Evidence Hub

Effectiveness and safety of modified fully oral 9-month treatment regimens for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study

O. Korotych, J. Achar, E. Gurbanova, A. Hovhannesyan, N. Lomtadze, Ana Ciobanu, Alena Skrahina, G. Dravniece et al.

Lancet. Infectious Diseases (Print), 2024

2,813 participants · 27 citations

Abstract

Summary Background In 2020, WHO guidelines prioritised the use of a standard fully oral short treatment regimen (STR) consisting of bedaquiline, levofloxacin or moxifloxacin, ethionamide, ethambutol, high-dose isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and clofazimine for the management of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis. A high prevalence of resistance to constituent drugs precluded its widespread use by countries in the WHO European region. We evaluated three 9-month fully oral modified STRs (mSTRs) in which ethionamide, ethambutol, isoniazid, and pyrazinamide were replaced by linezolid, cycloserine, or delamanid (or a combination). Methods This multicountry, prospective, single-arm, cohort study examined the effectiveness and safety of mSTRs for fluoroquinolone-susceptible, rifampicin-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis in 13 countries in the WHO European region during 2020–23. We enrolled adults and children of all ages with bacteriologically confirmed rifampicin-resistant, fluoroquinolone-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis, and children (aged 0–18 years) with clinically diagnosed disease and a confirmed contact with rifampicin-resistant, fluoroquinolone-susceptible tuberculosis. Participants aged 6 years or older received one of two regimens: bedaquiline, linezolid, levofloxacin, clofazimine, and cycloserine; or bedaquiline, linezolid, levofloxacin, clofazimine, and delamanid. Children younger than 6 years received delamanid, linezolid, levofloxacin, and clofazimine. Participants were…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 2,813 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free