Shortened Treatment

Shortened treatment regimens versus the standard regimen for drug‐sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis

Why are shortened treatment regimens important for TB patients?

Tuberculosis (TB) is a chronic infectious disease that causes more deaths than any other infectious disease worldwide. The current treatment regimen for TB consists of a combination of anti-tuberculosis drugs – isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol for two months, followed by isoniazid and rifampicin for four months – taken for a total of six months. However, due to the long treatment duration, many people do not finish the treatment, or they take the drugs irregularly, which may lead to relapse and drug resistance. A four-month regimen replacing ethambutol with moxifloxacin or gatifloxacin, or isoniazid with moxifloxacin, may improve adherence and treatment outcomes. 

Are shortened treatments effective in treatment of drug-sensitive pulmonary TB? 

  • Relapse after successful treatment is probably increased (moderate‐certainty evidence).
  • Death from any cause, treatment failure, and serious adverse events are probably little or no different (moderate‐certainty evidence).
  • Drug resistance may not be increased with moxifloxacin‐containing four‐month regimens (low‐certainty evidence), but it is uncertain whether this applies to gatifloxacin‐containing regimens (very low‐certainty evidence). 
  • The trials included in this review evaluated shorter regimens given to 3512 participants compared to 2176 participants given standard six‐month treatment regimens.  
  • A similar study with 2516 participants (Dorman et al., 2021) found that a four-month rifapentine-based regimen containing moxifloxacin was noninferior to the standard six-month regimen in the treatment of tuberculosis.

Equity – Do shortened treatments work for the disadvantaged? 

  • The trials in this review were conducted in low- and middle-income countries (Kenya, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia, China, India, Malaysia, Thailand, Mexico, Botswana, Zimbabwe, Benin, Guinea, Senegal, and south India), where TB is most prevalent.
  • Shortened treatment regimens can reduce the cost of treatment, which will be of benefit to patients in low- and middle-income countries. 
  • Decreasing the duration of treatment can also reduce socioeconomic impacts of TB, such as reduced time off work and reduced loss of earnings.
  • Trials including specific disadvantaged groups, such as those who are HIV+, were included in the review.
  • Children, pregnant women, and people with several comorbid conditions were excluded from the trials in this review.

Intervention Delivery 

  • Treatment regimens of less than six months' duration including any anti‐tuberculosis drug(s) or combinations thereof (new drugs or standard anti‐tuberculosis drugs at higher than recommended doses).
  • Comparison 1: Moxifloxacin‐containing 4‐month ATT regimens versus standard 6‐month ATT regimen for drug‐sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis.
  • Comparison 2: Gatifloxacin‐containing 4‐month ATT regimens compared to standard 6‐month ATT regimens for drug‐sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis.

Summary of Findings [SOF] Table: Moxifloxacin‐containing 4‐month ATT regimens versus standard 6‐month ATT regimen for drug‐sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis

Patient or population: adults with drug‐sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis
Setting: low‐ and middle‐income countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America
Intervention: moxifloxacin‐containing 4‐month ATT
Comparison: standard 6‐month ATT

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect

(95% CI)

Number of participants (studies)

Certainty of the evidence (GRADE)

Comments

Risk with 6month standard ATT

Risk with 4month moxifloxacincontaining ATT

Relapse
Follow
up: range 12 to 24 months

32 per 1000

82 more relapses per 1000
(44 more to 140 more)

RR 3.56
(2.37 to 5.37)

2265
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE
a,b,c

Due to indirectness

The 4month regimen probably increases relapse compared to the 6month regimen

Death from any cause

Followup: range 18 to 24 months

21 per 1000

2 more deaths per 1000
(7 fewer to 16 more)

RR 1.06
(0.65 to 1.75)

2760
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE
a,c,d

Due to indirectness

The 4month regimen probably makes little or no difference in death from any cause compared to the 6month regimen

Treatment failure

16 per 1000

5 fewer treatment failures per 1000
(11 fewer to 8 more)

RR 0.71
(0.33 to 1.52)

2282
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE
a,c,d

Due to indirectness

The 4month regimen probably results in little or no difference in treatment failure compared to the 6month regimen

Acquired drug resistance

7 per 1000

5 fewer with acquired drug resistance per 1000

(6 fewer to 2 more)

RR 0.33
(0.08 to 1.31)

2282

(3 RCTs)e

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW
c,f,g

Due to indirectness and imprecision

The 4month regimen may be little or no different than the 6month regimen in the incidence of acquired drug resistance

Serious adverse events

Followup: range 18 to 24 months

62 per 1000

2 fewer with serious adverse events per 1000
(16 fewer to 16 more)

RR 0.97
(0.74 to 1.27)

3548
(4 RCTs)
g

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE
a,c,d,h

Due to indirectness

The 4month regimen probably results in little or no difference in serious adverse events compared to the 6month regimen

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
ATT: anti
tuberculosis treatment; CI: confidence interval; RCT: randomized controlled trial; RR: risk ratio.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence.
High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect.
Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different.
Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect.
Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.

aNo serious risk of bias: although Jawahar 2013 was at high risk of allocation bias, exclusion of this trial from the sensitivity analysis did not change the direction of effect. Not downgraded.
bNo serious inconsistency: although trial results indicated a moderate degree of heterogeneity (I² = 58%), the differences were between small and large effects favouring 6month ATT. Changing the model from fixed effect to random effects did not alter the direction of effect. Not downgraded.
cDowngraded one level for serious indirectness: trials excluded children and adolescents, people with diabetes, and other physical comorbid conditions.
dNo serious imprecision: the 95% CI for the risk ratio was wide but event rates were low and the sample size was large; the risk ratio and the 95% CI around absolute estimates did not indicate clinically appreciable differences with either regimen. Not downgraded.
eNo serious imprecision: the 95% CI for the risk ratio was wide but event rates were low and the sample size was large; the 95% CI for the risk ratio (RR 0.5% fewer with the 4month regimen, 95% CI 1.1% fewer to 0.8% more) did not indicate that there were clinically important differences in proportions with treatment failure. Not downgraded.
fDrug resistance was assessed using LJ solid media in one trial, MGIT liquid media in another trial, and either or both in the third trial.
gSerious imprecision: events were few and the 95% CI for the pooled estimate was wide. In the largest study that also reported the most events, results were equivocal for acquired resistance and only possible resistance was reported. Downgraded one level.
hThree trials provided data for all outcomes in this summary table (Gillespie 2014Jawahar 2013Jindani 2014); Velayutham 2014 provided data only for serious adverse events.

Summary of Findings [SOF] Table: Gatifloxacin‐containing 4‐month ATT regimens compared to standard 6‐month ATT regimens for drug‐sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis

Patient or population: adults with drug‐sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis
Setting: low‐ and middle‐income countries in sub‐Saharan Africa and India
Intervention: gatifloxacin‐containing 4‐month ATT regime
Comparison: standard 6‐month treatment regimen

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

№ of participants
(studies)

Certainty of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with 6month standard ATT

Risk with gatifloxacincontaining
4
month ATT

Relapse
Followup: 24 months

70 per 1000

77 more relapses per 1000
(32 more to 128 more)

RR 2.11
(1.56 to 2.84)

1633
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATEa,b

Due to indirectness

The 4month regimen probably increases relapse compared to the 6month regimen

Death from any cause
Followup: 24 months

29 per 1000

3 fewer deaths per 1000
(14 fewer to 16 more)

RR 0.90
(0.53 to 1.53)

1886
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATEa,b,c

Due to indirectness

The 4month regimen probably makes little or no difference in death compared to the 6month regimen

Treatment failure

25 per 1000

1 less treatment failure per 1000
(12 fewer to 18 more)

RR 0.93
(0.51 to 1.70)

1657
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
MODERATEa,b,c

Due to indirectness

The 4month regimen probably makes little or no difference in treatment failure compared to the 6month regimen

Acquired drug resistance

12 per 1000

9 fewer with acquired drug resistance per 1000

(12 fewer to 49 more)

RR 0.24

(0.01 to 5.01)

301

(1 RCT)d

⊕⊝⊝⊝
VERY LOWb,e,f

Due to indirectness, risk of bias, and imprecision

We do not know if acquired drug resistance is any different in the 4month and the 6month regimens

Serious adverse events

24 per 1000

0 fewer serious adverse events per 1000
(10 fewer to 18 more)

RR 1.02
(0.58 to 1.77)

1993
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATEa,b,c

Due to indirectness

The 4month regimen probably results in little or no difference in serious adverse events compared to the 6month regimen

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
ATT: anti
tuberculosis treatment; CI: confidence interval; RCT: randomized controlled trial; RR: risk ratio.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence.

High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect.
Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different.
Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect.
Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.

aNo serious risk of bias: although Jawahar 2013 was assigned high risk of bias for allocation concealment, removal of this trial from the sensitivity analysis did not significantly alter the direction, magnitude, or precision of the effect estimate. Not downgraded.
bDowngraded one level for serious indirectness: trials excluded children and adolescents and people with diabetes mellitus and other comorbid physical conditions and those with alcohol abuse.
cNo serious imprecision: the 95% CI of the risk ratio was wide, but events were few and the sample size was reasonably large; the 95% CI for the absolute estimates did not indicate clinically appreciable benefits for either regimen. Not downgraded.
dOne trial provided data on acquired drug resistance (
Jawahar 2013). Merle 2014 reported only drug susceptibility at baseline.
eDowngraded one level for serious risk of bias: allocation concealment was compromised and there were baseline imbalances in proportions with drug resistance at baseline in the sole trial for this outcome (
Jawahar 2013).
fDowngraded two levels for very serious imprecision: the data for acquired resistance come from only one trial with 301 participants, and this trial did not evaluate resistance to gatifloxacin.

Relevance of the review for disadvantaged communities

Findings

Interpretation

Equity – Which of the PROGRESS groups examined

 

The trials included in this review were conducted in a mix of low- and middle-income countries (Kenya, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia, China, India, Malaysia, Thailand, Mexico, Botswana, Zimbabwe, Benin, Guinea, Senegal, and south India). There is a greater prevalence of tuberculosis in said countries relative to those of high-income.

 

TB is widespread in low- and middle-income countries and shortened treatment regimens may improve treatment adherence and thus decrease prevalence in these endemic areas. The study provides evidence demonstrating that four-month treatment regimens are inferior to standard sixmonth regimens in preventing relapse (although there is probably little or no difference in serious side effects or cure). The included studies were deemed low or moderate quality and thus further trials are needed.  

No other PROGRESS-plus groups were

examined in the review

This review did not analyze the effect of shorter treatment regimens across additional PROGRESS groups. Several factors, such as residence, occupation, education, socioeconomic status, etc., must be taken into consideration when developing treatment programs, as they have an impact on treatment adherence.

Equity Applicability

 

The review summarized trials addressing treatment of HIV+ populations.

 

It did not discuss the effects on children, pregnant women, or those with comorbid conditions.

The impact of shortened treatment regimens may differ in marginalized populations, reducing the certainty in the effect of estimates. Further trials testing treatments in these groups are therefore needed.

 

This review also did not include people with many comorbid conditions, such as previous TB and those with diabetes. Future research could examine the effectiveness of shortened treatment regiments for patients with such co-morbidities. However, it may be argued that relapse with the four-month regimens would likely not be less in populations with serious comorbidities than was reported in the trials in this review.

Cost-equity

 

No studies contributed economic data

Patients in low- and middle-income countries may not be able to afford TB treatment due to economic hardship through illness and loss of work. As TB treatment duration

increases, it can be expected that the cost of the regimen will increase as well. Thus, shortened treatment regimens may offer a more affordable alternative for patients in such countries. Further economic analyses are needed to develop an understanding of the most cost-effective and efficient treatment regimen.

Community Preferences

 

 

Community preferences regarding the length of regimens were not discussed. However, given that shorter regimens require less time and money, they are likely to be favoured over lengthier treatments. Research is needed to develop a regimen with novel drug combinations, given for less than six months, that is proven to be as safe and effective as the currently recommended six-month regimen.

Comments on this summary? Please contact Jennifer Petkovic.

This summary was prepared by Lama Dahroug