Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Drugs for preventing tuberculosis in people at risk of multiple‐drug‐resistant pulmonary tuberculosis

Esta versión no es la más reciente

Contraer todo Desplegar todo

Abstract

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To evaluate antituberculous drugs given to people exposed to MDR‐TB in preventing active tuberculosis.

Background

The term tuberculosis describes a broad range of clinical illnesses caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Although M. tuberculosis may affect any organ, pulmonary tuberculosis is the most common form, the most communicable, and the focus of the present review. Approximately 1.7 billion people, nearly one third of the worlds population, are thought to be infected with M. tuberculosis, with an estimated that two million deaths each year (Jasmer 2002).

Tuberculosis is transmitted through inhalation of droplet nuclei from infected people. The pathogenesis of tuberculosis involves three phases, transmission and acquisition of infection, latency, and progression of latent infection into active disease. In most instances, the infection is asymptomatic and the only evidence of infection is a positive skin hypersensitivity test, also known as a Mantoux or tuberculin test. Tuberculin testing is performed by injecting a standard dose of tuberculin into the skin of the forearm and measurement of the subsequent skin reaction (an induration or palpable raised hardened area). A person who has been exposed to the bacteria is expected to mount an immune response in the skin containing the bacterial proteins. The reaction is read by measuring the diameter of induration in millimetres. Calcific foci in the lung are seen only in a minority of cases, with viable bacilli in an even smaller minority. Approximately 3% to 4% of people with latent infection acquire active tuberculosis during the first year after tuberculin conversion (converting from a negative to positive skin reaction to a tuberculin test), and an additional 5% to 15% of people with latent infection develop active disease during their lifetime (Mandell 2000).

It should be noted that people who have been received a Bacille Calmette‐Guérin vaccine (BCG), a live‐attenuated mycobacterial strain derived from Mycobacterium bovis, may have a reaction to a tuberculin test. No reliable method has been developed to distinguish tuberculin reactions caused by vaccination with BCG from those caused by natural mycobacterial infections, although reactions of greater than 20 mm of induration are not likely caused by BCG. Therefore, a positive reaction to tuberculin in BCG‐vaccinated persons indicates infection with M. tuberculosis when the person tested is at increased risk for recent infection or has medical conditions that increase the risk for disease (ATS 2000). People with increased risk for developing active tuberculosis due exposure to M. tuberculosis include people with recent skin test conversion, children under the age of five, and people with particular clinical conditions such as immunosuppression (ATS 2000).

Symptoms of tuberculosis include cough (sometimes with haemoptysis or blood in the sputum), chest pain, breathlessness, night sweats, and signs of pneumonia. In advanced disease, there may be extreme weight loss. Approximately a quarter of sufferers from the disease die, most of them young adults (Dye 2002).

The emergence and spread of multiple‐drug‐resistant tuberculosis (MDR‐TB), caused by strains of M. tuberculosis resistant to at least isoniazid and rifampicin, is a threat to global tuberculosis control. Treatment of MDR‐TB is prolonged, expensive, more toxic than treatment of susceptible tuberculosis, and often unsuccessful (Pablos‐Mendez 2002).

MDR‐TB is essentially a man‐made disease. Exposure to a single drug, whether as a result of poor adherence to treatment, inappropriate prescribing (including inappropriate multiple‐drug therapy), irregular drug supply, or poor drug quality, suppresses the growth of bacilli susceptible to that drug but permits the multiplication of pre‐existing drug‐resistant mutants. The patient then develops acquired resistance. Subsequent transmission of such bacilli to other people may lead to disease that is drug resistant from the outset, an occurrence known as primary resistance (WHO/IUATLD 2004).

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the prevalence of MDR‐TB between 1999 and 2002 among new cases ranged from 0% to 14.2% (1.1% median). Among previously treated cases, the prevalence ranged between 0% and 60% (7% median). When all cases were combined, the prevalence ranged between 0% and 26.8% (1.7% median); and rates of over 10% were documented in 11 countries (WHO/IUATLD 2004).

Treatment of latent tuberculosis infection has been a key component in tuberculosis control for several decades. The American Thoracic Society recommends using isoniazid, rifampicin, as chemoprohylactic agents for treating latent tuberculosis in groups at high risk for susceptible tuberculosis (ATS 2000). A Cochrane review demonstrated that treating HIV‐negative people at increased risk of developing active tuberculosis with isoniazid resulted in a reduced risk of developing active tuberculosis when compared with placebo (relative risk (RR) of 0.40, 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) 0.31 to 0.52) (Smieja 2004). According to another Cochrane review of HIV‐positive people, any treatment regimen of latent tuberculosis results in a reduced risk of active tuberculosis (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.81) (Woldehanna 2004). Treatment of MDR‐TB contacts is complicated by resistance of the source isolates to recommended drugs and unproven cost‐effectiveness of alternative treatment.

While the level of evidence regarding the effectiveness of treatment of latent tuberculosis for people at risk of susceptible tuberculosis is high, experts are still undecided on the management of people exposed to MDR‐TB (Passannante 1994). According to a statement issued by the American Thoracic Society and adopted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, immunocompetent people exposed to MDR‐TB should be followed up for six months, whether treated or not. In cases where they are treated, the American Thoracic Society recommends the following two drug regimens for six to 12 months if the organisms from the index case patient are known to be susceptible to these agents (ATS 2000): pyrazinamide and ethambutol; or pyrazinamide and a quinolone (levofloxacin or ofloxacin). However, frequent adverse have been documented in people prescribed treatment of latent tuberculosis using the above agents. These adverse effects include hepatitis, hyperuricemia, rash (pyrazinamide) and optic neuritis (ethambutol) (Yee 2003).

This review will appraise and summarize the evidence on the effectiveness of antituberculous drugs for preventing active tuberculosis in people exposed to MDR‐TB.

Objectives

To evaluate antituberculous drugs given to people exposed to MDR‐TB in preventing active tuberculosis.

Methods

Criteria for considering studies for this review

Types of studies

Randomized controlled trials.

Types of participants

People exposed to patients with active MDR‐TB. We will exclude people with active tuberculosis at study enrolment, and trials involving people with active tuberculosis disease, as this would now be considered treatment of disease rather than prevention of active disease.

Types of interventions

Intervention
Any antituberculous drug regimen.

Control
Any alternative antituberculous drug regimen, placebo, or no intervention.

Types of outcome measures

Primary
Active pulmonary tuberculosis.

Secondary

  • Death from any cause.

  • Extra‐pulmonary tuberculosis.

Adverse events

  • Serious adverse events (leading to hospitalization or continuation of hospitalization, life‐threatening, or persistent or significant disability).

  • Adverse events requiring discontinuation of treatment.

  • Other adverse events.

Search methods for identification of studies

We will attempt to identify all relevant trials regardless of language or publication status (published, unpublished, in press, and in progress).

We will search the following databases using the search terms and strategy described in Table 1.

Open in table viewer
Table 1. Detailed search strategies

Search set

CIDG SR*

CENTRAL

MEDLINE**

EMBASE**

LILACS**

1

multi‐drug resistant tuberculosis

TUBERCULOSIS MULTIDRUG‐RESISTANT

TUBERCULOSIS MULTIDRUG‐RESISTANT

TUBERCULOSIS

tuberculosis

2

MDR‐TB

multidrug resistant tuberculosis

multidrug‐resistant tuberculosis

MULTIDRUG‐RESISTANCE

drug resistance

3

multiple drug resistant tuberculosis

MDR tuberculosis

1 and 2

1 and 2

4

drug resistant tuberculosis

MDR‐TB

multidrug resistant tuberculosis

TUBERCULOSIS FARMACO‐RESISTENTE

5

MDR‐TB

multi‐drug resistant tuberculosis

multiple drug resistant tuberculosis

TUBERCULOSIS RESISTENTE A DROGAS

6

1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6

drug‐resistant tuberculosis

drug resistant tuberculosis

3 or 4 or 5

7

multiple drug resistant tuberculosis

MDR tuberculosis

8

1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7

MDR TB

9

3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 or 8

*Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register

**Search terms used in combination with the search strategy for retrieving trials developed by The Cochrane Collaboration (Higgins 2005); upper case: MeSH or EMTREE heading; lower case: free text term

  • Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (May 2005).

  • Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2005).

  • MEDLINE (1966 to May 2005).

  • EMBASE (1974 to May 2005).

  • LILACS (1982 to May 2005).

We will contact study authors and other researchers in the field in an attempt to identify additional studies that may be eligible for inclusion in this review.

Researchers and organizations
We will contact study authors, other researchers in the field, and organizations (including the World Health Organization and the Global Partnership to Stop TB) for unpublished and ongoing trials.

Reference lists
We will also check the reference lists of all studies identified by the above methods.

Data collection and analysis

Trial selection
Two authors (A Fraser and M Paul) will independently inspect titles and abstracts identified by the search in order to identify potentially relevant publications. We will obtain the full text of all articles considered potentially relevant by at least one author. We will then use a standard eligibility form and apply the inclusion criteria for the final decision. We will also check that the trials are independent. We will consult a third independent author (L Leibovici) in cases of disagreement and document the reasons for excluding studies.

Assessment of methodological quality
Two authors (A Fraser and M Paul) will independently assess included trials for methodological quality; in case of disagreement, we will consult a third reviewer (L Leibovici). We will use an individual component approach to quality assessment using four variables. We will categorize the generation of the allocation sequence and allocation concealment as adequate, unclear, inadequate, or not described using the approach described in Juni 2001. We will record who was blinded in each trial, such as the participants, care provider, outcome assessor, or statistician. We will assess the inclusion of all randomized participants in the analysis to be adequate if 90% or more of the participants randomized into the trial were included in the analysis, unclear, inadequate if less than 90%, or not described. We will report the results of the methodological quality assessment in a table.

Data extraction
Two authors (A Fraser, M Paul) will independently extract data from the included trials into a standard form, and where there is any disagreement, a third reviewer (L Leibovici) will extract the data. We will discuss the data extraction, document decisions and, where necessary, contact the trial authors for clarification or additional details. A Fraser will enter data into Review Manager 4.2.

Data analysis
We will analyse dichotomous data by calculating the relative risk for each trial and express uncertainty in each result using 95% confidence intervals. We will conduct meta‐analyses according to the following comparisons.

  • Antituberculous drug regimen versus alternative antituberculous drug regimen.

  • Antituberculous drug regimen versus placebo.

  • Antituberculous drug regimen versus no intervention.

  • Standardized antituberculous drug regimen versus antituberculous drug regimen tailored to drug susceptibility testing of the index case.

We will combine comparisons of any antituberculous treatment regimen with placebo or no intervention. We will not combine comparisons between different antituberculous drug regimens and comparisons with placebo or no intervention.

We will assess heterogeneity in trial results by visually examining the forest plots, as well as by the chi‐squared test and I‐squared statistic (Higgins 2003). We will use a fixed‐effect model throughout the review, unless there is statistically significant heterogeneity between the trials (chi‐squared test, P < 0.10). If there is heterogeneity and it is still appropriate to combine the trials, we will use the random‐effects model. We will also conduct the following subgroup analyses to investigate potential clinical sources of heterogeneity: children under the age of five versus all other ages; immunosuppressed versus immunocompetent people; and people with latent tuberculosis infection (according to a tuberculin skin test) before initiation of treatment versus those without.

Assuming a sufficient number of trials are available, we will also perform a sensitivity analysis according to allocation concealment, based on previous evidence showing over‐estimation of effects with inadequate allocation concealment (Moher 1998; Schulz 1995).

We will visually examine funnel plots for the main outcome (1/standard error plotted against relative risks) in order to estimate the presence of small study effect (publication bias or other). Asymmetry of the funnel plots will be formally expressed using the method described by Egger 1997.

Table 1. Detailed search strategies

Search set

CIDG SR*

CENTRAL

MEDLINE**

EMBASE**

LILACS**

1

multi‐drug resistant tuberculosis

TUBERCULOSIS MULTIDRUG‐RESISTANT

TUBERCULOSIS MULTIDRUG‐RESISTANT

TUBERCULOSIS

tuberculosis

2

MDR‐TB

multidrug resistant tuberculosis

multidrug‐resistant tuberculosis

MULTIDRUG‐RESISTANCE

drug resistance

3

multiple drug resistant tuberculosis

MDR tuberculosis

1 and 2

1 and 2

4

drug resistant tuberculosis

MDR‐TB

multidrug resistant tuberculosis

TUBERCULOSIS FARMACO‐RESISTENTE

5

MDR‐TB

multi‐drug resistant tuberculosis

multiple drug resistant tuberculosis

TUBERCULOSIS RESISTENTE A DROGAS

6

1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6

drug‐resistant tuberculosis

drug resistant tuberculosis

3 or 4 or 5

7

multiple drug resistant tuberculosis

MDR tuberculosis

8

1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7

MDR TB

9

3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 or 8

*Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register

**Search terms used in combination with the search strategy for retrieving trials developed by The Cochrane Collaboration (Higgins 2005); upper case: MeSH or EMTREE heading; lower case: free text term

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Detailed search strategies