Baseline and acquired resistance to bedaquiline, linezolid and pretomanid, and impact on treatment outcomes in four tuberculosis clinical trials containing pretomanid.

Bedaquiline (B), pretomanid (Pa) and linezolid (L) are key components of new regimens for treating rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (TB). However, there is limited information on the global prevalence of resistance to these drugs and the impact of resistance on treatment outcomes. Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) phenotypic drug susceptibility and whole-genome sequence (WGS) data, as well as patient profiles from 4 pretomanid-containing trials-STAND, Nix-TB, ZeNix and SimpliciTB-were used to investigate the rates of baseline resistance (BR) and acquired resistance (AR) to BPaL drugs, as well as their genetic basis, risk factors and impact on treatment outcomes. Data from >1,000 TB patients enrolled from 2015 to 2020 in 12 countries was assessed. We identified 2 (0.3%) participants with linezolid BR. Pretomanid BR was also rare, with similar rates across TB drug resistance types (0-2.1%). In contrast, bedaquiline BR was more prevalent among participants with highly resistant TB or longer prior treatment histories than those with newly diagnosed disease (5.2-6.3% vs. 0-0.3%). Bedaquiline BR was a risk factor for bacteriological failure or relapse in Nix-TB/ZeNix; 3/12 (25%, 95% CI 5-57%) participants with vs. 6/185 (3.2%, 1.2-6.9%) without bedaquiline BR. Across trials, we observed no linezolid AR, and only 3 cases of bedaquiline AR, including 2 participants with poor adherence. Overall, pretomanid AR was also rare, except in ZeNix patients with bedaquiline BR. WGS analyses revealed novel mutations in canonical resistant genes and, in 7 MTB isolates, the genetic determinants could not be identified. The overall low rates of BR to linezolid and pretomanid, and to a lesser extent to bedaquiline, observed in the pretomanid trials are in support of the worldwide implementation of BPaL-based regimens. Similarly, the overall low AR rates observed suggest BPaL drugs are better protected in the regimens trialed here than in other regimens combining bedaquiline with more, but less effective drugs.

Bedaquiline-Pretomanid-Linezolid Regimens for Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: The bedaquiline-pretomanid-linezolid regimen has been reported to have 90% efficacy against highly drug-resistant tuberculosis, but the incidence of adverse events with 1200 mg of linezolid daily has been high. The appropriate dose of linezolid and duration of treatment with this agent to minimize toxic effects while maintaining efficacy against highly drug-resistant tuberculosis are unclear. METHODS: We enrolled participants with extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis (i.e., resistant to rifampin, a fluoroquinolone, and an aminoglycoside), pre-XDR tuberculosis (i.e., resistant to rifampin and to either a fluoroquinolone or an aminoglycoside), or rifampin-resistant tuberculosis that was not responsive to treatment or for which a second-line regimen had been discontinued because of side effects. We randomly assigned the participants to receive bedaquiline for 26 weeks (200 mg daily for 8 weeks, then 100 mg daily for 18 weeks), pretomanid (200 mg daily for 26 weeks), and daily linezolid at a dose of 1200 mg for 26 weeks or 9 weeks or 600 mg for 26 weeks or 9 weeks. The primary end point in the modified intention-to-treat population was the incidence of an unfavorable outcome, defined as treatment failure or disease relapse (clinical or bacteriologic) at 26 weeks after completion of treatment. Safety was also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 181 participants were enrolled, 88% of whom had XDR or pre-XDR tuberculosis. Among participants who received bedaquiline-pretomanid-linezolid with linezolid at a dose of 1200 mg for 26 weeks or 9 weeks or 600 mg for 26 weeks or 9 weeks, 93%, 89%, 91%, and 84%, respectively, had a favorable outcome; peripheral neuropathy occurred in 38%, 24%, 24%, and 13%, respectively; myelosuppression occurred in 22%, 15%, 2%, and 7%, respectively; and the linezolid dose was modified (i.e., interrupted, reduced, or discontinued) in 51%, 30%, 13%, and 13%, respectively. Optic neuropathy developed in 4 participants (9%) who had received linezolid at a dose of 1200 mg for 26 weeks; all the cases resolved. Six of the seven unfavorable microbiologic outcomes through 78 weeks of follow-up occurred in participants assigned to the 9-week linezolid groups. CONCLUSIONS: A total of 84 to 93% of the participants across all four bedaquiline-pretomanid-linezolid treatment groups had a favorable outcome. The overall risk-benefit ratio favored the group that received the three-drug regimen with linezolid at a dose of 600 mg for 26 weeks, with a lower incidence of adverse events reported and fewer linezolid dose modifications. (Funded by the TB Alliance and others; ZeNix ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03086486.).

Ancient and recent differences in the intrinsic susceptibility of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex to pretomanid.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a robust phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) method with a correctly set breakpoint for pretomanid (Pa), the most recently approved anti-tuberculosis drug. METHODS: The Becton Dickinson Mycobacterial Growth Indicator Tube™ (MGIT) system was used at six laboratories to determine the MICs of a phylogenetically diverse collection of 356 Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) strains to establish the epidemiological cut-off value for pretomanid. MICs were correlated with WGS data to study the genetic basis of differences in the susceptibility to pretomanid. RESULTS: We observed ancient differences in the susceptibility to pretomanid among various members of MTBC. Most notably, lineage 1 of M. tuberculosis, which is estimated to account for 28% of tuberculosis cases globally, was less susceptible than lineages 2, 3, 4 and 7 of M. tuberculosis, resulting in a 99th percentile of 2 mg/L for lineage 1 compared with 0.5 mg/L for the remaining M. tuberculosis lineages. Moreover, we observed that higher MICs (≥8 mg/L), which probably confer resistance, had recently evolved independently in six different M. tuberculosis strains. Unlike the aforementioned ancient differences in susceptibility, these recent differences were likely caused by mutations in the known pretomanid resistance genes. CONCLUSIONS: In light of these findings, the provisional critical concentration of 1 mg/L for MGIT set by EMA must be re-evaluated. More broadly, these findings underline the importance of considering the global diversity of MTBC during clinical development of drugs and when defining breakpoints for AST.

Treatment of Highly Drug-Resistant Pulmonary Tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with highly drug-resistant forms of tuberculosis have limited treatment options and historically have had poor outcomes. METHODS: In an open-label, single-group study in which follow-up is ongoing at three South African sites, we investigated treatment with three oral drugs - bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid - that have bactericidal activity against tuberculosis and to which there is little preexisting resistance. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the drug combination for 26 weeks in patients with extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis and patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis that was not responsive to treatment or for which a second-line regimen had been discontinued because of side effects. The primary end point was the incidence of an unfavorable outcome, defined as treatment failure (bacteriologic or clinical) or relapse during follow-up, which continued until 6 months after the end of treatment. Patients were classified as having a favorable outcome at 6 months if they had resolution of clinical disease, a negative culture status, and had not already been classified as having had an unfavorable outcome. Other efficacy end points and safety were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients were enrolled in the study and were included in the evaluation of efficacy and safety end points. At 6 months after the end of treatment in the intention-to-treat analysis, 11 patients (10%) had an unfavorable outcome and 98 patients (90%; 95% confidence interval, 83 to 95) had a favorable outcome. The 11 unfavorable outcomes were 7 deaths (6 during treatment and 1 from an unknown cause during follow-up), 1 withdrawal of consent during treatment, 2 relapses during follow-up, and 1 loss to follow-up. The expected linezolid toxic effects of peripheral neuropathy (occurring in 81% of patients) and myelosuppression (48%), although common, were manageable, often leading to dose reductions or interruptions in treatment with linezolid. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid led to a favorable outcome at 6 months after the end of therapy in a high percentage of patients with highly drug-resistant forms of tuberculosis; some associated toxic effects were observed. (Funded by the TB Alliance and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02333799.).

A comparison of liquid and solid culture for determining relapse and durable cure in phase III TB trials for new regimens.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis kills more people than any other infectious disease, and new regimens are essential. The primary endpoint for confirmatory phase III trials for new regimens is a composite outcome that includes bacteriological treatment failure and relapse. Culture methodology is critical to the primary trial outcome. Patients in clinical trials can have positive cultures after treatment ends that may not necessarily indicate relapse, which was ascribed previously to laboratory cross-contamination or breakdown of old lesions. Löwenstein-Jensen (LJ) medium was the previous standard in clinical trials, but almost all current and future trials will use the Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) system due to its simplicity and consistency of use, which will affect phase III trial results. LJ was used for the definition of the primary endpoint in the REMoxTB trial, but every culture was also inoculated in parallel into the MGIT system. The data from this trial, therefore, provide a unique opportunity to investigate and compare the incidence of false 'isolated positives' in liquid and solid media and their potential impact on the primary efficacy results. METHODS: All post-treatment positive cultures were reviewed in the REMoxTB clinical trial. Logistic regression models were used to model the incidence of isolated positive cultures on MGIT and LJ. RESULTS: A total of 12,209 sputum samples were available from 1652 patients; cultures were more often positive on MGIT than LJ. In 1322 patients with a favourable trial outcome, 126 (9.5%) had cultures that were positive in MGIT compared to 34 (2.6%) patients with positive cultures on LJ. Among patients with a favourable outcome, the incidence of isolated positives on MGIT differed by study laboratory (p < 0.0001) with 21.9% of these coming from one laboratory investigating only 4.9% of patients. No other baseline factors predicted isolated positives on MGIT after adjusting for laboratory. There was evidence of clustering of isolated positive cultures in some patients even after adjusting for laboratory, p < 0.0001. The incidence of isolated positives on MGIT did not differ by treatment arm (p = 0.845, unadjusted). Compared to negative MGIT cultures, positive MGIT cultures were more likely to be associated with higher grade TB symptoms reported within 7 days either side of sputum collection in patients with an unfavourable primary outcome (p < 0.0001) but not in patients with a favourable outcome (p = 0.481). CONCLUSIONS: Laboratory cross-contamination was a likely cause of isolated positive MGIT cultures which were clustered in some laboratories. Certain patients had repeated positive MGIT cultures that did not meet the definition of a relapse. This pattern was too common to be explained by cross-contamination only, suggesting that host factors were also responsible. We conclude that MGIT can replace LJ in phase III TB trials, but there are implications for the definition of the primary outcome and patient management in trials in such settings. Most importantly, the methodologies differ in the incidence of isolated positives and in their capacity for capturing non-tuberculosis mycobacteria. It emphasises the importance of effective medical monitoring after treatment ends and consideration of clinical signs and symptoms for determining treatment failure and relapse.

Spot sputum samples are at least as good as early morning samples for identifying Mycobacterium tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: The use of early morning sputum samples (EMS) to diagnose tuberculosis (TB) can result in treatment delay given the need for the patient to return to the clinic with the EMS, increasing the chance of patients being lost during their diagnostic workup. However, there is little evidence to support the superiority of EMS over spot sputum samples. In this new analysis of the REMoxTB study, we compare the diagnostic accuracy of EMS with spot samples for identifying Mycobacterium tuberculosis pre- and post-treatment. METHODS: Patients who were smear positive at screening were enrolled into the study. Paired sputum samples (one EMS and one spot) were collected at each trial visit pre- and post-treatment. Microscopy and culture on solid LJ and liquid MGIT media were performed on all samples; those missing corresponding paired results were excluded from the analyses. RESULTS: Data from 1115 pre- and 2995 post-treatment paired samples from 1931 patients enrolled in the REMoxTB study were analysed. Patients were recruited from South Africa (47%), East Africa (21%), India (20%), Asia (11%), and North America (1%); 70% were male, median age 31 years (IQR 24-41), 139 (7%) co-infected with HIV with a median CD4 cell count of 399 cells/µL (IQR 318-535). Pre-treatment spot samples had a higher yield of positive Ziehl-Neelsen smears (98% vs. 97%, P = 0.02) and LJ cultures (87% vs. 82%, P = 0.006) than EMS, but there was no difference for positivity by MGIT (93% vs. 95%, P = 0.18). Contaminated and false-positive MGIT were found more often with EMS rather than spot samples. Surprisingly, pre-treatment EMS had a higher smear grading and shorter time-to-positivity, by 1 day, than spot samples in MGIT culture (4.5 vs. 5.5 days, P < 0.001). There were no differences in time to positivity in pre-treatment LJ culture, or in post-treatment MGIT or LJ cultures. Comparing EMS and spot samples in those with unfavourable outcomes, there were no differences in smear or culture results, and positive results were not detected earlier in Kaplan-Meier analyses in either EMS or spot samples. CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not support the hypothesis that EMS samples are superior to spot sputum samples in a clinical trial of patients with smear positive pulmonary TB. Observed small differences in mycobacterial burden are of uncertain significance and EMS samples do not detect post-treatment positives any sooner than spot samples.

Use of whole-genome sequencing to distinguish relapse from reinfection in a completed tuberculosis clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: RIFAQUIN was a tuberculosis chemotherapy trial in southern Africa including regimens with high-dose rifapentine with moxifloxacin. Here, the application of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is evaluated within RIFAQUIN for identifying new infections in treated patients as either relapses or reinfections. WGS is further compared with mycobacterial interspersed repetitive units-variable number tandem repeats (MIRU-VNTR) typing. This is the first report of WGS being used to evaluate new infections in a completed clinical trial for which all treatment and epidemiological data are available for analysis. METHODS: DNA from 36 paired samples of Mycobacterium tuberculosis cultured from patients before and after treatment was typed using 24-loci MIRU-VNTR, in silico spoligotyping and WGS. Following WGS, the sequences were mapped against the reference strain H37Rv, the single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) differences between pairs were identified, and a phylogenetic reconstruction was performed. RESULTS: WGS indicated that 32 of the paired samples had a very low number of SNP differences (0-5; likely relapses). One pair had an intermediate number of SNP differences, and was likely the result of a mixed infection with a pre-treatment minor genotype that was highly related to the post-treatment genotype; this was reclassified as a relapse, in contrast to the MIRU-VNTR result. The remaining three pairs had very high SNP differences (>750; likely reinfections). CONCLUSIONS: WGS and MIRU-VNTR both similarly differentiated relapses and reinfections, but WGS provided significant extra information. The low proportion of reinfections seen suggests that in standard chemotherapy trials with up to 24 months of follow-up, typing the strains brings little benefit to an analysis of the trial outcome in terms of differentiating relapse and reinfection. However, there is a benefit to using WGS as compared to MIRU-VNTR in terms of the additional genotype information obtained, in particular for defining the presence of mixed infections and the potential to identify known and novel drug-resistance markers.

High-dose rifapentine with moxifloxacin for pulmonary tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis regimens that are shorter and simpler than the current 6-month daily regimen are needed. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed, smear-positive, drug-sensitive tuberculosis to one of three regimens: a control regimen that included 2 months of ethambutol, isoniazid, rifampicin, and pyrazinamide administered daily followed by 4 months of daily isoniazid and rifampicin; a 4-month regimen in which the isoniazid in the control regimen was replaced by moxifloxacin administered daily for 2 months followed by moxifloxacin and 900 mg of rifapentine administered twice weekly for 2 months; or a 6-month regimen in which isoniazid was replaced by daily moxifloxacin for 2 months followed by one weekly dose of both moxifloxacin and 1200 mg of rifapentine for 4 months. Sputum specimens were examined on microscopy and after culture at regular intervals. The primary end point was a composite treatment failure and relapse, with noninferiority based on a margin of 6 percentage points and 90% confidence intervals. RESULTS: We enrolled a total of 827 patients from South Africa, Zimbabwe, Botswana, and Zambia; 28% of patients were coinfected with the human immunodefiency virus. In the per-protocol analysis, the proportion of patients with an unfavorable response was 4.9% in the control group, 3.2% in the 6-month group (adjusted difference from control, -1.8 percentage points; 90% confidence interval [CI], -6.1 to 2.4), and 18.2% in the 4-month group (adjusted difference from control, 13.6 percentage points; 90% CI, 8.1 to 19.1). In the modified intention-to-treat analysis these proportions were 14.4% in the control group, 13.7% in the 6-month group (adjusted difference from control, 0.4 percentage points; 90% CI, -4.7 to 5.6), and 26.9% in the 4-month group (adjusted difference from control, 13.1 percentage points; 90% CI, 6.8 to 19.4). CONCLUSIONS: The 6-month regimen that included weekly administration of high-dose rifapentine and moxifloxacin was as effective as the control regimen. The 4-month regimen was not noninferior to the control regimen. (Funded by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership and the Wellcome Trust; RIFAQUIN Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN44153044.).

Assessment of the sensitivity and specificity of Xpert MTB/RIF assay as an early sputum biomarker of response to tuberculosis treatment.

BACKGROUND: An accurate biomarker is urgently needed to monitor the response to treatment in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis. The Xpert MTB/RIF assay is a commercially available real-time PCR that can be used to detect Mycobacterium-tuberculosis-specific DNA sequences in sputum samples. We therefore evaluated this assay with serial sputum samples obtained over 26 weeks from patients undergoing treatment for tuberculosis. METHODS: We analysed sputum samples from 221 patients with smear-positive tuberculosis enrolled at two sites (Cape Town, South Africa, and Mbeya, Tanzania) of a multicentre randomised clinical trial REMoxTB of antituberculosis treatment on a weekly basis (weeks 0 to 8), then at weeks 12, 17, 22, and 26 after treatment initiation. The Xpert MTB/RIF results over time were compared with the results of standard smear microscopy and culture methods. FINDINGS: We obtained and analysed 2741 sputum samples from 221 patients. The reduction in positivity rates with Xpert MTB/RIF were slower than those with the standard methods. At week 8, positive results were obtained for 62 (29%) of 212 sputum samples with smear microscopy, 46 (26%) of 175 with solid culture (Löwenstein-Jensen medium), 77 (42%) of 183 with liquid culture (Bactec MGIT960 system), and 174 (84%) of 207 with Xpert MTB/RIF; at 26 weeks, positive results were obtained for ten (5%) of 199, four (3%) of 157, seven (4%) of 169, and 22 (27%) of 83 sputum samples, respectively. The reduction in detection of quantitative M tuberculosis DNA with Xpert MTB/RIF correlated with smear grades (ρ=-0·74; p<0·0001), solid culture grades (ρ=-0·73; p<0·0001), and time to liquid culture positivity (ρ=0·73; p<0·0001). Compared with the combined binary smear and culture results as a reference standard, the Xpert MTB/RIF assay had high sensitivity (97·0%, 95% CI 95·8-97·9), but poor specificity (48·6%, 45·0-52·2). INTERPRETATION: The poor specificity precludes the use of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay as a biomarker for monitoring tuberculosis treatment, and should not replace standard smear microscopy and culture. FUNDING: Global Alliance for TB Drug Development, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, German Ministry of Science and Technology.

Whole-genome sequencing to establish relapse or re-infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence of tuberculosis after treatment makes management difficult and is a key factor for determining treatment efficacy. Two processes can cause recurrence: relapse of the primary infection or re-infection with an exogenous strain. Although re-infection can and does occur, its importance to tuberculosis epidemiology and its biological basis is still debated. We used whole-genome sequencing-which is more accurate than conventional typing used to date-to assess the frequency of recurrence and to gain insight into the biological basis of re-infection. METHODS: We assessed patients from the REMoxTB trial-a randomised controlled trial of tuberculosis treatment that enrolled previously untreated participants with Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection from Malaysia, South Africa, and Thailand. We did whole-genome sequencing and mycobacterial interspersed repetitive unit-variable number of tandem repeat (MIRU-VNTR) typing of pairs of isolates taken by sputum sampling: one from before treatment and another from either the end of failed treatment at 17 weeks or later or from a recurrent infection. We compared the number and location of SNPs between isolates collected at baseline and recurrence. FINDINGS: We assessed 47 pairs of isolates. Whole-genome sequencing identified 33 cases with little genetic distance (0-6 SNPs) between strains, deemed relapses, and three cases for which the genetic distance ranged from 1306 to 1419 SNPs, deemed re-infections. Six cases of relapse and six cases of mixed infection were classified differently by whole-genome sequencing and MIRU-VNTR. We detected five single positive isolates (positive culture followed by at least two negative cultures) without clinical evidence of disease. INTERPRETATION: Whole-genome sequencing enables the differentiation of relapse and re-infection cases with greater resolution than do genotyping methods used at present, such as MIRU-VNTR, and provides insights into the biology of recurrence. The additional clarity provided by whole-genome sequencing might have a role in defining endpoints for clinical trials. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, European Union, Medical Research Council, Global Alliance for TB Drug Development, European and Developing Country Clinical Trials Partnership.

Molecular bacterial load assay, a culture-free biomarker for rapid and accurate quantification of sputum Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacillary load during treatment.

A molecular assay to quantify Mycobacterium tuberculosis is described. In vitro, 98% (n = 96) of sputum samples with a known number of bacilli (10(7) to 10(2) bacilli) could be enumerated within 0.5 log(10). In comparison to culture, the molecular bacterial load (MBL) assay is unaffected by other microorganisms present in the sample, results are obtained more quickly (within 24 h) and are seldom inhibited (0.7% samples), and the MBL assay critically shows the same biphasic decline as observed longitudinally during treatment. As a biomarker of treatment response, the MBL assay responds rapidly, with a mean decline in bacterial load for 111 subjects of 0.99 log(10) (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.81 to 1.17) after 3 days of chemotherapy. There was a significant association between the rate of bacterial decline during the same 3 days and bacilli ml(-1) sputum at day 0 (linear regression, P = 0.0003) and a 3.62 increased odds ratio of relapse for every 1 log(10) increase in pretreatment bacterial load (95% CI, 1.53 to 8.59).