no unexpected safety findings, and no deaths were bedaquiline-related. The most common cause of death was worsening cancer (three patients). Patients in the bedaquiline group tended to have poorer baseline risk profiles than non-bedaquiline patients and were more likely to have relapsed or already failed second-line treatment. Interpretation of mortality data was complicated by high rates of loss to follow-up in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The South Korean registry findings support previous risk/benefit observations and the continued use of bedaquiline as part of combination therapy in patients with MDR-TB.

Bedaquiline safety, efficacy, utilization and emergence of resistance following treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis patients in South Africa: a retrospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: This retrospective cohort study assessed benefits and risks of bedaquiline treatment in multidrug-resistant-tuberculosis (MDR-TB) combination therapy by evaluating safety, effectiveness, drug utilization and emergence of resistance to bedaquiline. METHODS: Data were extracted from a register of South African drug-resistant-tuberculosis (DR-TB) patients (Electronic DR-TB Register [EDRWeb]) for newly diagnosed patients with MDR-TB (including pre-extensively drug-resistant [XDR]-TB and XDR-TB and excluding rifampicin-mono-resistant [RR]-TB, as these patients are by definition not multidrug-resistant), receiving either a bedaquiline-containing or non-bedaquiline-containing regimen, at 14 sites in South Africa. Total duration of treatment and follow-up was up to 30 months, including 6 months' bedaquiline treatment. WHO treatment outcomes within 6 months after end-of-treatment were assessed in both patient groups. Longer term mortality (up to 30 months from treatment start) was evaluated through matching to the South African National Vital Statistics Register. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses were used to predict association between receiving a bedaquiline-containing regimen and treatment outcome. RESULTS: Data were extracted from EDRWeb for 5981 MDR-TB patients (N = 3747 bedaquiline-treated; N = 2234 non-bedaquiline-treated) who initiated treatment between 2015 and 2017, of whom 40.7% versus 80.6% had MDR-TB. More bedaquiline-treated than non-bedaquiline-treated patients had pre-XDR-TB (27.7% versus 9.5%) and XDR-TB (31.5% versus 9.9%) per pre-2021 WHO definitions. Most patients with treatment duration data (94.3%) received bedaquiline for 6 months. Treatment success (per pre-2021 WHO definitions) was achieved in 66.9% of bedaquiline-treated and 49.4% of non-bedaquiline-treated patients. Death was reported in fewer bedaquiline-treated (15.4%) than non-bedaquiline-treated (25.6%) patients. Bedaquiline-treated patients had increased likelihood of treatment success and decreased risk of mortality versus non-bedaquiline-treated patients. In patients with evaluable drug susceptibility testing data, 3.5% of bedaquiline-susceptible isolates at baseline acquired phenotypic resistance. Few patients reported bedaquiline-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (1.8%), TEAE-related bedaquiline discontinuations (1.4%) and QTcF values > 500 ms (2.5%) during treatment. CONCLUSION: Data from this large cohort of South African patients with MDR-TB showed treatment with bedaquiline-containing regimens was associated with survival and effectiveness benefit compared with non-bedaquiline-containing regimens. No new safety signals were detected. These data are consistent with the positive risk-benefit profile of bedaquiline and warrant continued implementation in combination therapy for MDR-TB treatment.

Multiple Myeloma Treatment in Real-world Clinical Practice: Results of a Prospective, Multinational, Noninterventional Study.

BACKGROUND: The present prospective, multinational, noninterventional study aimed to document and describe real-world treatment regimens and disease progression in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients initiating any new MM therapy from October 2010 to October 2012 were eligible. A multistage patient/site recruitment model was applied to minimize the selection bias; enrollment was stratified by country, region, and practice type. The patient medical and disease features, treatment history, and remission status were recorded at baseline, and prospective data on treatment, efficacy, and safety were collected electronically every 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 2358 patients were enrolled. Of these patients, 775 and 1583 did and did not undergo stem cell transplantation (SCT) at any time during treatment, respectively. Of the patients in the SCT and non-SCT groups, 49%, 21%, 14%, and 15% and 57%, 20%, 12% and 10% were enrolled at treatment line 1, 2, 3, and ≥ 4, respectively. In the SCT and non-SCT groups, 45% and 54% of the patients had received bortezomib-based therapy without thalidomide/lenalidomide, 12% and 18% had received thalidomide/lenalidomide-based therapy without bortezomib, and 30% and 4% had received bortezomib plus thalidomide/lenalidomide-based therapy as frontline treatment, respectively. The corresponding proportions of SCT and non-SCT patients in lines 2, 3, and ≥ 4 were 45% and 37%, 30% and 37%, and 12% and 3%, 33% and 27%, 35% and 32%, and 8% and 2%, and 27% and 27%, 27% and 23%, and 6% and 4%, respectively. In the SCT and non-SCT patients, the overall response rate was 86% to 97% and 64% to 85% in line 1, 74% to 78% and 59% to 68% in line 2, 55% to 83% and 48% to 60% in line 3, and 49% to 65% and 36% and 45% in line 4, respectively, for regimens that included bortezomib and/or thalidomide/lenalidomide. CONCLUSION: The results of our prospective study have revealed great diversity in the treatment regimens used to manage MM in real-life practice. This diversity was linked to factors such as novel agent accessibility and evolving treatment recommendations. Our results provide insight into associated clinical benefits.