| Literature DB >> 35590345 |
Constantino Lopes1, Debashish Kundu2, Ismael Da Costa Barreto3, Bernardino da Cruz4, S Siva Kumar5, Sureshbabu Ramalingam3,6, Anna S Dean7, Vineet Bhatia8, Prabhu Seenivasan5, C Padmapriyadarsini5, Olga Tosas Auguet7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A national drug resistance survey (DRS) was implemented for the first time in Timor-Leste (TL) in 2019. The primary objective of the survey was to assess the prevalence of drug resistance among new and previously treated pulmonary TB patients in the country.Entities:
Keywords: Anti-TB Drug Resistance Survey; Rifampicin resistance; Timor-Leste; Whole genome sequencing
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35590345 PMCID: PMC9119797 DOI: 10.1186/s41256-022-00249-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Glob Health Res Policy ISSN: 2397-0642
Fig. 1Timor-Leste’s anti-TB drug resistance survey sample processing workflow. SS + = sputum smear-positive (on microscopy); Prev Treated = previously treated; RIF = rifampicin; RR-TB = rifampicin-resistant TB (including MDR-TB); RS-TB = rifampicin-susceptible TB; pDST = phenotypic DST; WGS = whole genome sequencing; NTRL = National TB Reference Laboratory; SNRL = Supranational Laboratory
Demographic and clinical characteristics of bacteriologically confirmed TB patients enrolled in the survey
| Patient characteristics | New | Previously treated | Combined | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frequency (n) | % | Number | % | Number | % | |
| Male | 479 | 56.8 | 45 | 61.6 | 524 | 57.1 |
| Female | 365 | 43.2 | 28 | 38.4 | 393 | 42.9 |
| 0–14 | 19 | 2.2 | 0 | 0.0 | 19 | 2.1 |
| 15–24 | 212 | 25.1 | 11 | 15.1 | 223 | 24.3 |
| 25–34 | 179 | 21.2 | 19 | 26.0 | 198 | 21.6 |
| 35–44 | 111 | 13.2 | 7 | 9.6 | 118 | 12.9 |
| 45–54 | 107 | 12.7 | 18 | 24.7 | 125 | 13.6 |
| 55–64 | 107 | 12.7 | 6 | 8.2 | 113 | 12.3 |
| 65+ | 109 | 12.9 | 12 | 16.4 | 121 | 13.2 |
| Negative | 863 | 98.7 | 77 | 98.6 | 904 | 98.7 |
| Positive | 11 | 1.3 | 1 | 1.4 | 12 | 1.3 |
| Aileu | 23 | 2.7 | 2 | 2.7 | 25 | 2.7 |
| Ainaro | 14 | 1.7 | 0 | 0.0 | 14 | 1.5 |
| Baucau | 43 | 5.1 | 4 | 5.5 | 47 | 5.1 |
| Bobonaro | 68 | 8.1 | 6 | 8.2 | 74 | 8.1 |
| Covalima | 37 | 4.4 | 4 | 5.5 | 41 | 4.5 |
| Dili | 297 | 35.2 | 28 | 38.4 | 325 | 35.4 |
| Ermera | 211 | 25.0 | 9 | 12.3 | 220 | 24.0 |
| Lauten | 26 | 3.1 | 5 | 6.8 | 31 | 3.4 |
| Liquica | 31 | 3.7 | 5 | 6.8 | 36 | 3.9 |
| Manatuto | 24 | 2.8 | 3 | 4.1 | 27 | 2.9 |
| Manufahi | 17 | 2.0 | 4 | 5.5 | 21 | 2.3 |
| Oecusse | 33 | 3.9 | 2 | 2.7 | 35 | 3.8 |
| Viqueque | 20 | 2.4 | 1 | 1.4 | 21 | 2.3 |
aOne new TB patient with missing HIV status
Fig. 2Age/sex population structure of bacteriologically confirmed pulmonary TB patients
Prevalence of rifampicin resistance among TB patients in the survey, overall and by previous anti-TB treatment history
| Total TB cases | RR-TB | % (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| New patients | 844 | 5 | 0.6 (0.2–1.3) |
| Previously treated patients | 73 | 2 | 2.7 (0.5–8.2) |
| All patients | 917 | 7 | 0.8 (0.3–1.5) |
RR-TB rifampicin resistant tuberculosis, 95% CI 95% confidence intervals
Risk Factors for development of rifampicin-resistant TB
| Variable | Level | Total TB caes | RR-TB cases | Odds raion (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment history | New | 844 | 5 | 0.11 | |
| Previously treated | 73 | 2 | 4.7 (0.7–22.4) | ||
| Gender | Male | 524 | 4 | 0.96 | |
| Female | 393 | 3 | 1.0 (0.2–4.8) | ||
| HIV statusa | Negative | 904 | 7 | NA | |
| Positive | 12 | 0 | NA | ||
| Age | 15–24 | 223 | 1 | 0.99 | |
| 0–14 | 19 | 0 | NA | ||
| 25–34 | 198 | 2 | 4.5 (0.2–43.4) | ||
| 35–44 | 118 | 1 | 1.8 (0.1–47.1) | ||
| 45–54 | 125 | 1 | 1.4 (0.1–36.3) | ||
| 55–64 | 113 | 1 | 2.0 (0.1–50.1) | ||
| 65 + | 121 | 1 | 1.6 (0.1–41.4) | ||
| Municipality | Other municipalities | 592 | 2 | 0.06 | |
| Dili capital | 325 | 5 | 4.5 (1.0–31.7) |
Univariate logistic regression analyses of key demographic and clinical variables as potential predictors of rifampicin resistance. Analyses were adjusted by treatment history. Variable levels with zero cases were excluded from the analyses; consequently, no analysis was conducted for HIV, but numbers of rifampicin resistant cases disaggregated by HIV status are included in the table for reference
aHIV status was missing for one patient