Optimization of dosing regimens of isoniazid and rifampicin in children with tuberculosis in India

Aims Pharmacokinetic studies in the past have shown inadequate antituberculosis drug levels in children with the currently available dosing regimens. This study attempted to investigate the pharmacokinetics of isoniazid and rifampicin, when used in children, and to optimize their dosing regimens. Methods Data were collected from 41 children, aged 2–16 years, who were being treated with antituberculosis drugs for at least 2 months. Concentration measurements were done for 6 h and analysed using a nonlinear, mixed‐effects model. Results Isoniazid pharmacokinetics were described by a one‐compartment disposition model with a transit absorption model (fixed, n = 5). A mixture model was used to identify the slow and fast acetylator subgroups. Rifampicin was described by a one‐compartment disposition model with a transit absorption model (fixed, n = 9). Body weight was added to the clearance and volume of distribution of both the drugs using an allometric function. Simulations with the isoniazid model showed that 84.9% of the population achieved therapeutic peak serum concentration with the planned fixed‐dose combination regimen. Simulations with the rifampicin model showed that only about 28.8% of the simulated population achieve the therapeutic peak serum concentration with the fixed‐dose combination regimen. A novel regimen for rifampicin, with an average dose of 35 mg kg–1, was found to provide adequate drug exposure in most children. Conclusions The exposure to isoniazid is adequate with present regimens. For rifampicin, a novel dosing regimen was developed to ensure adequate drug concentrations in children. However, further studies are required to assess the dose–effect relationship of higher doses of rifampicin

Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF assays for extrapulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults.

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

A multifaceted intervention to improve diagnosis and early management of hospitalised patients with suspected acute brain infections in Brazil, India, and Malawi: An international multicentre intervention study

Background Brain infections pose substantial challenges in diagnosis and management and carry high mortality and morbidity, especially in low-income and middle-income countries. We aimed to improve the diagnosis and early management of patients admitted to hospital (adults aged 16 years and older and children aged >28 days) with suspected acute brain infections at 13 hospitals in Brazil, India, and Malawi. Methods With hospital stakeholders, policy makers, and patient and public representatives, we co-designed a multifaceted clinical and laboratory intervention, informed by an evaluation of routine practice. The intervention, tailored for each setting, included a diagnostic and management algorithm, a lumbar puncture pack, a testing panel, and staff training. We used multivariable logistic regression and interrupted time series analysis to compare the coprimary outcomes—the percentage of patients achieving a syndromic diagnosis and the percentage achieving a microbiological diagnosis before and after the intervention. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04190303) and is complete. Findings Between Jan 5, 2021, and Nov 30, 2022, we screened 10 462 patients and enrolled a total of 2233 patients at 13 hospital sites connected to the four study centres in Brazil, India, and Malawi. 1376 (62%) were recruited before the intervention and 857 (38%) were recruited after the intervention. 2154 patients (96%) had assessment of the primary outcome (1330 [62%] patients recruited pre-intervention and 824 [38%] recruited post-intervention). The median age across centres was 23 years (IQR 6–44), with 1276 (59%) being adults aged 16 years or older and 888 (41%) children aged between 29 days and 15 years; 1264 (59%) patients were male and 890 (41%) were female. Data on race and ethnicity were not recorded. 1020 (77%) of 1320 patients received a syndromic diagnosis before the intervention, rising to 701 (86%) of 813 after the intervention (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·81 [95% CI 1·40–2·34]; p<0·0001). A microbiological diagnosis was made in 294 (22%) of 1330 patients pre-intervention, increasing to 250 (30%) of 824 patients post-intervention (aOR 1·46 [95% CI 1·18–1·79]; p=0·00040). Interrupted time series analysis confirmed that these increases exceeded a modest underlying trend of improvement over time. The percentage receiving a lumbar puncture, time to appropriate therapy, and functional outcome also improved. Interpretation Diagnosis and management of patients with suspected acute brain infections improved following introduction of a simple intervention package across a diverse range of hospitals on three continents. The intervention is now being implemented in other settings as part of the WHO Meningitis Roadmap and encephalitis control initiatives