Evidence Hub

Comparative efficacy and safety of high-dose rifamycin regimens for tuberculosis treatment: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Feng Z, Wu H, Li Q, Zhang X, He Q, Wang H, Yu J, Ge S et al.

BMJ open, 2025

6,456 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Objectives: High-dose rifamycin (HDR) regimens have demonstrated significant potential in tuberculosis (TB) treatment. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of different HDR regimens.

Design: Using a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).

Data sources: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched up to 2 November 2024.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Randomised controlled trials that compared the efficacy and safety of HDR regimens (rifampin 15-30 mg/kg/day and rifapentine 7.5-20 mg/kg/day) to standard-dose rifampin in patients with pulmonary drug-susceptible TB were included.

Data extraction and synthesis: The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane tools. We conducted NMA with GEMTC in R. The simulation was performed using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo technique set on four parallel chains, with 20 000 burn-in iterations, 50 000 inference iterations and a thinning factor of n=2.5. To check for model convergence, Gelman and Rubin diagnostic plots and density plots were applied. We assessed heterogeneity using the I² test, evaluated transitivity by comparing effect modifiers across studies and examined consistency via node-splitting analysis. The confidence in network meta-analysis online tool and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 Tool were used to assess evidence certainty and risk of bias, respectively. Higher surface area under the cumulative rank curve scores indicated a higher probability of top-ranking…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 6,456 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