Comparison of 3 optimized delivery strategies for completion of isoniazid-rifapentine (3HP) for tuberculosis prevention among people living with HIV in Uganda: A single-center randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Expanding access to shorter regimens for tuberculosis (TB) prevention, such as once-weekly isoniazid and rifapentine taken for 3 months (3HP), is critical for reducing global TB burden among people living with HIV (PLHIV). Our coprimary hypotheses were that high levels of acceptance and completion of 3HP could be achieved with delivery strategies optimized to overcome well-contextualized barriers and that 3HP acceptance and completion would be highest when PLHIV were provided an informed choice between delivery strategies. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In a pragmatic, single-center, 3-arm, parallel-group randomized trial, PLHIV receiving care at a large urban HIV clinic in Kampala, Uganda, were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 3HP by facilitated directly observed therapy (DOT), facilitated self-administered therapy (SAT), or informed choice between facilitated DOT and facilitated SAT using a shared decision-making aid. We assessed the primary outcome of acceptance and completion (≥11 of 12 doses of 3HP) within 16 weeks of treatment initiation using proportions with exact binomial confidence intervals (CIs). We compared proportions between arms using Fisher's exact test (two-sided α = 0.025). Trial investigators were blinded to primary and secondary outcomes by study arm. Between July 13, 2020, and July 8, 2022, 1,656 PLHIV underwent randomization, with equal numbers allocated to each study arm. One participant was erroneously enrolled a second time and was excluded in the primary intention-to-treat analysis. Among the remaining 1,655 participants, the proportion who accepted and completed 3HP exceeded the prespecified 80% target in the DOT (0.94; 97.5% CI [0.91, 0.96] p < 0.001), SAT (0.92; 97.5% CI [0.89, 0.94] p < 0.001), and Choice (0.93; 97.5% CI [0.91, 0.96] p < 0.001) arms. There was no difference in acceptance and completion between any 2 arms overall or in prespecified subgroup analyses based on sex, age, time on antiretroviral therapy, and history of prior treatment for TB or TB infection. Only 14 (0.8%) participants experienced an adverse event prompting discontinuation of 3HP. The main limitation of the study is that it was conducted in a single center. Multicenter studies are now needed to confirm the feasibility and generalizability of the facilitated 3HP delivery strategies in other settings. CONCLUSIONS: Short-course TB preventive treatment was widely accepted by PLHIV in Uganda, and very high levels of treatment completion were achieved in a programmatic setting with delivery strategies tailored to address known barriers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03934931.

Estimands for clinical endpoints in Tuberculosis treatment randomized controlled trials: a retrospective application in a completed trial.

Background: Randomized trials for the treatment of tuberculosis (TB) rely on a composite primary outcome to capture unfavorable treatment responses. However, variability between trials in the outcome definition and estimation methods complicates across-trial comparisons and hinders the advancement of treatment guidelines. The International Council for Harmonization (ICH) provides international regulatory standards for clinical trials. The estimand framework outlined in the recent ICH E9(R1) addendum offers a timely opportunity for randomized trials of TB treatment to adopt broadly standardized outcome definitions and analytic approaches. We previously proposed and defined four estimands for use in this context. Our objective was to evaluate how the use of these estimands and choice of estimation method impacts results and interpretation of a large phase III TB trial. Methods: We reanalyzed participant level data from the REMoxTB trial. We applied four estimands and various methods of estimation to assess non-inferiority of both novel 4-month treatment regimens against standard of care. Results: With each of the four estimands we reached the same conclusion as the original trial analysis; that the novel regimens were not non-inferior to standard of care. Each estimand and method of estimation gave similar estimates of the treatment effect with fluctuations in variance and differences driven by the methods applied for handling intercurrent events. Conclusions: Our application of estimands defined by the ICH E9(R1) addendum offers a formalized framework for addressing the primary TB treatment trial objective and can promote uniformity in future trials by limiting heterogeneity in trial outcome definitions. We demonstrated the utility of our proposal using data from the REMoxTB randomized trial. We outlined methods for estimating each estimand and found consistent conclusions across estimands. We recommend future late-phase TB treatment trials to implement some or all of our estimands to promote rigorous outcome definitions and reduce variability between trials.Trial registration: NCT00864383.

Handling intercurrent events and missing data in non-inferiority trials using the estimand framework: A tuberculosis case study.

INTRODUCTION: The ICH E9 addendum outlining the estimand framework for clinical trials was published in 2019 but provides limited guidance around how to handle intercurrent events for non-inferiority studies. Once an estimand is defined, it is also unclear how to deal with missing values using principled analyses for non-inferiority studies. METHODS: Using a tuberculosis clinical trial as a case study, we propose a primary estimand, and an additional estimand suitable for non-inferiority studies. For estimation, multiple imputation methods that align with the estimands for both primary and sensitivity analysis are proposed. We demonstrate estimation methods using the twofold fully conditional specification multiple imputation algorithm and then extend and use reference-based multiple imputation for a binary outcome to target the relevant estimands, proposing sensitivity analyses under each. We compare the results from using these multiple imputation methods with those from the original study. RESULTS: Consistent with the ICH E9 addendum, estimands can be constructed for a non-inferiority trial which improves on the per-protocol/intention-to-treat-type analysis population previously advocated, involving respectively a hypothetical or treatment policy strategy to handle relevant intercurrent events. Results from using the 'twofold' multiple imputation approach to estimate the primary hypothetical estimand, and using reference-based methods for an additional treatment policy estimand, including sensitivity analyses to handle the missing data, were consistent with the original study's reported per-protocol and intention-to-treat analysis in failing to demonstrate non-inferiority. CONCLUSIONS: Using carefully constructed estimands and appropriate primary and sensitivity estimators, using all the information available, results in a more principled and statistically rigorous approach to analysis. Doing so provides an accurate interpretation of the estimand.

Rethinking intercurrent events in defining estimands for tuberculosis trials.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Tuberculosis remains one of the leading causes of death from an infectious disease globally. Both choices of outcome definitions and approaches to handling events happening post-randomisation can change the treatment effect being estimated, but these are often inconsistently described, thus inhibiting clear interpretation and comparison across trials. METHODS: Starting from the ICH E9(R1) addendum's definition of an estimand, we use our experience of conducting large Phase III tuberculosis treatment trials and our understanding of the estimand framework to identify the key decisions regarding how different event types are handled in the primary outcome definition, and the important points that should be considered in making such decisions. A key issue is the handling of intercurrent (i.e. post-randomisation) events (ICEs) which affect interpretation of or preclude measurement of the intended final outcome. We consider common ICEs including treatment changes and treatment extension, poor adherence to randomised treatment, re-infection with a new strain of tuberculosis which is different from the original infection, and death. We use two completed tuberculosis trials (REMoxTB and STREAM Stage 1) as illustrative examples. These trials tested non-inferiority of new tuberculosis treatment regimens versus a control regimen. The primary outcome was a binary composite endpoint, 'favourable' or 'unfavourable', which was constructed from several components. RESULTS: We propose the following improvements in handling the above-mentioned ICEs and loss to follow-up (a post-randomisation event that is not in itself an ICE). First, changes to allocated regimens should not necessarily be viewed as an unfavourable outcome; from the patient perspective, the potential harms associated with a change in the regimen should instead be directly quantified. Second, handling poor adherence to randomised treatment using a per-protocol analysis does not necessarily target a clear estimand; instead, it would be desirable to develop ways to estimate the treatment effects more relevant to programmatic settings. Third, re-infection with a new strain of tuberculosis could be handled with different strategies, depending on whether the outcome of interest is the ability to attain culture negativity from infection with any strain of tuberculosis, or specifically the presenting strain of tuberculosis. Fourth, where possible, death could be separated into tuberculosis-related and non-tuberculosis-related and handled using appropriate strategies. Finally, although some losses to follow-up would result in early treatment discontinuation, patients lost to follow-up before the end of the trial should not always be classified as having an unfavourable outcome. Instead, loss to follow-up should be separated from not completing the treatment, which is an ICE and may be considered as an unfavourable outcome. CONCLUSION: The estimand framework clarifies many issues in tuberculosis trials but also challenges trialists to justify and improve their outcome definitions. Future trialists should consider all the above points in defining their outcomes.

Economic evaluation of short treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, Ethiopia and South Africa: the STREAM trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate cost changes for health systems and participants, resulting from switching to short treatment regimens for multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis. METHODS: We compared the costs to health systems and participants of long (20 to 22 months) and short (9 to 11 months) MDR tuberculosis regimens in Ethiopia and South Africa. Cost data were collected from participants in the STREAM phase-III randomized controlled trial and we estimated health-system costs using bottom-up and top-down approaches. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed by calculating the incremental cost per unfavourable outcome avoided. FINDINGS: Health-care costs per participant in South Africa were 8340.7 United States dollars (US$) with the long and US$ 6618.0 with the short regimen; in Ethiopia, they were US$ 6096.6 and US$ 4552.3, respectively. The largest component of the saving was medication costs in South Africa (67%; US$ 1157.0 of total US$ 1722.8) and social support costs in Ethiopia (35%, US$ 545.2 of total US$ 1544.3). In Ethiopia, trial participants on the short regimen reported lower expenditure for supplementary food (mean reduction per participant: US$ 225.5) and increased working hours (i.e. 667 additional hours over 132 weeks). The probability that the short regimen was cost-effective was greater than 95% when the value placed on avoiding an unfavourable outcome was less than US$ 19 000 in Ethiopia and less than US$ 14 500 in South Africa. CONCLUSION: The short MDR tuberculosis treatment regimen was associated with a substantial reduction in health-system costs and a lower financial burden for participants.

Rethinking non-inferiority: a practical trial design for optimising treatment duration.

Background Trials to identify the minimal effective treatment duration are needed in different therapeutic areas, including bacterial infections, tuberculosis and hepatitis C. However, standard non-inferiority designs have several limitations, including arbitrariness of non-inferiority margins, choice of research arms and very large sample sizes. Methods We recast the problem of finding an appropriate non-inferior treatment duration in terms of modelling the entire duration-response curve within a pre-specified range. We propose a multi-arm randomised trial design, allocating patients to different treatment durations. We use fractional polynomials and spline-based methods to flexibly model the duration-response curve. We call this a 'Durations design'. We compare different methods in terms of a scaled version of the area between true and estimated prediction curves. We evaluate sensitivity to key design parameters, including sample size, number and position of arms. Results A total sample size of ~ 500 patients divided into a moderate number of equidistant arms (5-7) is sufficient to estimate the duration-response curve within a 5% error margin in 95% of the simulations. Fractional polynomials provide similar or better results than spline-based methods in most scenarios. Conclusion Our proposed practical randomised trial 'Durations design' shows promising performance in the estimation of the duration-response curve; subject to a pending careful investigation of its inferential properties, it provides a potential alternative to standard non-inferiority designs, avoiding many of their limitations, and yet being fairly robust to different possible duration-response curves. The trial outcome is the whole duration-response curve, which may be used by clinicians and policymakers to make informed decisions, facilitating a move away from a forced binary hypothesis testing paradigm.

Testing many treatments within a single protocol over 10 years at MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL: Multi-arm, multi-stage platform, umbrella and basket protocols.

There is real need to change how we do some of our clinical trials, as currently the testing and development process is too slow, too costly and too failure-prone often we find that a new treatment is no better than the current standard. Much of the focus on the development and testing pathway has been in improving the design of phase I and II trials. In this article, we present examples of new methods for improving the design of phase III trials (and the necessary lead up to them) as they are the most time-consuming and expensive part of the pathway. Key to all these methods is the aim to test many treatments and/or pose many therapeutic questions within one protocol.

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.