Dataset Information

Drivers and trajectories of resistance to new first-line drug regimens for tuberculosis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

New first-line drug regimens for treatment of tuberculosis (TB) are in clinical trials: emergence of resistance is a key concern. Because population-level data on resistance cannot be collected in advance, epidemiological models are important tools for understanding the drivers and dynamics of resistance before novel drug regimens are launched.

Methods

We developed a transmission model of TB after launch of a new drug regimen, defining drug-resistant TB (DR-TB) as resistance to the new regimen. The model is characterized by (1) the probability of acquiring resistance during treatment, (2) the transmission fitness of DR-TB relative to drug-susceptible TB (DS-TB), and (3) the probability of treatment success for DR-TB versus DS-TB. We evaluate the effect of each factor on future DR-TB prevalence, defined as the proportion of incident TB that is drug-resistant.

Results

Probability of acquired resistance was the strongest predictor of the DR-TB proportion in the first 5 years after the launch of a new drug regimen. Over a longer term, however, the DR-TB proportion was driven by the resistant population's transmission fitness and treatment success rates. Regardless of uncertainty in acquisition probability and transmission fitness, high levels (>10%) of drug resistance were unlikely to emerge within 50 years if, among all cases of TB that were detected, 85% of those with DR-TB could be appropriately diagnosed as such and then successfully treated.

Conclusions

Short-term surveillance cannot predict long-term drug resistance trends after launch of novel first-line TB regimens. Ensuring high treatment success of drug-resistant TB through early diagnosis and appropriate second-line therapy can mitigate many epidemiological uncertainties and may substantially slow the emergence of drug-resistant TB.

SUBMITTER: Shrestha S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4281792 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To investigate the responses to switching to second-line regimens among patients who had received a long-term first-line antiretroviral therapy.Patients switching to second-line regimens from June 2008 to June 2015 were enrolled from an observational cohort. In addition, patients continuing first-line therapy and had a viral load <1000?copies/mL were included as controls in July 2012. All these patients were followed-up for 36 months or until June 2016. The virological, immunological outcomes, and drug resistance were evaluated. Virological failure was defined as viral load ?1000?copies/mL after 6 months of treatment since the start of the study.There were 304 patients switching to second-line regimens and 46 patients remaining on first-line therapy enrolled while having received first-line therapy for a median of 7.6 years. Patients with plasma viral load (VL) ?1000?copies/mL before switching to second-line regimens had a sharp decline in the proportion of virological failure with 26.7%, 20.4%, and 17.0% at 12, 24, and 36 months after regimen switch, respectively (trend test, P?<?.001). Among these patients, individuals with drug resistance (DR) had a better virological responses as compared with those without DR after regimen switching. While patients with VL <1000?copies/mL at inclusion remained a high rate of viral suppression after switching to second-line regimens. So did patients continuing first-line therapy. Among patients with VL ?1000?copies/mL before switching to second-line regimens, the rates of drug resistance were decreased from 79.4% at inclusion to 7.5% at 36 months of regimen switch, with the proportion of NRTI- and NNRTI-related drug resistance from 67.2% and 79.4% to 5.4% and 7.5%, respectively. No PI-related resistance was found. Having self-reported missing doses within a month at follow-ups were independently associated with virological failure at 36 months of switching.HIV-infected patients had viral load ?1000?copies/mL at regimen switch after a long duration of first-line therapy had good virological responses to second-line regimens, especially those harbored drug resistant variants at regimen switch. However, patients with suppressive first-line therapy did not appear to benefit virologically from switching to second-line regimens.

Project description:BackgroundDrug resistance displays a problem for the therapy of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infections. For molecular resistance testing, it is essential to have precise knowledge on genomic variations involved in resistance development. However, data from high-incidence settings are only sparely available. Therefore we performed a systematic approach and analyzed a total of 97 M. tuberculosis strains from previously treated patients in Sierra Leone for mutations in katG, rpoB, rrs, rpsL, gidB, embB, pncA and where applicable in inhA and ahpC. Of the strains investigated 50 were either mono- or poly-resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, streptomycin, ethambutol and pyrazinamide or MDR and 47 fully susceptible strains served as controls.ResultsThe majority of isoniazid and rifampin resistant strains had mutations in katG315 (71.9%) and rpoB531 (50%). However, rpoB mutations in codons 511, 516 and 533 were also detected in five rifampin susceptible strains. MIC determinations revealed low-level rifampin resistance for those strains. Thus, the sensitivity and specificity of sequencing of katG for detection of drug resistance were 86.7% and 100% and for sequencing of rpoB 100% and 93.8%, respectively.Strikingly, none of the streptomycin resistant strains had mutations in rrs, but 47.5% harboured mutations in rpsL. Further changes were detected in gidB. Among ethambutol resistant strains 46.7% had mutations at embB306. Pyrazinamide resistant strains displayed a variety of mutations throughout pncA. The specificities of sequencing of rpsL, embB and pncA for resistance detection were high (96-100%), whereas sensitivities were lower (48.8%, 73.3%, 70%).ConclusionsOur study reveals a good correlation between data from molecular and phenotypic resistance testing in this high-incidence setting. However, the fact that particular mutations in rpoB are not linked to high-level resistance is challenging and demonstrates that careful interpretation of molecular resistance assays is mandatory. In addition, certain variations, especially in gidB, appear to be phylogenetically informative polymorphisms rather than markers for drug resistance.