| Literature DB >> 26644982 |
Makoto Masuda1, Takashi Sato2, Kentaro Sakamaki3, Makoto Kudo2, Takeshi Kaneko4, Yoshiaki Ishigatsubo5.
Abstract
Purpose. The predictive factor of response to antituberculous therapy has not been fully elucidated. Airway acidity has been thought to be a potential indicator of the bactericidal activity. Therefore, we hypothesized that monitoring airway acidity by measuring sputum pH could predict response to therapy. Methods. A total of 47 patients having newly diagnosed, smear-positive, active pulmonary tuberculosis were enrolled between October 2011 and March 2014. Sputum samples were serially analyzed before and after treatment. Eligible patients who initiated a standard 6-month treatment were monitored for the length of time to sputum smear and culture conversion. Results. There were 39 patients who completed a 2-month intensive phase of isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol therapy followed by a 4-month continuation phase of isoniazid and rifampicin. Although factors including age, cavitation, sputum grade, and use of an acid-suppressant were associated with initial low sputum pH in univariate analysis, multivariate analysis revealed that only age ≥61 years was a statistically important factor predicting low pH value (p = 0.005). Further outcome analysis showed that initial low sputum pH before treatment was the only factor significantly associated with shorter length of time to both sputum smear and culture conversion (p = 0.034 and 0.019, respectively) independent of the effects of age, sputum bacterial load, extent of lung lesion, and cavitation. Thus, initial low sputum pH indicated favorable response to anti-tuberculosis therapy. Conclusions. Measuring sputum pH is an easy and inexpensive way of predicting response to standard combination therapy in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis.Entities:
Keywords: Airway acidity; Antituberculous therapy; Pulmonary tuberculosis; Sputum pH
Year: 2015 PMID: 26644982 PMCID: PMC4671190 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.1448
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Baseline characteristics of patients with pulmonary tuberculosis.
| Characteristics | |
|---|---|
| Age, median year (range) | 61 (16–87) |
| Gender—Male, No. (%) | 25 (64.1) |
| Smoking history (current/ex-smoker/never) | 17/14/8 |
| Use of acid-suppressant, No. (%) | 14 (35.9) |
| Immunocompromised, No. (%) | 13 (33.3) |
| Extensive lung lesion, No. (%) | 14 (35.9) |
| Presence of cavities, No. (%) | 24 (61.5) |
| Sputum appearance, M1/M2/P1/P2/P3 | 5/5/10/11/8 |
| Sputum bacterial load, scanty /1 + /2 + /3 + | 2/15/8/14 |
| Sputum pH, median (range) | 7.00 (5.50–8.37) |
Notes.
Acid-suppressant including histamine-2 receptor antagonist and proton pump inhibitor.
Immunocompromised; Patients having diabetes mellitus and/or corticosteroid user.
Extensive lung lesion; Radiological extent of parenchymal disease over one whole lung.
Sputum appearance classified by Miller and Jones’ classification.
Figure 1Distribution of initial sputum pH before treatment in pulmonary tuberculosis patients.
The pH of freshly collected sputum samples was measured according to the Methods section. In the 39 patients included, the median value of initial sputum pH was 7.00.
Figure 2Changes in sputum pH after collecting samples in pulmonary tuberculosis patients.
Serial analysis of pH in freshly collected sputum samples (n = 14) was made up to 6 h under deferent temperature conditions: (A) 4 °C or (B) room temperature. Statistical analysis was performed by using paired-t test.
Figure 3Changes in sputum pH before and after treatment in pulmonary tuberculosis patients.
Paired sputum samples from patients before and 2 months after initiating antituberculous therapy are shown. Statistical analysis was paired t-test.
Univariate and multivariate analyses of odds ratio for an initial low sputum pH (<7.00).
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics | OR | 95% CI |
| OR | 95% CI |
|
| Age ≥61 yr | 8.750 | 2.100–36.251 | 0.004 | 24.535 | 2.685–224.213 | 0.005 |
| Male sex | 2.291 | 0.613–8.498 | 0.320 | |||
| Smoking history (current/ex-smoker vs. never) | 0.938 | 0.214–4.108 | 1.000 | |||
| Use of acid-suppressant | 4.444 | 1.115–17.497 | 0.048 | |||
| Immunocompromised | 3.600 | 0.905–14.132 | 0.096 | |||
| Extensive lung lesion | 1.697 | 0.466–6.165 | 0.514 | |||
| Presence of cavities | 0.300 | 0.080–1.130 | 0.105 | |||
| Sputum appearance | 0.542 | 0.134–2.219 | 0.480 | 0.104 | 0.010–1.128 | 0.063 |
| Sputum bacterial load (<2+ vs ≥2+) | 3.208 | 0.877–11.719 | 0.111 | |||
Notes.
confidence interval
odds ratio
Acid-suppressant including histamine-2 receptor antagonist and proton pump inhibitor.
Immunocompromised; Patients having diabetes mellitus and/or corticosteroid user.
Extensive lung lesion; Radiological extent of parenchymal disease over one whole lung.
Sputum appearance classified by Miller and Jones’ classification.
Fisher’s exact test.
¶ Logistic regression.
Figure 4The time to sputum smear and culture conversion in pulmonary tuberculosis patients.
Thirty-nine included patients were divided into groups according to median initial sputum pH. Kaplan–Meier Curves of time to (A) sputum smear conversion and (B) sputum culture conversion were made in low (pH < 7.00) and high (pH ≥ 7.00) sputum pH groups, and analyzed using the log-rank test. Ticks indicate censored data.
Cox regression analysis for baseline predictors of sputum smear and culture conversion in patients.
| Predictor variable | Hazard ratio | 95% CI |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sputum smear conversion (days) | Age ≥61 yr | 1.910 | 0.724–5.036 | 0.193 |
| Sputum bacterial load | 1.465 | 0.644–3.334 | 0.366 | |
| Extensive lung lesion | 0.543 | 0.221–1.334 | 0.185 | |
| Presence of cavities | 1.825 | 0.845–3.941 | 0.128 | |
| Sputum pH ≥7.0 | 3.094 | 1.093–8.760 | 0.034 | |
| Sputum culture conversion (days) | Age ≥61 yr | 1.556 | 0.724–3.347 | 0.260 |
| Sputum bacterial load | 1.390 | 0.650–2.974 | 0.398 | |
| Extensive lung lesion | 0.723 | 0.322–1.623 | 0.434 | |
| Presence of cavities | 2.044 | 0.894–4.673 | 0.092 | |
| Sputum pH ≥ 7.0 | 2.717 | 1.183–6.240 | 0.019 |
Notes.
confidence interval
Dummy variables for sputum bacterial load: 0 for bacterial load <2+, 1 for bacterial load ≥2+.
Dummy variables for extensive lung lesion: 0 for lung lesion < one whole lung, 1 for lung lesion ≥ one whole lung.
Dummy variables for presence of cavities: 0 for no cavity, 1 for presence of ≥ one cavity.