-
The Lancet. Respiratory Medicine Apr 2020Treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis requires long-term therapy with a combination of multiple second-line drugs. These drugs are associated with numerous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis requires long-term therapy with a combination of multiple second-line drugs. These drugs are associated with numerous adverse events that can cause severe morbidity, such as deafness, and in some instances can lead to death. Our aim was to estimate the absolute and relative frequency of adverse events associated with different tuberculosis drugs to provide useful information for clinicians and tuberculosis programmes in selecting optimal treatment regimens.
METHODS
We did a meta-analysis using individual-level patient data that were obtained from studies that reported adverse events that resulted in permanent discontinuation of anti-tuberculosis medications. We used a database created for our previous meta-analysis of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment and outcomes, for which we did a systematic review of literature published between Jan 1, 2009, and Aug 31, 2015 (updated April 15, 2016), and requested individual patient-level information from authors. We also considered for this analysis studies contributing patient-level data in response to a public call made by WHO in 2018. Meta-analysis for proportions and arm-based network meta-analysis were done to estimate the incidence of adverse events for each tuberculosis drug.
FINDINGS
58 studies were identified, including 50 studies from the updated individual patient data meta-analysis for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment. 35 of these studies, with 9178 patients, were included in our analysis. Using meta-analysis of proportions, drugs with low risks of adverse event occurrence leading to permanent discontinuation included levofloxacin (1·3% [95% CI 0·3-5·0]), moxifloxacin (2·9% [1·6-5·0]), bedaquiline (1·7% [0·7-4·2]), and clofazimine (1·6% [0·5-5·3]). Relatively high incidence of adverse events leading to permanent discontinuation was seen with three second-line injectable drugs (amikacin: 10·2% [6·3-16·0]; kanamycin: 7·5% [4·6-11·9]; capreomycin: 8·2% [6·3-10·7]), aminosalicylic acid (11·6% [7·1-18·3]), and linezolid (14·1% [9·9-19·6]). Risk of bias in selection of studies was judged to be low because there were no important differences between included and excluded studies. Variability between studies was significant for most outcomes analysed.
INTERPRETATION
Fluoroquinolones, clofazimine, and bedaquiline had the lowest incidence of adverse events leading to permanent drug discontinuation, whereas second-line injectable drugs, aminosalicylic acid, and linezolid had the highest incidence. These results suggest that close monitoring of adverse events is important for patients being treated for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Our results also underscore the urgent need for safer and better-tolerated drugs to reduce morbidity from treatment itself for patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.
FUNDING
Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (USA), American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, and Infectious Diseases Society of America.
Topics: Adult; Aminosalicylic Acid; Antitubercular Agents; Canada; Clofazimine; Diarylquinolines; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Fluoroquinolones; Humans; Incidence; Linezolid; Male; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Tuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary
PubMed: 32192585
DOI: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30047-3 -
The Journal of Antimicrobial... Aug 2020Improved genetic understanding of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) resistance to novel and repurposed anti-tubercular agents can aid the development of rapid molecular...
Systematic review of mutations associated with resistance to the new and repurposed Mycobacterium tuberculosis drugs bedaquiline, clofazimine, linezolid, delamanid and pretomanid.
BACKGROUND
Improved genetic understanding of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) resistance to novel and repurposed anti-tubercular agents can aid the development of rapid molecular diagnostics.
METHODS
Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, in March 2018, we performed a systematic review of studies implicating mutations in resistance through sequencing and phenotyping before and/or after spontaneous resistance evolution, as well as allelic exchange experiments. We focused on the novel drugs bedaquiline, delamanid, pretomanid and the repurposed drugs clofazimine and linezolid. A database of 1373 diverse control MTB whole genomes, isolated from patients not exposed to these drugs, was used to further assess genotype-phenotype associations.
RESULTS
Of 2112 papers, 54 met the inclusion criteria. These studies characterized 277 mutations in the genes atpE, mmpR, pepQ, Rv1979c, fgd1, fbiABC and ddn and their association with resistance to one or more of the five drugs. The most frequent mutations for bedaquiline, clofazimine, linezolid, delamanid and pretomanid resistance were atpE A63P, mmpR frameshifts at nucleotides 192-198, rplC C154R, ddn W88* and ddn S11*, respectively. Frameshifts in the mmpR homopolymer region nucleotides 192-198 were identified in 52/1373 (4%) of the control isolates without prior exposure to bedaquiline or clofazimine. Of isolates resistant to one or more of the five drugs, 59/519 (11%) lacked a mutation explaining phenotypic resistance.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review supports the use of molecular methods for linezolid resistance detection. Resistance mechanisms involving non-essential genes show a diversity of mutations that will challenge molecular diagnosis of bedaquiline and nitroimidazole resistance. Combined phenotypic and genotypic surveillance is needed for these drugs in the short term.
Topics: Antitubercular Agents; Clofazimine; Diarylquinolines; Humans; Linezolid; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Mutation; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Nitroimidazoles; Oxazoles; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Tuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant
PubMed: 32361756
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkaa136 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022Every year, an estimated one million children and young adolescents become ill with tuberculosis, and around 226,000 of those children die. Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Every year, an estimated one million children and young adolescents become ill with tuberculosis, and around 226,000 of those children die. Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) is a molecular World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended rapid diagnostic test that simultaneously detects Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex and rifampicin resistance. We previously published a Cochrane Review 'Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra assays for tuberculosis disease and rifampicin resistance in children'. The current review updates evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert Ultra in children presumed to have tuberculosis disease. Parts of this review update informed the 2022 WHO updated guidance on management of tuberculosis in children and adolescents.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert Ultra for detecting: pulmonary tuberculosis, tuberculous meningitis, lymph node tuberculosis, and rifampicin resistance, in children with presumed tuberculosis. Secondary objectives To investigate potential sources of heterogeneity in accuracy estimates. For detection of tuberculosis, we considered age, comorbidity (HIV, severe pneumonia, and severe malnutrition), and specimen type as potential sources. To summarize the frequency of Xpert Ultra trace results.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and three trial registers without language restrictions to 9 March 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Cross-sectional and cohort studies and randomized trials that evaluated Xpert Ultra in HIV-positive and HIV-negative children under 15 years of age. We included ongoing studies that helped us address the review objectives. We included studies evaluating sputum, gastric, stool, or nasopharyngeal specimens (pulmonary tuberculosis), cerebrospinal fluid (tuberculous meningitis), and fine needle aspirate or surgical biopsy tissue (lymph node tuberculosis). For detecting tuberculosis, reference standards were microbiological (culture) or composite reference standard; for stool, we also included Xpert Ultra performed on a routine respiratory specimen. For detecting rifampicin resistance, reference standards were drug susceptibility testing or MTBDRplus.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and, using QUADAS-2, assessed methodological quality judging risk of bias separately for each target condition and reference standard. For each target condition, we used the bivariate model to estimate summary sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We stratified all analyses by type of reference standard. We summarized the frequency of Xpert Ultra trace results; trace represents detection of a very low quantity of Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA. We assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 14 studies (11 new studies since the previous review). For detection of pulmonary tuberculosis, 335 data sets (25,937 participants) were available for analysis. We did not identify any studies that evaluated Xpert Ultra accuracy for tuberculous meningitis or lymph node tuberculosis. Three studies evaluated Xpert Ultra for detection of rifampicin resistance. Ten studies (71%) took place in countries with a high tuberculosis burden based on WHO classification. Overall, risk of bias was low. Detection of pulmonary tuberculosis Sputum, 5 studies Xpert Ultra summary sensitivity verified by culture was 75.3% (95% CI 64.3 to 83.8; 127 participants; high-certainty evidence), and specificity was 97.1% (95% CI 94.7 to 98.5; 1054 participants; high-certainty evidence). Gastric aspirate, 7 studies Xpert Ultra summary sensitivity verified by culture was 70.4% (95% CI 53.9 to 82.9; 120 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and specificity was 94.1% (95% CI 84.8 to 97.8; 870 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Stool, 6 studies Xpert Ultra summary sensitivity verified by culture was 56.1% (95% CI 39.1 to 71.7; 200 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and specificity was 98.0% (95% CI 93.3 to 99.4; 1232 participants; high certainty-evidence). Nasopharyngeal aspirate, 4 studies Xpert Ultra summary sensitivity verified by culture was 43.7% (95% CI 26.7 to 62.2; 46 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and specificity was 97.5% (95% CI 93.6 to 99.0; 489 participants; high-certainty evidence). Xpert Ultra sensitivity was lower against a composite than a culture reference standard for all specimen types other than nasopharyngeal aspirate, while specificity was similar against both reference standards. Interpretation of results In theory, for a population of 1000 children: • where 100 have pulmonary tuberculosis in sputum (by culture): - 101 would be Xpert Ultra-positive, and of these, 26 (26%) would not have pulmonary tuberculosis (false positive); and - 899 would be Xpert Ultra-negative, and of these, 25 (3%) would have tuberculosis (false negative). • where 100 have pulmonary tuberculosis in gastric aspirate (by culture): - 123 would be Xpert Ultra-positive, and of these, 53 (43%) would not have pulmonary tuberculosis (false positive); and - 877 would be Xpert Ultra-negative, and of these, 30 (3%) would have tuberculosis (false negative). • where 100 have pulmonary tuberculosis in stool (by culture): - 74 would be Xpert Ultra-positive, and of these, 18 (24%) would not have pulmonary tuberculosis (false positive); and - 926 would be Xpert Ultra-negative, and of these, 44 (5%) would have tuberculosis (false negative). • where 100 have pulmonary tuberculosis in nasopharyngeal aspirate (by culture): - 66 would be Xpert Ultra-positive, and of these, 22 (33%) would not have pulmonary tuberculosis (false positive); and - 934 would be Xpert Ultra-negative, and of these, 56 (6%) would have tuberculosis (false negative). Detection of rifampicin resistance Xpert Ultra sensitivity was 100% (3 studies, 3 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and specificity range was 97% to 100% (3 studies, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence). Trace results Xpert Ultra trace results, regarded as positive in children by WHO standards, were common. Xpert Ultra specificity remained high in children, despite the frequency of trace results.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found Xpert Ultra sensitivity to vary by specimen type, with sputum having the highest sensitivity, followed by gastric aspirate and stool. Nasopharyngeal aspirate had the lowest sensitivity. Xpert Ultra specificity was high against both microbiological and composite reference standards. However, the evidence base is still limited, and findings may be imprecise and vary by study setting. Although we found Xpert Ultra accurate for detection of rifampicin resistance, results were based on a very small number of studies that included only three children with rifampicin resistance. Therefore, findings should be interpreted with caution. Our findings provide support for the use of Xpert Ultra as an initial rapid molecular diagnostic in children being evaluated for tuberculosis.
Topics: Adolescent; Antibiotics, Antitubercular; Child; Cross-Sectional Studies; HIV Infections; Humans; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Rifampin; Sensitivity and Specificity; Sputum; Tuberculosis, Lymph Node; Tuberculosis, Meningeal; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary
PubMed: 36065889
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013359.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2014Accurate, rapid detection of tuberculosis (TB) and TB drug resistance is critical for improving patient care and decreasing TB transmission. Xpert® MTB/RIF assay is an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Accurate, rapid detection of tuberculosis (TB) and TB drug resistance is critical for improving patient care and decreasing TB transmission. Xpert® MTB/RIF assay is an automated test that can detect both TB and rifampicin resistance, generally within two hours after starting the test, with minimal hands-on technical time. The World Health Organization (WHO) issued initial recommendations on Xpert® MTB/RIF in early 2011. A Cochrane Review on the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF for pulmonary TB and rifampicin resistance was published January 2013. We performed this updated Cochrane Review as part of a WHO process to develop updated guidelines on the use of the test.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF for pulmonary TB (TB detection), where Xpert® MTB/RIF was used as both an initial test replacing microscopy and an add-on test following a negative smear microscopy result.To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF for rifampicin resistance detection, where Xpert® MTB/RIF was used as the initial test replacing culture-based drug susceptibility testing (DST).The populations of interest were adults presumed to have pulmonary, rifampicin-resistant or multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB), with or without HIV infection. The settings of interest were intermediate- and peripheral-level laboratories. The latter may be associated with primary health care facilities.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for publications in any language up to 7 February 2013 in the following databases: Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; MEDLINE; EMBASE; ISI Web of Knowledge; MEDION; LILACS; BIOSIS; and SCOPUS. We also searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and the search portal of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to identify ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials, cross-sectional studies, and cohort studies using respiratory specimens that allowed for extraction of data evaluating Xpert® MTB/RIF against the reference standard. We excluded gastric fluid specimens. The reference standard for TB was culture and for rifampicin resistance was phenotypic culture-based DST.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
For each study, two review authors independently extracted data using a standardized form. When possible, we extracted data for subgroups by smear and HIV status. We assessed the quality of studies using QUADAS-2 and carried out meta-analyses to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity of Xpert® MTB/RIF separately for TB detection and rifampicin resistance detection. For TB detection, we performed the majority of analyses using a bivariate random-effects model and compared the sensitivity of Xpert® MTB/RIF and smear microscopy against culture as reference standard. For rifampicin resistance detection, we undertook univariate meta-analyses for sensitivity and specificity separately to include studies in which no rifampicin resistance was detected.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 27 unique studies (integrating nine new studies) involving 9557 participants. Sixteen studies (59%) were performed in low- or middle-income countries. For all QUADAS-2 domains, most studies were at low risk of bias and low concern regarding applicability.As an initial test replacing smear microscopy, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 89% [95% Credible Interval (CrI) 85% to 92%] and pooled specificity 99% (95% CrI 98% to 99%), (22 studies, 8998 participants: 2953 confirmed TB, 6045 non-TB).As an add-on test following a negative smear microscopy result, Xpert®MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 67% (95% CrI 60% to 74%) and pooled specificity 99% (95% CrI 98% to 99%; 21 studies, 6950 participants).For smear-positive, culture-positive TB, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 98% (95% CrI 97% to 99%; 21 studies, 1936 participants).For people with HIV infection, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 79% (95% CrI 70% to 86%; 7 studies, 1789 participants), and for people without HIV infection, it was 86% (95% CrI 76% to 92%; 7 studies, 1470 participants). Comparison with smear microscopy In comparison with smear microscopy, Xpert® MTB/RIF increased TB detection among culture-confirmed cases by 23% (95% CrI 15% to 32%; 21 studies, 8880 participants).For TB detection, if pooled sensitivity estimates for Xpert® MTB/RIF and smear microscopy are applied to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients where 10% of those with symptoms have TB, Xpert® MTB/RIF will diagnose 88 cases and miss 12 cases, whereas sputum microscopy will diagnose 65 cases and miss 35 cases. Rifampicin resistance For rifampicin resistance detection, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 95% (95% CrI 90% to 97%; 17 studies, 555 rifampicin resistance positives) and pooled specificity was 98% (95% CrI 97% to 99%; 24 studies, 2411 rifampicin resistance negatives). Among 180 specimens with nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM), Xpert® MTB/RIF was positive in only one specimen that grew NTM (14 studies, 2626 participants).For rifampicin resistance detection, if the pooled accuracy estimates for Xpert® MTB/RIF are applied to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 individuals where 15% of those with symptoms are rifampicin resistant, Xpert® MTB/RIF would correctly identify 143 individuals as rifampicin resistant and miss eight cases, and correctly identify 833 individuals as rifampicin susceptible and misclassify 17 individuals as resistant. Where 5% of those with symptoms are rifampicin resistant, Xpert® MTB/RIF would correctly identify 48 individuals as rifampicin resistant and miss three cases and correctly identify 931 individuals as rifampicin susceptible and misclassify 19 individuals as resistant.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In adults thought to have TB, with or without HIV infection, Xpert® MTB/RIF is sensitive and specific. Compared with smear microscopy, Xpert® MTB/RIF substantially increases TB detection among culture-confirmed cases. Xpert® MTB/RIF has higher sensitivity for TB detection in smear-positive than smear-negative patients. Nonetheless, this test may be valuable as an add-on test following smear microscopy in patients previously found to be smear-negative. For rifampicin resistance detection, Xpert® MTB/RIF provides accurate results and can allow rapid initiation of MDR-TB treatment, pending results from conventional culture and DST. The tests are expensive, so current research evaluating the use of Xpert® MTB/RIF in TB programmes in high TB burden settings will help evaluate how this investment may help start treatment promptly and improve outcomes.
Topics: Adult; Antibiotics, Antitubercular; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Humans; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Polymerase Chain Reaction; Rifampin; Sensitivity and Specificity; Sequence Analysis, DNA; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary
PubMed: 24448973
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009593.pub3 -
Chest Nov 2023Nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease (NTM-PD) is widely underdiagnosed, and certain patient groups, such as those with underlying respiratory diseases, are at... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease (NTM-PD) is widely underdiagnosed, and certain patient groups, such as those with underlying respiratory diseases, are at increased risk of developing the disease. Understanding patients at risk is essential to allow for prompt testing and diagnosis and appropriate management to prevent disease progression.
RESEARCH QUESTION
What are the risk factors for NTM-PD that should prompt a physician to consider NTM testing and diagnosis?
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
Electronic searches of PubMed and EMBASE were conducted in July 2021 for the period 2011-2021. Inclusion criteria were studies of patients with NTM-PD with associated risk factors. Data were extracted and assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data analysis was conducted using the R-based "meta" package. Only studies that reported association outcomes for cases with NTM-PD compared with control participants (healthy populations or participants without NTM-PD) were considered for the meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Of the 9,530 searched publications, 99 met the criteria for the study. Of these, 24 formally reported an association between possible risk factors and the presence of NTM-PD against a control population and were included in the meta-analysis. Comorbid respiratory disease was associated with a significant increase in the OR for NTM-PD (bronchiectasis [OR, 21.43; 95% CI, 5.90-77.82], history of TB [OR, 12.69; 95% CI, 2.39-67.26], interstitial lung disease [OR, 6.39; 95% CI, 2.65-15.37], COPD [OR, 6.63; 95% CI, 4.57-9.63], and asthma [OR, 4.15; 95% CI, 2.81-6.14]). Other factors noted to be associated with an increased risk of NTM-PD were the use of inhaled corticosteroids (OR 4.46; 95% CI, 2.13-9.35), solid tumors (OR, 4.66; 95% CI, 1.04-20.94) and the presence of pneumonia (OR, 5.54; 95% CI, 2.72-11.26).
INTERPRETATION
The greatest risk for NTM-PD is conferred by comorbid respiratory diseases such as bronchiectasis. These findings could help with identification of patient populations at risk for NTM-PD to drive prompt testing and appropriate initiation of therapy.
Topics: Humans; Mycobacterium Infections, Nontuberculous; Risk Factors; Bronchiectasis; Asthma; Respiratory Tract Diseases; Nontuberculous Mycobacteria; Lung Diseases; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37429481
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2023.06.014 -
Lancet (London, England) Mar 2020Tens of millions of children are exposed to Mycobacterium tuberculosis globally every year; however, there are no contemporary estimates of the risk of developing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Tens of millions of children are exposed to Mycobacterium tuberculosis globally every year; however, there are no contemporary estimates of the risk of developing tuberculosis in exposed children. The effectiveness of contact investigations and preventive therapy remains poorly understood.
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we investigated the development of tuberculosis in children closely exposed to a tuberculosis case and followed for incident disease. We restricted our search to cohort studies published between Jan 1, 1998, and April 6, 2018, in MEDLINE, Web of Science, BIOSIS, and Embase electronic databases. Individual-participant data and a pre-specified list of variables were requested from authors of all eligible studies. These included characteristics of the exposed child, the index case, and environmental characteristics. To be eligible for inclusion in the final analysis, a dataset needed to include: (1) individuals below 19 years of age; (2) follow-up for tuberculosis for a minimum of 6 months; (3) individuals with household or close exposure to an individual with tuberculosis; (4) information on the age and sex of the child; and (5) start and end follow-up dates. Studies assessing incident tuberculosis but without dates or time of follow-up were excluded. Our analysis had two primary aims: (1) estimating the risk of developing tuberculosis by time-period of follow-up, demographics (age, region), and clinical attributes (HIV, tuberculosis infection status, previous tuberculosis); and (2) estimating the effectiveness of preventive therapy and BCG vaccination on the risk of developing tuberculosis. We estimated the odds of prevalent tuberculosis with mixed-effects logistic models and estimated adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for incident tuberculosis with mixed-effects Poisson regression models. The effectiveness of preventive therapy against incident tuberculosis was estimated through propensity score matching. The study protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018087022).
FINDINGS
In total, study groups from 46 cohort studies in 34 countries-29 (63%) prospective studies and 17 (37%) retrospective-agreed to share their data and were included in the final analysis. 137 647 tuberculosis-exposed children were evaluated at baseline and 130 512 children were followed for 429 538 person-years, during which 1299 prevalent and 999 incident tuberculosis cases were diagnosed. Children not receiving preventive therapy with a positive result for tuberculosis infection had significantly higher 2-year cumulative tuberculosis incidence than children with a negative result for tuberculosis infection, and this incidence was greatest among children below 5 years of age (19·0% [95% CI 8·4-37·4]). The effectiveness of preventive therapy was 63% (adjusted HR 0·37 [95% CI 0·30-0·47]) among all exposed children, and 91% (adjusted HR 0·09 [0·05-0·15]) among those with a positive result for tuberculosis infection. Among all children <5 years of age who developed tuberculosis, 83% were diagnosed within 90 days of the baseline visit.
INTERPRETATION
The risk of developing tuberculosis among exposed infants and young children is very high. Most cases occurred within weeks of contact investigation initiation and might not be preventable through prophylaxis. This suggests that alternative strategies for prevention are needed, such as earlier initiation of preventive therapy through rapid diagnosis of adult cases or community-wide screening approaches.
FUNDING
National Institutes of Health.
Topics: Adolescent; Age Factors; Child; Child, Preschool; Contact Tracing; Disease Transmission, Infectious; Family Characteristics; Female; Global Health; Humans; Incidence; Male; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Risk Assessment; Sex Factors; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary
PubMed: 32199484
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30166-5 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Apr 2007The World Health Organization field leprosy classification is based on the number of skin lesions: single-lesion leprosy (1 lesion), paucibacillary leprosy (2-5 skin... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The World Health Organization field leprosy classification is based on the number of skin lesions: single-lesion leprosy (1 lesion), paucibacillary leprosy (2-5 skin lesions), and multibacillary leprosy (more than 5 skin lesions). Worldwide, about 720,000 new cases of leprosy are reported each year, and about 2 million people have leprosy-related disabilities.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to prevent leprosy? What are the effects of treatments for leprosy? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to March 2006 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 20 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: Bacillus Calmette Guerin (BCG) plus killed Mycobacterium leprae vaccine; BCG vaccine; ICRC vaccine; multidrug treatment; multiple-dose treatment; mycobacterium w vaccine; single-dose treatment.
Topics: BCG Vaccine; Humans; Leprosy; Leprosy, Lepromatous; Leprosy, Multibacillary; Leprosy, Paucibacillary; Leprosy, Tuberculoid; Mycobacterium leprae; World Health Organization
PubMed: 19454067
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2022The World Health Organization (WHO) End TB Strategy stresses universal access to drug susceptibility testing (DST). DST determines whether Mycobacterium tuberculosis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The World Health Organization (WHO) End TB Strategy stresses universal access to drug susceptibility testing (DST). DST determines whether Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteria are susceptible or resistant to drugs. Xpert MTB/XDR is a rapid nucleic acid amplification test for detection of tuberculosis and drug resistance in one test suitable for use in peripheral and intermediate level laboratories. In specimens where tuberculosis is detected by Xpert MTB/XDR, Xpert MTB/XDR can also detect resistance to isoniazid, fluoroquinolones, ethionamide, and amikacin.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/XDR for pulmonary tuberculosis in people with presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis (having signs and symptoms suggestive of tuberculosis, including cough, fever, weight loss, night sweats). To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/XDR for resistance to isoniazid, fluoroquinolones, ethionamide, and amikacin in people with tuberculosis detected by Xpert MTB/XDR, irrespective of rifampicin resistance (whether or not rifampicin resistance status was known) and with known rifampicin resistance.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched multiple databases to 23 September 2021. We limited searches to 2015 onwards as Xpert MTB/XDR was launched in 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Diagnostic accuracy studies using sputum in adults with presumptive or confirmed pulmonary tuberculosis. Reference standards were culture (pulmonary tuberculosis detection); phenotypic DST (pDST), genotypic DST (gDST),composite (pDST and gDST) (drug resistance detection).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently reviewed reports for eligibility and extracted data using a standardized form. For multicentre studies, we anticipated variability in the type and frequency of mutations associated with resistance to a given drug at the different centres and considered each centre as an independent study cohort for quality assessment and analysis. We assessed methodological quality with QUADAS-2, judging risk of bias separately for each target condition and reference standard. For pulmonary tuberculosis detection, owing to heterogeneity in participant characteristics and observed specificity estimates, we reported a range of sensitivity and specificity estimates and did not perform a meta-analysis. For drug resistance detection, we performed meta-analyses by reference standard using bivariate random-effects models. Using GRADE, we assessed certainty of evidence of Xpert MTB/XDR accuracy for detection of resistance to isoniazid and fluoroquinolones in people irrespective of rifampicin resistance and to ethionamide and amikacin in people with known rifampicin resistance, reflecting real-world situations. We used pDST, except for ethionamide resistance where we considered gDST a better reference standard.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two multicentre studies from high multidrug-resistant/rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis burden countries, reporting on six independent study cohorts, involving 1228 participants for pulmonary tuberculosis detection and 1141 participants for drug resistance detection. The proportion of participants with rifampicin resistance in the two studies was 47.9% and 80.9%. For tuberculosis detection, we judged high risk of bias for patient selection owing to selective recruitment. For ethionamide resistance detection, we judged high risk of bias for the reference standard, both pDST and gDST, though we considered gDST a better reference standard. Pulmonary tuberculosis detection - Xpert MTB/XDR sensitivity range, 98.3% (96.1 to 99.5) to 98.9% (96.2 to 99.9) and specificity range, 22.5% (14.3 to 32.6) to 100.0% (86.3 to 100.0); median prevalence of pulmonary tuberculosis 91.3%, (interquartile range, 89.3% to 91.8%), (2 studies; 1 study reported on 2 cohorts, 1228 participants; very low-certainty evidence, sensitivity and specificity). Drug resistance detection People irrespective of rifampicin resistance - Isoniazid resistance: Xpert MTB/XDR summary sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval (CI)) were 94.2% (87.5 to 97.4) and 98.5% (92.6 to 99.7) against pDST, (6 cohorts, 1083 participants, moderate-certainty evidence, sensitivity and specificity). - Fluoroquinolone resistance: Xpert MTB/XDR summary sensitivity and specificity were 93.2% (88.1 to 96.2) and 98.0% (90.8 to 99.6) against pDST, (6 cohorts, 1021 participants; high-certainty evidence, sensitivity; moderate-certainty evidence, specificity). People with known rifampicin resistance - Ethionamide resistance: Xpert MTB/XDR summary sensitivity and specificity were 98.0% (74.2 to 99.9) and 99.7% (83.5 to 100.0) against gDST, (4 cohorts, 434 participants; very low-certainty evidence, sensitivity and specificity). - Amikacin resistance: Xpert MTB/XDR summary sensitivity and specificity were 86.1% (75.0 to 92.7) and 98.9% (93.0 to 99.8) against pDST, (4 cohorts, 490 participants; low-certainty evidence, sensitivity; high-certainty evidence, specificity). Of 1000 people with pulmonary tuberculosis, detected as tuberculosis by Xpert MTB/XDR: - where 50 have isoniazid resistance, 61 would have an Xpert MTB/XDR result indicating isoniazid resistance: of these, 14/61 (23%) would not have isoniazid resistance (FP); 939 (of 1000 people) would have a result indicating the absence of isoniazid resistance: of these, 3/939 (0%) would have isoniazid resistance (FN). - where 50 have fluoroquinolone resistance, 66 would have an Xpert MTB/XDR result indicating fluoroquinolone resistance: of these, 19/66 (29%) would not have fluoroquinolone resistance (FP); 934 would have a result indicating the absence of fluoroquinolone resistance: of these, 3/934 (0%) would have fluoroquinolone resistance (FN). - where 300 have ethionamide resistance, 296 would have an Xpert MTB/XDR result indicating ethionamide resistance: of these, 2/296 (1%) would not have ethionamide resistance (FP); 704 would have a result indicating the absence of ethionamide resistance: of these, 6/704 (1%) would have ethionamide resistance (FN). - where 135 have amikacin resistance, 126 would have an Xpert MTB/XDR result indicating amikacin resistance: of these, 10/126 (8%) would not have amikacin resistance (FP); 874 would have a result indicating the absence of amikacin resistance: of these, 19/874 (2%) would have amikacin resistance (FN).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Review findings suggest that, in people determined by Xpert MTB/XDR to be tuberculosis-positive, Xpert MTB/XDR provides accurate results for detection of isoniazid and fluoroquinolone resistance and can assist with selection of an optimised treatment regimen. Given that Xpert MTB/XDR targets a limited number of resistance variants in specific genes, the test may perform differently in different settings. Findings in this review should be interpreted with caution. Sensitivity for detection of ethionamide resistance was based only on Xpert MTB/XDR detection of mutations in the inhA promoter region, a known limitation. High risk of bias limits our confidence in Xpert MTB/XDR accuracy for pulmonary tuberculosis. Xpert MTB/XDR's impact will depend on its ability to detect tuberculosis (required for DST), prevalence of resistance to a given drug, health care infrastructure, and access to other tests.
Topics: Adult; Amikacin; Antibiotics, Antitubercular; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Ethionamide; Fluoroquinolones; Humans; Isoniazid; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Rifampin; Sensitivity and Specificity; Tuberculosis, Lymph Node; Tuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary
PubMed: 35583175
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014841.pub2 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Nov 2009In people infected with both HIV and Mycobacterium tuberculosis, the annual risk of developing active tuberculosis is 5% to 10% - more than 10 times the rate for... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
In people infected with both HIV and Mycobacterium tuberculosis, the annual risk of developing active tuberculosis is 5% to 10% - more than 10 times the rate for HIV-negative people with M tuberculosis infection. Untreated, mortality from tuberculosis in people with HIV is likely to be high, and over 5% of people relapse after successful treatment.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of first-line treatments for tuberculosis in HIV-positive people? What are the effects of second-line treatments for tuberculosis in HIV-positive people? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to July 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 23 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: adjuvant immunotherapy (with corticosteroids, or Mycobacterium vaccae); antimycobacterial treatment combinations; conventional antituberculous treatment (short course, long course, including rifabutin [3 or 5 months], quinolones, or thiacetazone); directly observed therapy (short course); highly active antiretroviral treatment (early initiation or delayed initiation); rifampicin (3 months or less); secondary prophylaxis with antituberculous treatment; and unsupervised treatment.
Topics: AIDS-Related Opportunistic Infections; HIV Infections; Humans; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Tuberculosis; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary
PubMed: 21726477
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2021Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) and Xpert MTB/RIF are World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended rapid nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) widely used for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) and Xpert MTB/RIF are World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended rapid nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) widely used for simultaneous detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex and rifampicin resistance in sputum. To extend our previous review on extrapulmonary tuberculosis (Kohli 2018), we performed this update to inform updated WHO policy (WHO Consolidated Guidelines (Module 3) 2020).
OBJECTIVES
To estimate diagnostic accuracy of Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF for extrapulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults with presumptive extrapulmonary tuberculosis.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, Web of Science, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Registry, and ProQuest, 2 August 2019 and 28 January 2020 (Xpert Ultra studies), without language restriction.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Cross-sectional and cohort studies using non-respiratory specimens. Forms of extrapulmonary tuberculosis: tuberculous meningitis and pleural, lymph node, bone or joint, genitourinary, peritoneal, pericardial, disseminated tuberculosis. Reference standards were culture and a study-defined composite reference standard (tuberculosis detection); phenotypic drug susceptibility testing and line probe assays (rifampicin resistance detection).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias and applicability using QUADAS-2. For tuberculosis detection, we performed separate analyses by specimen type and reference standard using the bivariate model to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). We applied a latent class meta-analysis model to three forms of extrapulmonary tuberculosis. We assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
69 studies: 67 evaluated Xpert MTB/RIF and 11 evaluated Xpert Ultra, of which nine evaluated both tests. Most studies were conducted in China, India, South Africa, and Uganda. Overall, risk of bias was low for patient selection, index test, and flow and timing domains, and low (49%) or unclear (43%) for the reference standard domain. Applicability for the patient selection domain was unclear for most studies because we were unsure of the clinical settings. Cerebrospinal fluid Xpert Ultra (6 studies) Xpert Ultra pooled sensitivity and specificity (95% CrI) against culture were 89.4% (79.1 to 95.6) (89 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 91.2% (83.2 to 95.7) (386 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have tuberculous meningitis, 168 would be Xpert Ultra-positive: of these, 79 (47%) would not have tuberculosis (false-positives) and 832 would be Xpert Ultra-negative: of these, 11 (1%) would have tuberculosis (false-negatives). Xpert MTB/RIF (30 studies) Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity against culture were 71.1% (62.8 to 79.1) (571 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and 96.9% (95.4 to 98.0) (2824 participants; high-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have tuberculous meningitis, 99 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-positive: of these, 28 (28%) would not have tuberculosis; and 901 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-negative: of these, 29 (3%) would have tuberculosis. Pleural fluid Xpert Ultra (4 studies) Xpert Ultra pooled sensitivity and specificity against culture were 75.0% (58.0 to 86.4) (158 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and 87.0% (63.1 to 97.9) (240 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have pleural tuberculosis, 192 would be Xpert Ultra-positive: of these, 117 (61%) would not have tuberculosis; and 808 would be Xpert Ultra-negative: of these, 25 (3%) would have tuberculosis. Xpert MTB/RIF (25 studies) Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity against culture were 49.5% (39.8 to 59.9) (644 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 98.9% (97.6 to 99.7) (2421 participants; high-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have pleural tuberculosis, 60 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-positive: of these, 10 (17%) would not have tuberculosis; and 940 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-negative: of these, 50 (5%) would have tuberculosis. Lymph node aspirate Xpert Ultra (1 study) Xpert Ultra sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval) against composite reference standard were 70% (51 to 85) (30 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and 100% (92 to 100) (43 participants; low-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have lymph node tuberculosis, 70 would be Xpert Ultra-positive and 0 (0%) would not have tuberculosis; 930 would be Xpert Ultra-negative and 30 (3%) would have tuberculosis. Xpert MTB/RIF (4 studies) Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity against composite reference standard were 81.6% (61.9 to 93.3) (377 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 96.4% (91.3 to 98.6) (302 participants; low-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have lymph node tuberculosis, 118 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-positive and 37 (31%) would not have tuberculosis; 882 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-negative and 19 (2%) would have tuberculosis. In lymph node aspirate, Xpert MTB/RIF pooled specificity against culture was 86.2% (78.0 to 92.3), lower than that against a composite reference standard. Using the latent class model, Xpert MTB/RIF pooled specificity was 99.5% (99.1 to 99.7), similar to that observed with a composite reference standard. Rifampicin resistance Xpert Ultra (4 studies) Xpert Ultra pooled sensitivity and specificity were 100.0% (95.1 to 100.0), (24 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 100.0% (99.0 to 100.0) (105 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have rifampicin resistance, 100 would be Xpert Ultra-positive (resistant): of these, zero (0%) would not have rifampicin resistance; and 900 would be Xpert Ultra-negative (susceptible): of these, zero (0%) would have rifampicin resistance. Xpert MTB/RIF (19 studies) Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity were 96.5% (91.9 to 98.8) (148 participants; high-certainty evidence) and 99.1% (98.0 to 99.7) (822 participants; high-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have rifampicin resistance, 105 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-positive (resistant): of these, 8 (8%) would not have rifampicin resistance; and 895 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-negative (susceptible): of these, 3 (0.3%) would have rifampicin resistance.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF may be helpful in diagnosing extrapulmonary tuberculosis. Sensitivity varies across different extrapulmonary specimens: while for most specimens specificity is high, the tests rarely yield a positive result for people without tuberculosis. For tuberculous meningitis, Xpert Ultra had higher sensitivity and lower specificity than Xpert MTB/RIF against culture. Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF had similar sensitivity and specificity for rifampicin resistance. Future research should acknowledge the concern associated with culture as a reference standard in paucibacillary specimens and consider ways to address this limitation.
Topics: Adult; Antibiotics, Antitubercular; Bias; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; False Negative Reactions; False Positive Reactions; Humans; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques; Reagent Kits, Diagnostic; Rifampin; Sensitivity and Specificity; Tuberculosis; Tuberculosis, Lymph Node; Tuberculosis, Meningeal; Tuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant; Tuberculosis, Pleural
PubMed: 33448348
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012768.pub3