Susan E Dorman1, Payam Nahid1, Ekaterina V Kurbatova1, Patrick P J Phillips1, Kia Bryant1, Kelly E Dooley1, Melissa Engle1, Stefan V Goldberg1, Ha T T Phan1, James Hakim1, John L Johnson1, Madeleine Lourens1, Neil A Martinson1, Grace Muzanyi1, Kim Narunsky1, Sandy Nerette1, Nhung V Nguyen1, Thuong H Pham1, Samuel Pierre1, Anne E Purfield1, Wadzanai Samaneka1, Radojka M Savic1, Ian Sanne1, Nigel A Scott1, Justin Shenje1, Erin Sizemore1, Andrew Vernon1, Ziyaad Waja1, Marc Weiner1, Susan Swindells1, Richard E Chaisson1. 1. From the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (S.E.D.); the UCSF Center for Tuberculosis, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco (P.N., P.P.J.P., R.M.S.); the Vietnam National Tuberculosis Program-University of California, San Francisco Research Collaboration Unit (P.N., P.P.J.P., H.T.T.P., N.V.N., T.H.P., R.M.S.) and the National Lung Hospital (N.V.N., T.H.P.) - both in Hanoi; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta (E.V.K., K.B., S.V.G., A.E.P., N.A.S., E.S., A.V.); the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio and the South Texas Veterans Health Care System, San Antonio (M.E., M.W.); the University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Harare (J.H., W.S.); Case Western Reserve University, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland (J.L.J.); the Uganda-Case Western Reserve University Research Collaboration, Kampala (J.L.J., G.M.); TASK (M.L.), the University of Cape Town Lung Institute (K.N.), and the South African Tuberculosis Vaccine Initiative (J.S.), Cape Town, the Perinatal HIV Research Unit, University of the Witwatersrand (N.A.M., Z.W.), and the Wits Health Consortium (I.S.), Johannesburg - all in South Africa; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore (K.E.D., N.A.M., R.E.C.), and the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, Rockville (A.E.P.) - both in Maryland; the Haitian Group for the Study of Kaposi's Sarcoma and Opportunistic Infections (GHESKIO), Port-au-Prince (S.N., S.P.); and the University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha (S.S.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rifapentine-based regimens have potent antimycobacterial activity that may allow for a shorter course in patients with drug-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis. METHODS: In an open-label, phase 3, randomized, controlled trial involving persons with newly diagnosed pulmonary tuberculosis from 13 countries, we compared two 4-month rifapentine-based regimens with a standard 6-month regimen consisting of rifampin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (control) using a noninferiority margin of 6.6 percentage points. In one 4-month regimen, rifampin was replaced with rifapentine; in the other, rifampin was replaced with rifapentine and ethambutol with moxifloxacin. The primary efficacy outcome was survival free of tuberculosis at 12 months. RESULTS: Among 2516 participants who had undergone randomization, 2343 had a culture positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis that was not resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, or fluoroquinolones (microbiologically eligible population; 768 in the control group, 791 in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 784 in the rifapentine group), of whom 194 were coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus and 1703 had cavitation on chest radiography. A total of 2234 participants could be assessed for the primary outcome (assessable population; 726 in the control group, 756 in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 752 in the rifapentine group). Rifapentine with moxifloxacin was noninferior to the control in the microbiologically eligible population (15.5% vs. 14.6% had an unfavorable outcome; difference, 1.0 percentage point; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.6 to 4.5) and in the assessable population (11.6% vs. 9.6%; difference, 2.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.1 to 5.1). Noninferiority was shown in the secondary and sensitivity analyses. Rifapentine without moxifloxacin was not shown to be noninferior to the control in either population (17.7% vs. 14.6% with an unfavorable outcome in the microbiologically eligible population; difference, 3.0 percentage points [95% CI, -0.6 to 6.6]; and 14.2% vs. 9.6% in the assessable population; difference, 4.4 percentage points [95% CI, 1.2 to 7.7]). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred during the on-treatment period in 19.3% of participants in the control group, 18.8% in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 14.3% in the rifapentine group. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of a 4-month rifapentine-based regimen containing moxifloxacin was noninferior to the standard 6-month regimen in the treatment of tuberculosis. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and others; Study 31/A5349 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02410772.).
BACKGROUND: Rifapentine-based regimens have potent antimycobacterial activity that may allow for a shorter course in patients with drug-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis. METHODS: In an open-label, phase 3, randomized, controlled trial involving persons with newly diagnosed pulmonary tuberculosis from 13 countries, we compared two 4-month rifapentine-based regimens with a standard 6-month regimen consisting of rifampin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (control) using a noninferiority margin of 6.6 percentage points. In one 4-month regimen, rifampin was replaced with rifapentine; in the other, rifampin was replaced with rifapentine and ethambutol with moxifloxacin. The primary efficacy outcome was survival free of tuberculosis at 12 months. RESULTS: Among 2516 participants who had undergone randomization, 2343 had a culture positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis that was not resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, or fluoroquinolones (microbiologically eligible population; 768 in the control group, 791 in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 784 in the rifapentine group), of whom 194 were coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus and 1703 had cavitation on chest radiography. A total of 2234 participants could be assessed for the primary outcome (assessable population; 726 in the control group, 756 in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 752 in the rifapentine group). Rifapentine with moxifloxacin was noninferior to the control in the microbiologically eligible population (15.5% vs. 14.6% had an unfavorable outcome; difference, 1.0 percentage point; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.6 to 4.5) and in the assessable population (11.6% vs. 9.6%; difference, 2.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.1 to 5.1). Noninferiority was shown in the secondary and sensitivity analyses. Rifapentine without moxifloxacin was not shown to be noninferior to the control in either population (17.7% vs. 14.6% with an unfavorable outcome in the microbiologically eligible population; difference, 3.0 percentage points [95% CI, -0.6 to 6.6]; and 14.2% vs. 9.6% in the assessable population; difference, 4.4 percentage points [95% CI, 1.2 to 7.7]). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred during the on-treatment period in 19.3% of participants in the control group, 18.8% in the rifapentine-moxifloxacin group, and 14.3% in the rifapentine group. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of a 4-month rifapentine-based regimen containing moxifloxacin was noninferior to the standard 6-month regimen in the treatment of tuberculosis. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and others; Study 31/A5349 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02410772.).
Authors: Ian M Rosenthal; Kathy Williams; Sandeep Tyagi; Andrew A Vernon; Charles A Peloquin; William R Bishai; Jacques H Grosset; Eric L Nuermberger Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2005-09-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Yingda L Xie; Soumitesh Chakravorty; Derek T Armstrong; Sandra L Hall; Laura E Via; Taeksun Song; Xing Yuan; Xiaoying Mo; Hong Zhu; Peng Xu; Qian Gao; Myungsun Lee; Jongseok Lee; Laura E Smith; Ray Y Chen; Joon Sung Joh; YoungSoo Cho; Xin Liu; Xianglin Ruan; Lili Liang; Nila Dharan; Sang-Nae Cho; Clifton E Barry; Jerrold J Ellner; Susan E Dorman; David Alland Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Eric L Nuermberger; Tetsuyuki Yoshimatsu; Sandeep Tyagi; Richard J O'Brien; Andrew N Vernon; Richard E Chaisson; William R Bishai; Jacques H Grosset Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2003-10-24 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Eric L Nuermberger; Tetsuyuki Yoshimatsu; Sandeep Tyagi; Kathy Williams; Ian Rosenthal; Richard J O'Brien; Andrew A Vernon; Richard E Chaisson; William R Bishai; Jacques H Grosset Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2004-08-11 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Ian M Rosenthal; Ming Zhang; Kathy N Williams; Charles A Peloquin; Sandeep Tyagi; Andrew A Vernon; William R Bishai; Richard E Chaisson; Jacques H Grosset; Eric L Nuermberger Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Nicholas C Poulton; Zachary A Azadian; Michael A DeJesus; Jeremy M Rock Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2022-08-03 Impact factor: 5.938
Authors: Samantha Pillay; Karen R Steingart; Geraint R Davies; Marty Chaplin; Margaretha De Vos; Samuel G Schumacher; Rob Warren; Grant Theron Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2022-05-18
Authors: Oliver W Meldrum; Kylie B R Belchamber; Kiarina D Chichirelo-Konstantynovych; Katie L Horton; Tetyana V Konstantynovych; Merete B Long; Melissa J McDonnell; Lidia Perea; Alberto L Garcia-Basteiro; Michael R Loebinger; Raquel Duarte; Holly R Keir Journal: ERJ Open Res Date: 2022-05-23
Authors: Oyindamola O Adefisayo; Pierre Dupuy; Astha Nautiyal; James M Bean; Michael S Glickman Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2021-12-16 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Kendra K Radtke; Anneke C Hesseling; J L Winckler; Heather R Draper; Belen P Solans; Stephanie Thee; Lubbe Wiesner; Louvina E van der Laan; Barend Fourie; James Nielsen; H Simon Schaaf; Radojka M Savic; Anthony J Garcia-Prats Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2022-04-28 Impact factor: 20.999