What are the most efficacious treatment regimens for isoniazid-resistant tuberculosis? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

HR Stagg ORCID logo; RJ Harris; H-A Hatherell; D Obach; H Zhao ORCID logo; N Tsuchiya; K Kranzer ORCID logo; V Nikolayevskyy; J Kim; MC Lipman; +1 more... I Abubakar; (2016) What are the most efficacious treatment regimens for isoniazid-resistant tuberculosis? A systematic review and network meta-analysis. THORAX, 71 (10). pp. 940-949. ISSN 0040-6376 DOI: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-208262
Copy

INTRODUCTION: Consensus on the best treatment regimens for patients with isoniazid-resistant TB is limited; global treatment guidelines differ. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis using mixed-treatment comparisons methodology to provide an up-to-date summary of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and relative regimen efficacy. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE, the Web of Science and EMBASE were mined using search terms for TB, drug therapy and RCTs. Extracted data were inputted into fixed-effects and random-effects models. ORs for all possible network comparisons and hierarchical rankings for different regimens were obtained. RESULTS: 12 604 records were retrieved and 118 remained postextraction, representing 59 studies-27 standalone and 32 with multiple papers. In comparison to a baseline category that included the WHO-recommended regimen for countries with high levels of isoniazid resistance (rifampicin-containing regimens using fewer than three effective drugs at 4 months, in which rifampicin was protected by another effective drug at 6 months, and rifampicin was taken for 6 months), extending the duration of rifampicin and increasing the number of effective drugs at 4 months lowered the odds of unfavourable outcomes (treatment failure or the lack of microbiological cure; relapse post-treatment; death due to TB) in a fixed-effects model (OR 0.31 (95% credible interval 0.12-0.81)). In a random-effects model all estimates crossed the null. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review and network meta-analysis highlight a regimen category that may be more efficacious than the WHO population level recommendation, and identify knowledge gaps where data are sparse. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42014015025.


picture_as_pdf
thoraxjnl-2015-208262.pdf
subject
Published Version
Available under Creative Commons: 3.0

View Download

Atom BibTeX OpenURL ContextObject in Span Multiline CSV OpenURL ContextObject Dublin Core Dublin Core MPEG-21 DIDL EndNote HTML Citation JSON MARC (ASCII) MARC (ISO 2709) METS MODS RDF+N3 RDF+N-Triples RDF+XML RIOXX2 XML Reference Manager Refer Simple Metadata ASCII Citation EP3 XML
Export

Downloads