Chimeremma D Nnadi1, Laura F Anderson2, Lori R Armstrong3, Helen R Stagg4, Debora Pedrazzoli5, Robert Pratt3, Charles M Heilig3, Ibrahim Abubakar6, Patrick K Moonan3. 1. Epidemic Intelligence Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA Division of Tuberculosis Elimination, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 2. Tuberculosis Section, Public Health England, London, UK. 3. Division of Tuberculosis Elimination, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 4. Research Department of Infection and Population Health, University College London, London, UK. 5. TB Modelling Group, TB Centre and CMMID, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London, UK. 6. Tuberculosis Section, Public Health England, London, UK Research Department of Infection and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: TB remains a major public health concern, even in low-incidence countries like the USA and the UK. Over the last two decades, cases of TB reported in the USA have declined, while they have increased substantially in the UK. We examined factors associated with this divergence in TB trends between the two countries. METHODS: We analysed all cases of TB reported to the US and UK national TB surveillance systems from 1 January 2000 through 31 December 2011. Negative binominal regression was used to assess potential demographic, clinical and risk factor variables associated with differences in observed trends. FINDINGS: A total of 259,609 cases were reported. From 2000 to 2011, annual TB incidence rates declined from 5.8 to 3.4 cases per 100,000 in the USA, whereas in the UK, TB incidence increased from 11.4 to 14.4 cases per 100,000. The majority of cases in both the USA (56%) and the UK (64%) were among foreign-born persons. The number of foreign-born cases reported in the USA declined by 15% (7731 in 2000 to 6564 in 2011) while native-born cases fell by 54% (8442 in 2000 to 3883 in 2011). In contrast, the number of foreign-born cases reported in the UK increased by 80% (3380 in 2000 to 6088 in 2011), while the number of native-born cases remained largely unchanged (2158 in 2000 to 2137 in 2011). In an adjusted negative binomial regression model, significant differences in trend were associated with sex, age, race/ethnicity, site of disease, HIV status and previous history of TB (p<0.01). Among the foreign-born, significant differences in trend were also associated with time since UK or US entry (p<0.01). INTERPRETATION: To achieve TB elimination in the UK, a re-evaluation of current TB control policies and practices with a focus on foreign-born are needed. In the USA, maintaining and strengthening control practices are necessary to sustain the progress made over the last 20 years. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
BACKGROUND: TB remains a major public health concern, even in low-incidence countries like the USA and the UK. Over the last two decades, cases of TB reported in the USA have declined, while they have increased substantially in the UK. We examined factors associated with this divergence in TB trends between the two countries. METHODS: We analysed all cases of TB reported to the US and UK national TB surveillance systems from 1 January 2000 through 31 December 2011. Negative binominal regression was used to assess potential demographic, clinical and risk factor variables associated with differences in observed trends. FINDINGS: A total of 259,609 cases were reported. From 2000 to 2011, annual TB incidence rates declined from 5.8 to 3.4 cases per 100,000 in the USA, whereas in the UK, TB incidence increased from 11.4 to 14.4 cases per 100,000. The majority of cases in both the USA (56%) and the UK (64%) were among foreign-born persons. The number of foreign-born cases reported in the USA declined by 15% (7731 in 2000 to 6564 in 2011) while native-born cases fell by 54% (8442 in 2000 to 3883 in 2011). In contrast, the number of foreign-born cases reported in the UK increased by 80% (3380 in 2000 to 6088 in 2011), while the number of native-born cases remained largely unchanged (2158 in 2000 to 2137 in 2011). In an adjusted negative binomial regression model, significant differences in trend were associated with sex, age, race/ethnicity, site of disease, HIV status and previous history of TB (p<0.01). Among the foreign-born, significant differences in trend were also associated with time since UK or US entry (p<0.01). INTERPRETATION: To achieve TB elimination in the UK, a re-evaluation of current TB control policies and practices with a focus on foreign-born are needed. In the USA, maintaining and strengthening control practices are necessary to sustain the progress made over the last 20 years. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Authors: Eleanor S Click; Patrick K Moonan; Carla A Winston; Lauren S Cowan; John E Oeltmann Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2012-01-15 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Timothy R Sterling; M Elsa Villarino; Andrey S Borisov; Nong Shang; Fred Gordin; Erin Bliven-Sizemore; Judith Hackman; Carol Dukes Hamilton; Dick Menzies; Amy Kerrigan; Stephen E Weis; Marc Weiner; Diane Wing; Marcus B Conde; Lorna Bozeman; C Robert Horsburgh; Richard E Chaisson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-12-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Manish Pareek; John P Watson; L Peter Ormerod; Onn Min Kon; Gerrit Woltmann; Peter J White; Ibrahim Abubakar; Ajit Lalvani Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2011-04-20 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: Carla A Winston; Thomas R Navin; Jose E Becerra; Michael P Chen; Lori R Armstrong; Carla Jeffries; Rachel S Yelk Woodruff; Jessie Wing; Angela M Starks; Craig M Hales; J Steve Kammerer; William R Mac Kenzie; Kiren Mitruka; Mark C Miner; Sandy Price; Joseph Scavotto; Ann M Cronin; Phillip Griffin; Philip A LoBue; Kenneth G Castro Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2011-11-07 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Nathan W Furukawa; Mahri Z Haider; Sheanne J Allen; Sherry L Carlson; Scott W Lindquist Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2017-04-06 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Sourya Shrestha; Sarah Cherng; Andrew N Hill; Sue Reynolds; Jennifer Flood; Pennan M Barry; Adam Readhead; Margaret Oxtoby; Michael Lauzardo; Tom Privett; Suzanne M Marks; David W Dowdy Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2019-09-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Erika M Dennis; Yun Hao; Mabella Tamambang; Tasha N Roshan; Knubian J Gatlin; Hanane Bghigh; Oladimeji T Ogunyemi; Fatoumata Diallo; Kiara K Spooner; Jason L Salemi; Omonike A Olaleye; Kashif Z Khan; Muktar H Aliyu; Hamisu M Salihu Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-03-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jennifer A Davidson; Miranda G Loutet; Catherine O'Connor; Cathriona Kearns; Robert M M Smith; Maeve K Lalor; H Lucy Thomas; Ibrahim Abubakar; Dominik Zenner Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: Patrick K Moonan; Sreenivas A Nair; Reshu Agarwal; Vineet K Chadha; Puneet K Dewan; Umesh D Gupta; Christine S Ho; Timothy H Holtz; Ajay M Kumar; Nishant Kumar; Prahlad Kumar; Susan A Maloney; Sundari R Mase; John E Oeltmann; C N Paramasivan; Malik M Parmar; Kiran K Rade; Ranjani Ramachandran; Raghuram Rao; Virendra S Salhorta; Rohit Sarin; Sanjay Sarin; Kuldeep S Sachdeva; Sriram Selvaraju; Rupak Singla; Diya Surie; Jamhoih Tonsing; Srikanth P Tripathy; Sunil D Khaparde Journal: BMJ Glob Health Date: 2018-10-08