K P Cain1, L J Nelson, J P Cegielski. 1. Division of Tuberculosis Elimination, and Epidemic Intelligence Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. kcain@cdc.gov
Abstract
SETTING: In the 1960s, treatment for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) with isoniazid proved to be so effective, safe, and inexpensive that research into alternative treatments virtually ceased. Now that multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is widespread, no data are available to guide the management of persons exposed to MDR-TB (contacts). METHODS: We surveyed National TB Program directors and MDR-TB program managers about current practices for managing MDR-TB contacts in countries with an MDR-TB prevalence of >2% in new patients and those with programs for managing MDR-TB. RESULTS: Of 35 countries that met the survey criteria, 25 (71%) responded; 24 of these (96%) have a guideline for managing TB contacts. Of these, 19 (76%) usually or always evaluated contacts and treated LTBI. In contrast, 10 (40%) countries reported having a guideline for managing MDR-TB contacts, 11 (44%) usually or always evaluated MDR-TB contacts, and 9 (36%) treated LTBI. Only two (8%) used a regimen that has activity against MDR-TB. Lack of evidence or guidelines was the main reason for not treating MDR-TB contacts. CONCLUSIONS: Management of MDR-TB contacts is inconsistent and ineffective due to lack of evidence-based guidelines. There is an urgent need to generate evidence to guide policy.
SETTING: In the 1960s, treatment for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) with isoniazid proved to be so effective, safe, and inexpensive that research into alternative treatments virtually ceased. Now that multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is widespread, no data are available to guide the management of persons exposed to MDR-TB (contacts). METHODS: We surveyed National TB Program directors and MDR-TB program managers about current practices for managing MDR-TB contacts in countries with an MDR-TB prevalence of >2% in new patients and those with programs for managing MDR-TB. RESULTS: Of 35 countries that met the survey criteria, 25 (71%) responded; 24 of these (96%) have a guideline for managing TB contacts. Of these, 19 (76%) usually or always evaluated contacts and treated LTBI. In contrast, 10 (40%) countries reported having a guideline for managing MDR-TB contacts, 11 (44%) usually or always evaluated MDR-TB contacts, and 9 (36%) treated LTBI. Only two (8%) used a regimen that has activity against MDR-TB. Lack of evidence or guidelines was the main reason for not treating MDR-TB contacts. CONCLUSIONS: Management of MDR-TB contacts is inconsistent and ineffective due to lack of evidence-based guidelines. There is an urgent need to generate evidence to guide policy.
Authors: S Swindells; A Gupta; S Kim; M D Hughes; J Sanchez; V Mave; R Dawson; N Kumarasamy; K Comins; B Smith; R Rustomjee; L Naini; N S Shah; A Hesseling; G Churchyard Journal: Int J Tuberc Lung Dis Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: S Bamrah; R Brostrom; F Dorina; L Setik; R Song; L M Kawamura; A Heetderks; S Mase Journal: Int J Tuberc Lung Dis Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 2.373