| Literature DB >> 23049846 |
Florian M Marx1, Rory Dunbar, Donald A Enarson, Nulda Beyers.
Abstract
RATIONALE: High rates of recurrent tuberculosis after successful treatment have been reported from different high burden settings in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, little is known about the rate of smear-positive tuberculosis after treatment default. In particular, it is not known whether or not treatment defaulters continue to be or become again smear-positive and thus pose a potential for transmission of infection to others.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23049846 PMCID: PMC3458061 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0045724
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Overview of smear-positive tuberculosis cases included in and excluded from the study.
Figure 2Ascertainment of subsequent episodes of re-treatment via record linkage and manual review for the study.
Univariable analysis of index episode risk factors for subsequent smear-positive tuberculosis re-treatment (N = 2,136).
| Total re-treatmentcases | PY | Rate (per 100 PY) | Crude hazard-ratio(95% CI) | P-value | |
|
| 291 | 10844 | 2.68 (2.39–3.01) | ||
|
| <0.001 | ||||
| Cured | 185 | 8863 | 2.09 (1.81–2.41) | 1 | |
| Completed | 14 | 640 | 2.19 (1.29–3.69) | 1.05 (0.61–1.80) | |
| Defaulted | 92 | 1341 | 6.86 (5.59–8.41) | 3.29 (2.56–4.22) | |
|
| 0.005 | ||||
| Female | 93 | 4352 | 2.14 (1.74–2.62) | 1 | |
| Male | 198 | 6492 | 3.05 (2.65–3.51) | 1.43 (1.12–1.83) | |
|
| 0.002 | ||||
| 0–18 | 30 | 758 | 3.96 (2.77–5.66) | 1 | |
| 19–39 | 193 | 6646 | 2.90 (2.52–3.34) | 0.73 (0.50–1.08) | |
| 40+ | 68 | 3430 | 1.98 (1.56–2.51) | 0.50 (0.33–0.77) | |
|
| 0.03 | ||||
| New | 181 | 7384 | 2.45 (2.12–2.84) | 1 | |
| Re-treatment | 110 | 3424 | 3.21 (2.67–3.87) | 1.31 (1.03–1.66) | |
|
| 0.10 | ||||
| negative | 111 | 3542 | 3.13 (2.60–3.77) | 1 | |
| positive | 12 | 383 | 3.13 (1.78–5.52) | 1.00 (0.55–1.81) | |
| unknown | 168 | 6919 | 2.43 (2.09–2.82) | 0.77 (0.61–0.98) | |
|
| 0.03 | ||||
| Smear 1+ | 35 | 1588 | 2.20 (1.58–3.07) | 1 | |
| Smear 2+ | 48 | 1576 | 3.05 (2.30–4.04) | 1.38 (0.89–2.14) | |
| Smear 3+ | 154 | 4641 | 3.32 (2.83–3.89) | 1.51 (1.04–2.17) | |
|
| 0.03 | ||||
| Yes (smear-negative) | 189 | 8297 | 2.28 (1.98–2.63) | 1 | |
| No (smear-positive) | 60 | 1899 | 3.16 (2.45–4.07) | 1.39 (1.04–1.85) | |
|
| <0.001 | ||||
| >8 months | 53 | 1858 | 2.85 (2.18–11.32) | 1.47 (1.06–2.03) | |
| 6–8 months | 120 | 6177 | 1.94 (1.62–2.32) | 1 | |
| 4 – <6 months | 88 | 2431 | 3.62 (2.94. –4.46) | 1.86 (1.42–2.45) | |
| <4 months | 30 | 379 | 7.92 (5.54–12.23) | 4.08 (2.73–6.08) |
PY = Person-years.
CI = Confidence Interval.
Smear grade at start of treatment:
Smear 3+: Any of the two initial smears was 3+,i.e. >10 acid-fast bacilli (AFB) per 1 high-power field (HPF).
Smear 2+: Any of the two initial smears was 2+,i.e. 1–10 AFB per 1 HPF, but none of them was 3+.
Smear 1+: Any of the two initial smears was 1+,i.e. 10–99 AFB per 100 HPF, but none of them was 2+ or 3+.
Test for trend.
Multivariable analysis of index episode risk factors for subsequent smear-positive tuberculosis re-treatment (N = 1,733).
| Total re-treatment cases | PY | Rate (per 100 PY) | Crude hazard-ratio | P-value | |
|
| <0.001 | ||||
| Cured | 185 | 8863 | 2.09 (1.81–2.41) | 1 | |
| Completed | 14 | 640 | 2.19 (1.29–3.69) | 1.08 (0.58–2.00) | |
| Defaulted | 92 | 1341 | 6.86 (5.59–8.41) | 3.97 (3.00–5.26) | |
|
| 0.03 | ||||
| Smear 1+ | 35 | 1588 | 2.20 (1.58–3.07) | 1 | |
| Smear 2+ | 48 | 1576 | 3.05 (2.30–4.04) | 1.43 (0.93–2.22) | |
| Smear 3+ | 154 | 4641 | 3.32 (2.83–3.89) | 1.61 (1.11–2.33) | |
|
| 0.003 | ||||
| 0–18 | 30 | 758 | 3.96 (2.77–5.66) | 1 | |
| 19–39 | 193 | 6646 | 2.90 (2.52–3.34) | 0.50 (0.32–0.78) | |
| 40+ | 68 | 3430 | 1.98 (1.56–2.51) | 0.40 (0.25–0.65) |
PY = Person-years.
CI = Confidence Interval.
Adjusted for the other factors shown in the table.
Smear grade at start of treatment:
Smear 3+: Any of the two initial smears was 3+, i.e. >10 acid-fast bacilli (AFB) per 1 high-power field (HPF).
Smear 2+: Any of the two initial smears was 2+, i.e. 1–10 AFB per 1 HPF, but none of them was 3+.
Smear 1+: Any of the two initial smears was 1+, i.e. 10–99 AFB per 100 HPF, but none of them was 2+ or 3+.
Test for trend.
Figure 3Kaplan Meier failure estimates of re-treatment for smear-positive tuberculosis by index episode sputum smear grading and treatment outcome.
Figure 4Kaplan Meier failure estimates of smear-positive re-treatment after treatment default, stratified by smear conversion prior to defaulting (adjusted for time to default).
Treatment outcomes at re-treatment stratified by index episode treatment outcome (N = 291 re-treatment cases).
| Treatment outcome, re-treatment episode | |||||||
| Total | Cured/Completed | Failed | Died | Defaulted | Transfer out | Unknown | |
|
| |||||||
| Cured/Completed | 199 (100.0%) | 152 (76.4%) | 12 (6.0%) | 8 (4.0%) | 17 (8.5%) | 2 (1.0%) | 8 (4.0%) |
| Treatment default | 92 (100.0%) | 49 (53.3%) | 3 (3.3%) | 2 (2.2%) | 34 (37.0%) | 3 (3.3%) | 1 (1.1%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|