[Association between treatment outcome and age in tuberculosis and diabetes patients: a population analysis].

BACKGROUND: The undoubted importance of this work lies in the fact that for the first time in the Republic of Kazakhstan, an analysis is being made of the relationship between age and treatment outcome in patients with a comorbid diagnosis of tuberculosis and diabetes mellitus. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Identification of the correlation between the age of patients with tuberculosis with diabetes mellitus and the outcome of treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cross-sectional retrospective study of 2,125 patients with TB and diabetes mellitus out of a total of 43,807 of all patients diagnosed with TB (2017-2019). The study analyzed the data of patients with comorbidity from all regions of Kazakhstan (data from 14 regions and 3 cities of republican significance) (2017-2019). RESULTS: A high prevalence of tuberculosis morbidity with a concomitant diagnosis of diabetes mellitus in the age group from 45 to 64 years was revealed. This group consisted of 1193 patients out of 2115 (56.4% of the total number of patients with tuberculosis and diabetes mellitus). The average age of all studied patients with DM was 54.7±13.4 years. There is a positive correlation between age and treatment outcome in TB patients. Mortality was higher in the age group over 45 years old - OR95%CI = 0.213 [0.019-2.362], p - 0.0000015 (p < 0.05).

Concordance of three approaches for operationalizing outcome definitions for multidrug-resistant TB.

BACKGROUND: The WHO provides standardized outcome definitions for rifampicin-resistant (RR) and multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB. However, operationalizing these definitions can be challenging in some clinical settings, and incorrect classification may generate bias in reporting and research. Outcomes calculated by algorithms can increase standardization and be adapted to suit the research question. We evaluated concordance between clinician-assigned treatment outcomes and outcomes calculated based on one of two standardized algorithms, one which identified failure at its earliest possible recurrence (i.e., failure-dominant algorithm), and one which calculated the outcome based on culture results at the end of treatment, regardless of early occurrence of failure (i.e., success-dominant algorithm).METHODS: Among 2,525 patients enrolled in the multi-country endTB observational study, we calculated the frequencies of concordance using cross-tabulations of clinician-assigned and algorithm-assigned outcomes. We summarized the common discrepancies.RESULTS: Treatment success calculated by algorithms had high concordance with treatment success assigned by clinicians (95.8 and 97.7% for failure-dominant and success-dominant algorithms, respectively). The frequency and pattern of the most common discrepancies varied by country.CONCLUSION: High concordance was found between clinician-assigned and algorithm-assigned outcomes. Heterogeneity in discrepancies across settings suggests that using algorithms to calculate outcomes may minimize bias.