Evidence Hub

Treatment outcomes and drug-related adverse events across four short-course RR-TB regimens in South Africa: A retrospective analysis

Ndjeka N, Perumal R, Romanowski K, Mathema H, Amusa LB, Campbell JR, Conradie F, Schaaf HS et al.

International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 2026

396 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Shorter all-oral regimens for the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis or rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (MDR/RR-TB) have improved efficacy, but their performance under programmatic conditions remains insufficiently characterized.

METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated treatment outcomes and drug-related adverse events (AEs) among 396 randomly selected patients from four facilities in three provinces across South Africa. Patients received four different short-course regimens sequentially introduced into national programme: i) injectable 9-11-month (injectable-regimen), ii) bedaquiline-ethionamide-containing (ethionamide-regimen), iii) bedaquiline-linezolid-containing (linezolid-regimen), and iv) bedaquiline-pretomanid-linezolid-levofloxacin regimen (BPaL-L).

RESULTS: Compared with the injectable regimen, the ethionamide-regimen (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.98, 95% CI: 1.07-3.65) and BPaL-L (aOR 2.31; 95% CI: 1.23-4.33) had higher odds of treatment success; the linezolid-regimen did not (aOR 1.68; 95% CI: 0.92-3.06). The linezolid and BPaL-L regimens had similar odds of grade 3 or higher AEs, and comparable AE-related drug discontinuation. Toxicity patterns differed, from hearing loss with injectables to anaemia and neurotoxicity with BPaL-L.

CONCLUSION: Under programmatic conditions, the BPaL-L regimen achieved the highest treatment success while maintaining manageable safety profiles. These findings provide valuable evidence to guide patient…

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: 396 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