Helen S Cox1, Martha Morrow, Peter W Deutschmann. 1. Australian International Health Institute, University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC 3010, Melbourne, Australia. hcox@burnet.edu.au
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify published studies assessing tuberculosis recurrence after successful treatment with standard short course regimens for six months to determine the strength and sufficiency of evidence to support current guidelines. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Cochrane clinical trials register, specialist tuberculosis journals, and reference lists. Only English language publications were eligible. REVIEW METHODS: Studies were included irrespective of methodology or quality. Abstracted information included inclusion and exclusion criteria for participants, duration of follow-up, and definitions of treatment success and disease recurrence. The primary outcome was the proportion of successfully treated patients recorded with recurrent tuberculosis during the follow-up period. RESULTS: 17 study arms from 16 studies met the inclusion criteria; 10 were controlled clinical trials and six were either studies done under programmatic conditions or observational studies from functioning tuberculosis programmes. Although several clinical trials supported the use of daily treatment regimens, studies reporting tuberculosis recurrence after intermittent regimens were limited. Few studies carried out under routine programmatic conditions reported disease recurrence. Overall there was wide variation in recurrence after successful treatment, ranging from 0% to 14%. Considerable heterogeneity across studies precluded the systematic assessment of factors contributing to tuberculosis recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Despite DOTS (directly observed treatment, short course) being implemented for more than 10 years and millions of patients treated for tuberculosis, few studies have assessed the ability of standard DOTS regimens to result in lasting cure for patients treated under routine programmatic conditions.
OBJECTIVE: To identify published studies assessing tuberculosis recurrence after successful treatment with standard short course regimens for six months to determine the strength and sufficiency of evidence to support current guidelines. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Cochrane clinical trials register, specialist tuberculosis journals, and reference lists. Only English language publications were eligible. REVIEW METHODS: Studies were included irrespective of methodology or quality. Abstracted information included inclusion and exclusion criteria for participants, duration of follow-up, and definitions of treatment success and disease recurrence. The primary outcome was the proportion of successfully treated patients recorded with recurrent tuberculosis during the follow-up period. RESULTS: 17 study arms from 16 studies met the inclusion criteria; 10 were controlled clinical trials and six were either studies done under programmatic conditions or observational studies from functioning tuberculosis programmes. Although several clinical trials supported the use of daily treatment regimens, studies reporting tuberculosis recurrence after intermittent regimens were limited. Few studies carried out under routine programmatic conditions reported disease recurrence. Overall there was wide variation in recurrence after successful treatment, ranging from 0% to 14%. Considerable heterogeneity across studies precluded the systematic assessment of factors contributing to tuberculosis recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Despite DOTS (directly observed treatment, short course) being implemented for more than 10 years and millions of patients treated for tuberculosis, few studies have assessed the ability of standard DOTS regimens to result in lasting cure for patients treated under routine programmatic conditions.
Authors: Henry M Blumberg; William J Burman; Richard E Chaisson; Charles L Daley; Sue C Etkind; Lloyd N Friedman; Paula Fujiwara; Malgosia Grzemska; Philip C Hopewell; Michael D Iseman; Robert M Jasmer; Venkatarama Koppaka; Richard I Menzies; Richard J O'Brien; Randall R Reves; Lee B Reichman; Patricia M Simone; Jeffrey R Starke; Andrew A Vernon Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2003-02-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: H Banda; C Kang'ombe; A D Harries; D S Nyangulu; C J Whitty; J J Wirima; F M Salaniponi; D Maher; P Nunn Journal: Int J Tuberc Lung Dis Date: 2000-10 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: Debra Benator; Mondira Bhattacharya; Lorna Bozeman; William Burman; Antonino Cantazaro; Richard Chaisson; Fred Gordin; C Robert Horsburgh; James Horton; Awal Khan; Christopher Lahart; Beverly Metchock; Constance Pachucki; Llewellyn Stanton; Andrew Vernon; M Elsa Villarino; Yong Chen Wang; Marc Weiner; Stephen Weis Journal: Lancet Date: 2002-08-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Juan Manuel Coya; Alexandra Maure; Anne Biton; Roland Brosch; Brigitte Gicquel; Alexandre Giraud-Gatineau; Michael Thomson; Elliott M Bernard; Jade Marrec; Maximiliano G Gutierrez; Gérald Larrouy-Maumus; Ludovic Tailleux Journal: Elife Date: 2020-05-04 Impact factor: 8.140
Authors: Guang Xue He; Yan Guang Xie; Li Xia Wang; Martien W Borgdorff; Marieke J van der Werf; Ji Huan Fan; Xing Lu Yan; Fa Bin Li; Xue Zhi Zhang; Yan Lin Zhao; Susan van den Hof Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-05-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Dick Menzies; Andrea Benedetti; Anita Paydar; Ian Martin; Sarah Royce; Madhukar Pai; Andrew Vernon; Christian Lienhardt; William Burman Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2009-09-15 Impact factor: 11.069