Search

BACKGROUND: For decades, poor treatment options and low-quality evidence plagued care for patients with rifampin-resistant tuberculosis. The advent of new drugs to treat tuberculosis and enhanced funding now permit randomized, controlled trials of shortened-duration, all-oral treatments for rifampin-resistant tuberculosis. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, multinational, open-label, randomized, controlled noninferiority trial to compare standard therapy for treatment of fluoroquinolone-susceptible, rifampin-resistant tuberculosis with five 9-month oral regimens that included various combinations of bedaquiline (B), delamanid (D), linezolid (L), levofloxacin (Lfx) or moxifloxacin (M), clofazimine (C), and pyrazinamide (Z). Participants were randomly assigned (with the use of Bayesian response-adaptive randomization) to receive one of five combinations or standard therapy. The primary end point was a favorable outcome at week 73, defined by two negative sputum culture results or favorable bacteriologic, clinical, and radiologic evolution. The noninferiority margin was -12 percentage points. RESULTS: Among the 754 participants who underwent randomization, 699 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis, and 562 in the per-protocol analysis. In the modified intention-to-treat analysis, 80.7% of the patients in the standard-therapy group had favorable outcomes. The risk difference between standard therapy and each of the four new regimens that were found to be noninferior in the modified intention-to-treat population was as follows: BCLLfxZ, 9.8 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 18.7); BLMZ, 8.3 percentage points (95% CI, -0.8 to 17.4); BDLLfxZ, 4.6 percentage points (95% CI, -4.9 to 14.1); and DCMZ, 2.5 percentage points (95% CI, -7.5 to 12.5). Differences were similar in the per-protocol population, with the exception of DCMZ, which was not noninferior in that population. The proportion of participants with grade 3 or higher adverse events was similar across the regimens. Grade 3 or higher hepatotoxic events occurred in 11.7% of participants overall and in 7.1% of those receiving standard therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent results across all the analyses support the noninferior efficacy of three all-oral shortened regimens for the treatment of rifampin-resistant tuberculosis. (Funded by Unitaid and others; endTB ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02754765.).

Rationale: Optimizing pyrazinamide dosing is critical to improve treatment efficacy while minimizing toxicity during tuberculosis treatment. Study 31/AIDS Clinical Trials Group A5349 represents the largest phase 3 randomized controlled therapeutic trial to date for such an investigation. Objectives: We sought to report pyrazinamide pharmacokinetic parameters, risk factors for lower pyrazinamide exposure, and relationships between pyrazinamide exposure and efficacy and safety outcomes. We aimed to determine pyrazinamide dosing strategies that optimize risks and benefits. Methods: We analyzed pyrazinamide steady-state pharmacokinetic data using population nonlinear mixed-effects models. We evaluated the contribution of pyrazinamide exposure to long-term efficacy using parametric time-to-event models and safety outcomes using logistic regression. We evaluated optimal dosing with therapeutic windows targeting ≥95% durable cure and safety within the observed proportion of the primary safety outcome. Measurements and Main Results: Among 2,255 participants with 6,978 plasma samples, pyrazinamide displayed sevenfold exposure variability (151-1,053 mg·h/L). Body weight was not a clinically relevant predictor of drug clearance and thus did not justify the need for weight-banded dosing. Both clinical and safety outcomes were associated with pyrazinamide exposure, resulting in therapeutic windows of 231-355 mg · h/L for the control and 226-349 mg·h/L for the rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen. Flat dosing of pyrazinamide at 1,000 mg would have permitted an additional 13.1% (n = 96) of participants allocated to the control and 9.2% (n = 70) to the rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen dosed within the therapeutic window, compared with the current weight-banded dosing. Conclusions: Flat dosing of pyrazinamide at 1,000 mg/d would be readily implementable and could optimize treatment outcomes in drug-susceptible tuberculosis. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02410772).

BackgroundShort-course tuberculosis (TB) prevention regimens, including 12 weeks of isoniazid and rifapentine (3HP), are increasingly used in high-TB-burden countries. Despite established safety and tolerability in efficacy trials, 3HP-related adverse events (AEs) could differ in routine settings. Real-world data on AE type, frequency, and timing are crucial for health systems considering 3HP programmatic scale-up.MethodsWe reviewed AEs among people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) participating in a pragmatic implementation trial of facilitated 3HP taken by directly observed therapy (DOT) or self-administered therapy (SAT) in Kampala, Uganda, and classified them using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. We assessed AE timing and summarized related clinical actions including laboratory tests, diagnoses made, medications prescribed, and treatment interruptions.ResultsAmong 1655 people with HIV treated between July 2020 and September 2022, 270 (16.3%) reported 451 events; main issues included general (7%), nervous system (6%), musculoskeletal (5%), gastrointestinal (5%), and dermatologic (3%) disorders. Most (61%) occurred within 6 weeks of initiating 3HP. Among those with events, 211 (78%) required further clinician evaluation, 202 (75%) required laboratory testing, 102 (38%) had medications prescribed, 40 (15%) had treatment paused, and 14 (5%) discontinued 3HP. Women, those multidimensionally impoverished, and DOT recipients were more likely to report an AE. SAT users and later enrollees were more likely to have 3HP interrupted or stopped due to an AE.ConclusionsIn a routine setting, 3HP was safe, with 16% of people with HIV reporting AEs and only 3% requiring temporary or permanent treatment interruption. These findings support 3HP expansion in routine HIV/AIDS care settings for TB prevention. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT03934931.

BackgroundSputum-based testing is a barrier to increasing access to molecular diagnostics for tuberculosis (TB). Many people with TB are unable to produce sputum, and sputum processing increases assay complexity and cost. Tongue swabs are emerging as an alternative to sputum, but performance limits are uncertain.MethodsFrom June 2022 to July 2023, we enrolled 397 consecutive adults with cough >2 weeks at 2 health centers in Kampala, Uganda. We collected demographic and clinical information, sputum for TB testing (Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra and 2 liquid cultures), and tongue swabs for same-day quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) testing. We evaluated tongue swab qPCR diagnostic accuracy versus sputum TB test results, quantified TB targets per swab, assessed the impact of serial swabbing, and compared 2 swab types (Copan FLOQSWAB and Steripack spun polyester).ResultsAmong 397 participants, 43.1% were female, median age was 33 years, 23.5% were diagnosed with human immunodeficiency virus, and 32.0% had confirmed TB. Sputum Xpert Ultra and tongue swab qPCR results were concordant for 98.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 96.2-99.1) of participants. Tongue swab qPCR sensitivity was 92.6% (95% CI: 86.5 to 96.0) and specificity was 99.1% (95% CI: 96.9 to 99.8) versus microbiological reference standard. A single tongue swab recovered a 7-log range of TB copies, with a decreasing recovery trend among 4 serial swabs. Swab types performed equivalently.ConclusionsTongue swabs are a promising alternative to sputum for molecular diagnosis of TB, with sensitivity approaching sputum-based molecular tests. Our results provide valuable insights for developing successful tongue swab-based TB diagnostics.

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: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00864383. Registered on March 2009.

BackgroundNon-sputum-based triage tests for tuberculosis are a priority for ending tuberculosis. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the late-prototype Xpert MTB Host Response (Xpert HR) blood-based assay.MethodsWe conducted a prospective diagnostic accuracy study among outpatients with presumed tuberculosis in outpatient clinics in Viet Nam, India, the Philippines, Uganda, and South Africa. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older and reported cough lasting at least 2 weeks. We excluded those receiving tuberculosis treatment in the preceding 12 months and those who were unwilling to consent. Xpert HR was performed on capillary or venous blood. Reference standard testing included sputum Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra and mycobacterial culture. We performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to identify the optimal cutoff value for the Xpert HR to achieve the target sensitivity of 90% or more while maximising specificity, then calculated diagnostic accuracy using this cutoff value. This study was prospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04923958.FindingsBetween July 13, 2021, and Aug 15, 2022, 2046 adults with at least 2 weeks of cough were identified, of whom 1499 adults (686 [45·8%] females and 813 [54·2%] males) had valid Xpert HR and reference standard results. 329 (21·9%) had microbiologically confirmed tuberculosis. Xpert HR had an area under the ROC curve of 0·89 (95% CI 0·86-0·91). The optimal cutoff value was less than or equal to -1·25, giving a sensitivity of 90·3% (95% CI 86·5-93·3; 297 of 329) and a specificity of 62·6% (95% CI 59·7-65·3; 732 of 1170). Sensitivity was similar across countries, by sex, and by subgroups, although specificity was lower in people living with HIV (45·1%, 95% CI 37·8-52·6) than in those not living with HIV (65·9%, 62·8-68·8; difference of 20·8%, 95% CI 13·0-28·6; p

IntroductionIn high-burden settings, low-complexity screening tests for tuberculosis (TB) could expand the reach of community-based case-finding efforts. The potential costs and cost-effectiveness of approaches incorporating these tests are poorly understood.MethodsWe developed a microsimulation model assessing 3 approaches to community-based case-finding in hypothetical populations (India-, South Africa-, The Philippines-, Uganda-, and Vietnam-like settings) with TB prevalence 4 times that of national estimates: (1) screening with a point-of-care C-reactive protein (CRP) test, (2) screening with a more sensitive "Hypothetical Screening test" (95% sensitive for Xpert Ultra-positive TB, 70% specificity; equipment/labor costs similar to Xpert Ultra, but using a $2 cartridge) followed by sputum Xpert Ultra if positive, or (3) testing all individuals with sputum Xpert Ultra. Costs are expressed in 2023 US dollars and include treatment costs.ResultsUniversal Xpert Ultra was estimated to cost a mean $4.0 million (95% uncertainty range: $3.5 to $4.6 million) and avert 3200 (2600 to 3900) TB-related disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) per 100 000 people screened ($670 [The Philippines] to $2000 [Vietnam] per DALY averted). CRP was projected to cost $550 (The Philippines) to $1500 (Vietnam) per DALY averted but with 44% fewer DALYs averted. The Hypothetical Screening test showed minimal benefit compared to universal Xpert Ultra, but if specificity were improved to 95% and per-test cost to $4.5 (all-inclusive), this strategy could cost $390 (The Philippines) to $940 (Vietnam) per DALY averted.ConclusionsScreening tests can meaningfully improve the cost-effectiveness of community-based case-finding for TB but only if they are sensitive, specific, and inexpensive.

Three months of isoniazid-rifapentine (3HP) is being scaled up for tuberculosis (TB) preventive treatment (TPT) among people living with HIV (PLHIV) in high-burden settings. More evidence is needed to identify factors influencing successful 3HP delivery. We conducted a qualitative assessment of 3HP delivery nested within the 3HP Options Trial, which compared three optimized strategies for delivering 3HP: facilitated directly observed therapy (DOT), facilitated self-administered therapy (SAT), and patient choice between facilitated DOT and facilitated SAT at the Mulago HIV/AIDS clinic in Kampala, Uganda. We conducted 72 in-depth interviews among PLHIV purposively selected to investigate factors influencing 3HP acceptance and completion. We conducted ten key informant interviews with healthcare providers (HCPs) involved in 3HP delivery to identify facilitators and barriers at the clinic level. We used post-trial 3HP delivery data to assess sustainability. We used thematic analysis (inductive and deductive) to align the emergent themes with the RE-AIM framework dimensions to report implementation outcomes. Understanding the need for TPT, once-weekly dosing, shorter duration, and perceived 3HP safety enhanced acceptance overall. Treatment monitoring by HCPs and reduced risk of HIV status disclosure enabled DOT acceptance. Dosing autonomy enabled SAT acceptance. Switching between DOT and SAT as needed enabled acceptance of patient choice. Dosing reminders, reimbursement for clinical visits, and social support enabled 3HP completion; pill burden, side effects, and COVID-19-related treatment restrictions hindered completion. All HCPs were trained and participated in 3HP delivery with high fidelity. Training, care integration, prior TPT experience with daily isoniazid, and few 3HP-related serious adverse events enabled adoption, whereas initial concerns about 3HP safety among HCPs, and COVID-19 treatment disruptions delayed 3HP adoption. Refresher training and collaboration among HCPs enabled implementation whereas limited diagnostic facilities for adverse events at the clinic hindered implementation. SAT was modified post-trial; DOT was discontinued due to inadequate ongoing financial support beyond the study period. Facilitated delivery strategies made 3HP treatment convenient for PLHIV and were feasible and implemented with high fidelity by HCPs. However, the costs of 3HP facilitation may limit wider scale-up. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03934931); Registered 2nd May 2019; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03934931?id = NCT03934931&rank = 1.

The Phase 3 randomized controlled trial, TBTC Study 31/ACTG A5349 (NCT02410772) demonstrated that a 4-month rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen for drug-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis was safe and effective. The primary efficacy outcome was 12-month tuberculosis disease free survival, while the primary safety outcome was the proportion of grade 3 or higher adverse events during the treatment period. We conducted an analysis of demographic, clinical, microbiologic, radiographic, and pharmacokinetic data and identified risk factors for unfavorable outcomes and adverse events. Among participants receiving the rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen, low rifapentine exposure is the strongest driver of tuberculosis-related unfavorable outcomes (HR 0.65 for every 100 µg∙h/mL increase, 95%CI 0.54-0.77). The only other risk factors identified are markers of higher baseline disease severity, namely Xpert MTB/RIF cycle threshold and extent of disease on baseline chest radiography (Xpert: HR 1.43 for every 3-cycle-threshold decrease, 95%CI 1.07-1.91; extensive disease: HR 2.02, 95%CI 1.07-3.82). From these risk factors, we developed a simple risk stratification to classify disease phenotypes as easier-, moderately-harder, or harder-to-treat TB. Notably, high rifapentine exposures are not associated with any predefined adverse safety outcomes. Our results suggest that the easier-to-treat subgroup may be eligible for further treatment shortening while the harder-to-treat subgroup may need higher doses or longer treatment.

BackgroundExpanding 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 findingsIn 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.ConclusionsShort-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 registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03934931.

Introduction Rifampicin and isoniazid are key drugs in treatment regimens for drug-susceptible tuberculosis. Rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (tuberculosis which is resistant to both isoniazid and rifampicin) are managed similarly, [...], Most phase III trials in drug-resistant tuberculosis have either been underpowered to quantify differences in microbiological endpoints or have taken up to a decade to complete. Composite primary endpoints, dominated by differences in treatment discontinuation and regimen changes, may mask important differences in treatment failure and relapse. Although new regimens for drug-resistant tuberculosis appear very effective, resistance to new drugs is emerging rapidly. There is a need for shorter, safer and more tolerable regimens, including those active against bedaquiline-resistant tuberculosis. Transitioning from multiple regimen A versus regimen B trials to a single large phase III platform trial would accelerate the acquisition of robust estimates of relative efficacy and safety. Further efficiencies could be achieved by adopting modern adaptive platform designs. Collaboration among trialists, affected community representatives, funders and regulators is essential for developing such a phase III platform trial for drug-resistant tuberculosis treatment regimens. La majorite des essais de phase III relatifs a la tuberculose pharmacoreslstante soit n&apos;etaient pas assez puissants pour quantifier les fluctuations au niveau des criteres microbiologiques, soit etaient trop longs, se poursuivant parfois pendant dix ans. Les criteres primaires composites, domines par des differences dans l&apos;interruption du traitement et les changements de schema, pourraient dissimuler d&apos;importantes variations en termes d&apos;echec therapeutique et de rechute. Bien que les nouveaux traitements contre la tuberculose pharmacoresistante semblent tres efficaces, la resistance aux nouveaux medicaments evolue rapidement. Il est donc necessaire d&apos;opter pour des traitements plus courts, plus surs et mieux toleres, y compris ceux actifs contre la tuberculose resistant a la bedaquiline. Delaisser la multitude d&apos;essais opposant un schema de traitement A a un schema de traitement B pour se diriger vers un unique essai plateforme de phase III de grande envergure permettrait d&apos;obtenir plus vite des estimations solides concernant l&apos;innocuite et l&apos;efficacite relative. En outre, adopter des modeles de plateforme modernes et adaptatifs contribuerait a de meilleures performances. Enfin, la collaboration entre investigateurs, representants des communautes concernees, bailleurs de fonds et organismes de reglementation est essentielle a l&apos;elaboration de ce type d&apos;essai plateforme de phase III sur les traitements contre la tuberculose pharmacoresistante. La mayoria de los ensayos en fase III sobre tuberculosis resistente a los farmacos no ha tenido la potencia suficiente para cuantificar diferencias en los criterios de valoracion microbiologicos o ha tardado hasta una decada en completarse. Los criterios de valoracion principales compuestos, dominados por las diferencias en la interrupcion del tratamiento y los cambios de regimen, pueden ocultar diferencias importantes en el fracaso del tratamiento y la recaida. Aunque los nuevos regimenes de tratamiento para la tuberculosis resistente a los farmacos parecen muy eficaces, la resistencia a los nuevos farmacos esta apareciendo rapidamente. Se necesitan regimenes de tratamiento mas cortos, seguros y tolerables, incluidos los activos contra la tuberculosis resistente a la bedaquilina. La transicion de multiples ensayos de regimen A frente a regimen B a un unico gran ensayo de plataforma en fase III aceleraria la obtencion de estimaciones solidas de la eficacia y seguridad relativas. Podrian lograrse mayores eficiencias si se adoptaran disenos de plataforma adaptativos modernos. La colaboracion entre los autores de los ensayos, los representantes de las comunidades afectadas, los financiadores y los reguladores es esencial para desarrollar un ensayo de plataforma en fase III de este tipo para los regimenes de tratamiento de la tuberculosis resistente a los farmacos.

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 studys 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.

In the past 2 years, remarkable advances have been made in shortening tuberculosis (TB) treatment. In particular, four clinical trials (Study 31/A5349, Nix-TB, ZeNix and TB-PRACTECAL) have provided evidence of the efficacy of regimens based on new and repurposed drugs: the 4-month regimen for drug-susceptible TB, and the 6-month bedaquiline-pretomanid-linezolid regimen with or without moxifloxacin for multidrug-resistant/rifampicin-resistant TB. Even if the evidence at the basis of these new regimens is compelling, several questions remain open, particularly concerning linezolid dose finding, the upsurging threat of bedaquiline-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis and the feasibility of applying these results to the paediatric population. Several ongoing trials may fill the remaining gaps and produce further reliable evidence to address the outstanding questions in TB treatment shortening.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate safety of 3 months weekly isoniazid-rifapentine (3HP) for tuberculosis (TB) prevention when co-administered with dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy (TLD), and compare viral suppression among those initiating TLD + 3HP vs. TLD alone. DESIGN/METHODS: We analyzed data from an ongoing Phase 3 randomized trial comparing TB screening strategies among adults with CD4 + ≤350 cells/μl initiating routine antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Kampala, Uganda. TB screen-negative participants without contraindications are referred for self-administered 3HP. HIV viral load is routinely measured at 6 and 12 months. Here, we included TB-negative participants who initiated TLD with or without 3HP. We determined the number who discontinued 3HP due to drug toxicity. In addition, we assessed viral suppression at 6 and 12 months and used log-binomial regression to assess risk of viremia at 6 months for participants who initiated TLD + 3HP vs. TLD alone. RESULTS: Of 453 participants initiating TLD (287 [63.4%] female, median age 30 years [interquartile range (IQR) 25-37], median pre-ART CD4 + cell count 188 cells/μl [IQR 86-271]), 163 (36.0%) initiated 3HP. Of these, 154 (94.5%) completed 3HP and one (0.6%) had treatment permanently discontinued due to a possible 3HP-related adverse event. At 6 months, for participants who received TLD + 3HP, risk of viremia >50 copies/ml was 1.51 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-2.14] times that of participants who received TLD alone. There was no difference in viral suppression between those who received TLD + 3HP vs. TLD alone at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Co-administration of TLD + 3HP was well tolerated. However, those who received TLD + 3HP were less likely to achieve viral suppression within six-months compared to those who received TLD alone.

Rationale: We developed a standardized method, possible poor treatment response (PPTR), to help ascertain efficacy endpoints in Study S31/A5349 (NCT02410772), an open-label trial comparing two 4-month rifapentine-based regimens with a standard 6-month regimen for the treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). Objectives: We describe the use of the PPTR process and evaluate whether the goals of minimizing bias in efficacy endpoint assessment and attainment of relevant data to determine outcomes for all participants were achieved. Methods: A PPTR event was defined as the occurrence of one or more prespecified triggers. Each PPTR required initiation of a standardized evaluation process that included obtaining multiple sputum samples for microbiology. Measurements and Main Results: Among 2,343 participants with culture-confirmed drug-susceptible TB, 454 individuals (19.4%) had a total of 534 individual PPTR events, of which 76.6% were microbiological (positive smear or culture at or after 17 wk). At least one PPTR event was experienced by 92.4% (133 of 144) of participants with TB-related unfavorable outcome and between 13.8% and 14.7% of participants with favorable and not-assessable outcomes. A total of 75% of participants with TB-related unfavorable outcomes had microbiological confirmation of failure to achieve a disease-free cure. Conclusions: Standardized methodologies, such as our PPTR approach, could facilitate unbiased efficacy outcome determinations, improve discrimination between outcomes that are related and unrelated to regimen efficacy, and enhance the ability to conduct pooled analyses of contemporary trials.

BackgroundAdverse drug reactions (ADRs) frequently occur in patients using second-line anti-tuberculosis medicine for treatment of multidrug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB). ADRs contribute to treatment interruptions which can compromise treatment response and risk acquired drug resistance to critical newer drugs such as bedaquiline, while severe ADRs carry considerable morbidity and mortality. N-acetylcysteine (NAC) has shown promise in reducing ADRs for medications related to TB in case series or randomized controlled trials in other medical conditions, yet evidence is lacking in MDR-TB patients. TB endemic settings have limited capacity to conduct clinical trials. We designed a proof-of-concept clinical trial primarily to explore the preliminary evidence on the protective effect of NAC among people treated for MDR-TB with second-line anti-TB medications.MethodsThis is a proof-of-concept randomized open label clinical trial with 3 treatment arms including a control arm, an interventional arm of NAC 900 mg daily, and an interventional arm of NAC 900 mg twice-daily administered during the intensive phase of MDR-TB treatment. Patients initiating MDR-TB treatment will be enrolled at Kibong'oto National Center of Excellence for MDR-TB in the Kilimanjaro region of Tanzania. The minimum anticipated sample size is 66; with 22 participants in each arm. ADR monitoring will be performed at baseline and daily follow-up over 24 weeks including blood and urine specimen collection for hepatic and renal function and electrolyte abnormalities, and electrocardiogram. Sputum will be collected at baseline and monthly thereafter and cultured for mycobacteria as well as assayed for other molecular targets of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Adverse drug events will be analysed over time using mixed effect models. Mean differences between arms in change of the ADRs from baseline (with 95% confidence intervals) will be derived from the fitted model.DiscussionGiven that NAC promotes synthesis of glutathione, an intracellular antioxidant that combats the impact of oxidative stress, it may protect against medication induced oxidative damage in organs such as liver, pancreas, kidney, and cells of the immune system. This randomized controlled trial will determine if NAC leads to fewer ADRs, and if this protection is dose dependent. Fewer ADRs among patients treated with MDR-TB may significantly improve treatment outcomes for multidrug regimens that necessitate prolonged treatment durations. Conduct of this trial will set the needed infrastructure for clinical trials.Trial registrationPACTR202007736854169 Registered 03 July 2020.

BackgroundTuberculosis (TB) Trials Consortium Study 31/AIDS Clinical Trials Group A5349, an international randomized open-label phase 3 noninferiority trial showed that a 4-month daily regimen substituting rifapentine for rifampin and moxifloxacin for ethambutol had noninferior efficacy and was safe for the treatment of drug-susceptible pulmonary TB (DS-PTB) compared with the standard 6-month regimen. We explored results among the prespecified subgroup of people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (PWH).MethodsPWH and CD4+ counts ≥100 cells/μL were eligible if they were receiving or about to initiate efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy (ART). Primary endpoints of TB disease-free survival 12 months after randomization (efficacy) and ≥ grade 3 adverse events (AEs) on treatment (safety) were compared, using a 6.6% noninferiority margin for efficacy. Randomization was stratified by site, pulmonary cavitation, and HIV status. PWH were enrolled in a staged fashion to support cautious evaluation of drug-drug interactions between rifapentine and efavirenz.ResultsA total of 2516 participants from 13 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, and the Americas were enrolled. Among 194 (8%) microbiologically eligible PWH, the median CD4+ count was 344 cells/μL (interquartile range: 223-455). The rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen was noninferior to control (absolute difference in unfavorable outcomes -7.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI] -20.8% to 6.0%); the rifapentine regimen was not noninferior to control (+7.5% [95% CI, -7.3% to +22.4%]). Fewer AEs were reported in rifapentine-based regimens (15%) than the control regimen (21%).ConclusionsIn people with HIV-associated DS-PTB with CD4+ counts ≥100 cells/μL on efavirenz-based ART, the 4-month daily rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen was noninferior to the 6-month control regimen and was safe.Clinical trials registrationNCT02410772.

Bacterial killing in patients with tuberculosis (TB) relapse was compared to that in patients achieving cure, measured by TB molecular bacterial load assay (TB-MBLA) or mycobacteria growth indicator tube (MGIT) time to positivity (TTP). TB-MBLA in 4 relapsed patients was significantly different compared to 132 cured patients after 2 weeks of treatment; MGIT TTP showed a significant difference from week 8.

BackgroundPeople living with HIV (PLHIV) have an increased risk of developing active tuberculosis (TB). To reduce the burden of TB among PLHIV, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends systematic TB screening followed by (1) confirmatory TB testing for all who screen positive and (2) TB preventive therapy (TPT) for all TPT-eligible PLHIV who screen negative. Symptom-based screening remains the standard of care in most high TB burden settings, including Uganda. Despite having high sensitivity for active TB among antiretroviral-naïve PLHIV, symptom screening has poor specificity; as such, many high-risk PLHIV without active TB are not referred for TPT. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a promising alternative strategy for TB screening that has comparable sensitivity and higher specificity than symptom screening, and was endorsed by WHO in 2021. However, the impact of CRP-based TB screening on TB burden for PLHIV remains unclear.MethodsTB SCRIPT (TB Screening Improves Preventive Therapy Uptake) is a phase 3, multi-center, single-blinded, individual (1:1) randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of CRP-based TB screening on clinical outcomes of PLHIV. The trial aims to compare the effectiveness of a TB screening strategy based on CRP levels using a point-of-care (POC) assay on 2-year TB incidence and all-cause mortality (composite primary trial endpoint) and prevalent TB case detection and uptake of TPT (intermediate outcomes), relative to symptom-based TB screening (current practice).DiscussionThis study will be critical to improving selection of eligible PLHIV for TPT and helping guide the scale-up and integration of TB screening and TPT activities. This work will enable the field to improve TB screening by removing barriers to TPT initiation among eligible PLHIV, and provide randomized evidence to inform and strengthen WHO guidelines.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04557176. Registered on September 21, 2020.

Background/aimsTuberculosis 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.MethodsStarting 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.ResultsWe 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.ConclusionThe 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.

BackgroundA 4-month regimen containing rifapentine and moxifloxacin has noninferior efficacy compared to the standard 6-month regimen for drug-sensitive tuberculosis. We evaluated the effect of regimens containing daily, high-dose rifapentine on efavirenz pharmacokinetics and viral suppression in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-associated tuberculosis (TB).MethodsIn the context of a Phase 3 randomized controlled trial, HIV-positive individuals already virally suppressed on efavirenz--containing antiretroviral therapy (ART) (EFV1), or newly initiating efavirenz (EFV2) received TB treatment containing rifapentine (1200 mg), isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and either ethambutol or moxifloxacin. Mid-interval efavirenz concentrations were measured (a) during ART and TB cotreatment (Weeks 4, 8, 12, and 17, different by EFV group) and (b) when ART was taken alone (pre- or post-TB treatment, Weeks 0 and 22). Apparent oral clearance (CL/F) was estimated and compared. Target mid-interval efavirenz concentrations were > 1 mg/L. Co-treatment was considered acceptable if > 80% of participants had mid-interval efavirenz concentrations meeting this target.ResultsEFV1 and EFV2 included 70 and 41 evaluable participants, respectively. The geometric mean ratio comparing efavirenz CL/F with vs without TB drugs was 0.79 (90% confidence interval [CI] .72-.85) in EFV1 and 0.84 [90% CI .69-.97] in EFV2. The percent of participants with mid-interval efavirenz concentrations > 1mg/L in EFV1 at Weeks 0, 4, 8, and 17 was 96%, 96%, 88%, and 89%, respectively. In EFV2, at approximately 4 and 8 weeks post efavirenz initiation, the value was 98%.ConclusionsTB treatment containing high-dose daily rifapentine modestly decreased (rather than increased) efavirenz clearance and therapeutic targets were met supporting the use of efavirenz with these regimens, without dose adjustment.Clinical trials registrationNCT02410772.

Droplet digital PCR is a particularly valuable tool for ratiometric assays because it provides simultaneous absolute quantification of two target sequences in a single assay. This manuscript addresses a challenge in establishing a new ratiometric droplet digital PCR assay for use in sputum, the rRNA synthesis ratio. In principle, the methods established to evaluate precision and determine the limit of quantification for a single measurand cannot be applied to a ratiometric assay. The precision of a ratio depends on precision in both the numerator and denominator. Here, we evaluated the MOVER approximated coefficient of variation as indicator of assay precision that does not require technical replicates. We estimated the MOVER approximated coefficient of variation in dilution series and routine assays and evaluated its agreement with the traditional coefficient of variation. We found that the MOVER approximated coefficient of variation was able to recapitulate the traditional coefficient of variation without the requirement for replicate assays. We also demonstrated that the MOVER approximated coefficient of variation threshold can be used to define the limit of quantification of the rRNA synthesis Ratio. In conclusion, the MOVER approximated coefficient of variation may be useful not only for the rRNA synthesis ratio but for other assays that measure ratios via droplet digital PCR.

BackgroundRapid molecular methods such as the line probe assay (LPA) and Xpert® MTB/RIF assay (Xpert) have been recommended by the World Health Organization for drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) diagnosis. We conducted an interventional trial in DR-TB reference centers in Brazil to evaluate the impact of the use of LPA and Xpert.MethodsPatients with DR-TB were eligible if their drug susceptibility testing results were available to the treating physician at the time of consultation. The standard reference MGITTM 960 was compared with Xpert (arm 1) and LPA (arm 2). Effectiveness was considered as the start of the appropriate TB regimen that matched drug susceptibility testing (DST) and the proportions of culture conversion and favorable treatment outcomes after 6 months.ResultsA higher rate of empirical treatment was observed with MGIT alone than with the Xpert assay (97.0% vs. 45.0%) and LPA (98.2% vs. 67.5%). Patients started appropriate TB treatment more quickly than those in the MGIT group (median 15.0 vs. 40.5 days; p

Rationale: No evidence-based tools exist to enhance precision in the selection of patient-specific optimal treatment durations to study in tuberculosis clinical trials. Objectives: To develop risk stratification tools that assign patients with tuberculosis into risk groups of unfavorable outcome and inform selection of optimal treatment duration for each patient strata to study in clinical trials. Methods: Publicly available data from four phase 3 trials, each evaluating treatment duration shortening from 6 to 4 months, were used to develop parametric time-to-event models that describe unfavorable outcomes. Regimen, baseline, and on-treatment characteristics were evaluated as predictors of outcomes. Exact regression coefficients of predictors were used to assign risk groups and predict optimal treatment durations. Measurements and Main Results: The parametric model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.72. A six-item risk score (HIV status, smear grade, sex, cavitary disease status, body mass index, and Month 2 culture status) successfully grouped participants into low (1,060/3,791; 28%), moderate (1,740/3,791; 46%), and high (991/3,791; 26%) risk, requiring treatment durations of 4, 6, and greater than 6 months, respectively, to reach a target cure rate of 93% when receiving standard-dose rifamycin-containing regimens. With current one-duration-fits-all approaches, high-risk groups have a 3.7-fold (95% confidence interval, 2.7-5.1) and 2.4-fold (1.9-2.9) higher hazard risk of unfavorable outcomes compared with low- and moderate-risk groups, respectively. Four-month regimens were noninferior to the standard 6-month regimen in the low-risk group. Conclusions: Our model discrimination was modest but consistent with current models of unfavorable outcomes. Our results showed that stratified medicine approaches are feasible and may achieve high cure rates in all patients with tuberculosis. An interactive risk stratification tool is provided to facilitate decision-making in the regimen development pathway.

Pyrazinamide is a potent sterilising agent that shortens the treatment duration needed to cure tuberculosis. It is synergistic with novel and existing drugs for tuberculosis. The dose of pyrazinamide that optimises efficacy while remaining safe is uncertain, as is its potential role in shortening treatment duration further.Pharmacokinetic data, sputum culture, and safety laboratory results were compiled from Tuberculosis Trials Consortium (TBTC) studies 27 and 28 and Pan-African Consortium for the Evaluation of Antituberculosis Antibiotics (PanACEA) multi-arm multi-stage tuberculosis (MAMS-TB), multi-centre phase 2 trials in which participants received rifampicin (range 10-35 mg·kg-1), pyrazinamide (range 20-30 mg·kg-1), plus two companion drugs. Pyrazinamide pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) and pharmacokinetic-toxicity analyses were performed.In TBTC studies (n=77), higher pyrazinamide maximum concentration (Cmax) was associated with shorter time to culture conversion (TTCC) and higher probability of 2-month culture conversion (p-value4500 mg) or increasing both pyrazinamide and rifampicin would be required to reach targets associated with treatment shortening. Combining all trials, liver toxicity was rare (3.9% with grade 3 or higher liver function tests (LFT)), and no relationship was seen between pyrazinamide Cmax and LFT levels.Pyrazinamide's microbiological efficacy increases with increasing drug concentrations. Optimising pyrazinamide alone, though, is unlikely to be sufficient to allow tuberculosis treatment shortening; rather, rifampicin dose would need to be increased in parallel.

Accumulating data indicate that higher rifampicin doses are more effective and shorten tuberculosis (TB) treatment duration. This study evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and 7- and 14-day early bactericidal activity (EBA) of increasing doses of rifampicin. Here we report the results of the final cohorts of PanACEA HIGHRIF1, a dose escalation study in treatment-naive adult smear-positive patients with TB. Patients received, in consecutive cohorts, 40 or 50 mg·kg-1 rifampicin once daily in monotherapy (day 1-7), supplemented with standard dose isoniazid, pyrazinamide and ethambutol between days 8 and 14. In the 40 mg·kg-1 cohort (n=15), 13 patients experienced a total of 36 adverse events during monotherapy, resulting in one treatment discontinuation. In the 50 mg·kg-1 cohort (n=17), all patients experienced adverse events during monotherapy, 93 in total; 11 patients withdrew or stopped study medication. Adverse events were mostly mild/moderate and tolerability rather than safety related, i.e. gastrointestinal disorders, pruritis, hyperbilirubinaemia and jaundice. There was a more than proportional increase in the rifampicin geometric mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to 12 h (AUC0-24 h) for 50 mg·kg-1 compared with 40 mg·kg-1; 571 (range 320-995) versus 387 (range 201-847) mg·L-1·h, while peak exposures saw proportional increases. Protein-unbound exposure after 50 mg·kg-1 (11% (range 8-17%)) was comparable with lower rifampicin doses. Rifampicin exposures and bilirubin concentrations were correlated (Spearman's ρ=0.670 on day 3, p

BackgroundRifapentine-based regimens have potent antimycobacterial activity that may allow for a shorter course in patients with drug-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis.MethodsIn an open-label, phase 3, randomized, controlled trial involving persons with newly diagnosed pulmonary tuberculosis from 13 countries, we compared two 4-month rifapentine-based regimens with a standard 6-month regimen consisting of rifampin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (control) using a noninferiority margin of 6.6 percentage points. In one 4-month regimen, rifampin was replaced with rifapentine; in the other, rifampin was replaced with rifapentine and ethambutol with moxifloxacin. The primary efficacy outcome was survival free of tuberculosis at 12 months.ResultsAmong 2516 participants who had undergone randomization, 2343 had a culture positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis that was not resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, or fluoroquinolones (microbiologically eligible population; 768 in the control group, 791 in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 784 in the rifapentine group), of whom 194 were coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus and 1703 had cavitation on chest radiography. A total of 2234 participants could be assessed for the primary outcome (assessable population; 726 in the control group, 756 in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 752 in the rifapentine group). Rifapentine with moxifloxacin was noninferior to the control in the microbiologically eligible population (15.5% vs. 14.6% had an unfavorable outcome; difference, 1.0 percentage point; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.6 to 4.5) and in the assessable population (11.6% vs. 9.6%; difference, 2.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.1 to 5.1). Noninferiority was shown in the secondary and sensitivity analyses. Rifapentine without moxifloxacin was not shown to be noninferior to the control in either population (17.7% vs. 14.6% with an unfavorable outcome in the microbiologically eligible population; difference, 3.0 percentage points [95% CI, -0.6 to 6.6]; and 14.2% vs. 9.6% in the assessable population; difference, 4.4 percentage points [95% CI, 1.2 to 7.7]). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred during the on-treatment period in 19.3% of participants in the control group, 18.8% in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 14.3% in the rifapentine group.ConclusionsThe efficacy of a 4-month rifapentine-based regimen containing moxifloxacin was noninferior to the standard 6-month regimen in the treatment of tuberculosis. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and others; Study 31/A5349 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02410772.).

Rifampin or multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (RR/MDR-TB) treatment has largely transitioned to regimens free of the injectable aminoglycoside component, despite the drug class' purported bactericidal activity early in treatment. We tested whether Mycobacterium tuberculosis killing rates measured by tuberculosis molecular bacterial load assay (TB-MBLA) in sputa correlate with composition of the RR/MDR-TB regimen. Serial sputa were collected from patients with RR/MDR- and drug-sensitive TB at days 0, 3, 7, and 14, and then monthly for 4 months of anti-TB treatment. TB-MBLA was used to quantify viable M. tuberculosis 16S rRNA in sputum for estimation of colony forming units per ml (eCFU/ml). M. tuberculosis killing rates were compared among regimens using nonlinear-mixed-effects modeling of repeated measures. Thirty-seven patients produced 296 serial sputa and received treatment as follows: 13 patients received an injectable bedaquiline-free reference regimen, 9 received an injectable bedaquiline-containing regimen, 8 received an all-oral bedaquiline-based regimen, and 7 patients were treated for drug-sensitive TB with conventional rifampin/isoniazid/pyrazinamide/ethambutol (RHZE). Compared to the adjusted M. tuberculosis killing of -0.17 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.23 to -0.12) for the injectable bedaquiline-free reference regimen, the killing rates were -0.62 (95% CI -1.05 to -0.20) log10 eCFU/ml for the injectable bedaquiline-containing regimen (P = 0.019), -0.35 (95% CI -0.65 to -0.13) log10 eCFU/ml for the all-oral bedaquiline-based regimen (P = 0.054), and -0.29 (95% CI -0.78 to +0.22) log10 eCFU/ml for the RHZE regimen (P = 0.332). Thus, M. tuberculosis killing rates from sputa were higher among patients who received bedaquiline but were further improved with the addition of an injectable aminoglycoside.

BackgroundScaling up shorter regimens for tuberculosis (TB) prevention such as once weekly isoniazid-rifapentine (3HP) taken for 3 months is a key priority for achieving targets set forth in the World Health Organization's (WHO) END TB Strategy. However, there are few data on 3HP patient acceptance and completion in the context of routine HIV care in sub-Saharan Africa.Methods and findingsThe 3HP Options Trial is a pragmatic, parallel type 3 effectiveness-implementation randomized trial comparing 3 optimized strategies for delivering 3HP-facilitated directly observed therapy (DOT), facilitated self-administered therapy (SAT), or informed choice between DOT and SAT using a shared decision-making aid-to people receiving care at a large urban HIV clinic in Kampala, Uganda. Participants and healthcare providers were not blinded to arm assignment due to the nature of the 3HP delivery strategies. We conducted an interim analysis of participants who were enrolled and exited the 3HP treatment period between July 13, 2020 and April 30, 2021. The primary outcome, which was aggregated across trial arms for this interim analysis, was the proportion who accepted and completed 3HP (≥11 of 12 doses within 16 weeks of randomization). We used Bayesian inference analysis to estimate the posterior probability that this proportion would exceed 80% under at least 1 of the 3HP delivery strategies, a coprimary hypothesis of the trial. Through April 2021, 684 participants have been enrolled, and 479 (70%) have exited the treatment period. Of these 479 participants, 309 (65%) were women, mean age was 41.9 years (standard deviation (SD): 9.2), and mean time on antiretroviral therapy (ART) was 7.8 years (SD: 4.3). In total, 445 of them (92.9%, 95% confidence interval (CI): [90.2 to 94.9]) accepted and completed 3HP treatment. There were no differences in treatment acceptance and completion by sex, age, or time on ART. Treatment was discontinued due to a documented adverse event (AE) in 8 (1.7%) patients. The probability that treatment acceptance and completion exceeds 80% under at least 1 of the three 3HP delivery strategies was greater than 99%. The main limitations are that the trial was conducted at a single site, and the interim analysis focused on aggregate outcome data to maintain blinding of investigators to arm-specific outcomes.Conclusions3HP was widely accepted by people living with HIV (PLHIV) in Uganda, and very high levels of treatment completion were achieved in a programmatic setting. These findings show that 3HP can enable effective scale-up of tuberculosis preventive therapy (TPT) in high-burden countries, particularly when delivery strategies are tailored to target known barriers to treatment completion.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03934931.

BackgroundRecently, a 3-month (12-dose) regimen of weekly isoniazid and rifapentine (3HP) was recommended by the World Health Organization for the prevention of tuberculosis (TB) among people living with HIV (PLHIV) on common antiretroviral therapy regimens. The best approach to delivering 3HP to PLHIV remains uncertain.MethodsWe developed a three-armed randomized trial assessing optimized strategies for delivering 3HP to PLHIV. The trial will be conducted at the Mulago Immune Suppression Syndrome (i.e., HIV/AIDS) clinic in Kampala, Uganda. We plan to recruit 1656 PLHIV, randomized 1:1 to each of the three arms (552 per arm). Using a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation design, this pragmatic trial aims to (1) compare the acceptance and completion of 3HP among PLHIV under three delivery strategies: directly observed therapy (DOT), self-administered therapy (SAT), and informed patient choice of either DOT or SAT (with the assistance of a decision aid); (2) to identify processes and contextual factors that influence the acceptance and completion of 3HP under each delivery strategy; and (3) to estimate the costs and compare the cost-effectiveness of three strategies for delivering 3HP. The three delivery strategies were each optimized to address key barriers to 3HP completion using a theory-informed approach. We hypothesize that high levels of treatment acceptance and completion can be achieved among PLHIV in sub-Saharan Africa and that offering PLHIV an informed choice between the optimized DOT and SAT delivery strategies will result in greater acceptance and completion of 3HP. The design and planned evaluation of the delivery strategies were guided by the use of implementation science conceptual frameworks.Discussion3HP-one of the most promising interventions for TB prevention-will not be scaled up unless it can be delivered in a patient-centered fashion. We highlight shared decision-making as a key element of our trial design and theorize that offering PLHIV an informed choice between optimized delivery strategies will facilitate the highest levels of treatment acceptance and completion.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03934931 ; Registered 2 May 2019.