More sensitive tests are needed for the diagnosis of smear-negative and HIV-associated tuberculosis. This study compares the sensitivities and specificities of three molecular tests, namely, the Xpert MTB/RIF test, the Xpert Ultra (Ultra), and RealTi m e MTB (RT-MTB), in a high HIV prevalence setting.

Objective: In resource‐limited settings, where genotypic drug resistance testing is rarely performed and poor adherence is the most common reason for treatment failure, programmatic approaches to handling treatment failure are essential. This study was performed to describe one such approach to adherence optimisation.Methods: This was a single‐arm study of patients on second‐line protease inhibitor (PI)‐based antiretroviral therapy (ART) with a HIV‐1 RNA ≥400 copies/ml in Johannesburg, South Africa, between 1 March 2012 and 1 December 2013. Patients underwent enhanced adherence counselling. Those with improved adherence and a repeat viral load of >1000 copies/ml underwent HIV‐1 drug resistance testing. We describe results using simple proportions and 95% confidence intervals.Results: Of the 400 patients who underwent targeted adherence counselling after an elevated viral load on second‐line ART, 388 (97%) underwent repeat viral load testing. Most of these (n = 249; 64%, 95% CI 59–69) resuppressed (<400 copies/ml) on second line. By the end of follow‐up (1 March 2014), among the 139 (36%, 95% CI: 31–41%), who did not initially resuppress after being targeted, 106 had a viral load >400 copies/ml, 11 switched to third line, 5 were awaiting third line, 4 had died and 13 were lost to follow‐up. Among the unsuppressed, 48 successfully underwent resistance testing with some resistance detected in most (41/48).Conclusions: Most (64%) second‐line treatment failure in this clinic is related to adherence and can be overcome with careful adherence support. Controlled interventions are needed to determine what the optimal approach is to improving second‐line outcomes and reducing the need for third‐line ART.

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends systematic symptom screening for tuberculosis (TB). However, TB prevalence surveys suggest that this strategy does not identify millions of TB patients, globally. Undiagnosed or delayed diagnosis of TB contribute to TB transmission and exacerbate morbidity and mortality. We conducted a cluster-randomized trial of large urban and rural primary healthcare clinics in 3 provinces of South Africa to evaluate whether a novel intervention of targeted universal testing for TB (TUTT) in high-risk groups diagnosed more patients with TB per month compared to current standard of care (SoC) symptom-directed TB testing. Methods and findings: Sixty-two clinics were randomized; with initiation of the intervention clinics over 6 months from March 2019. The study was prematurely stopped in March 2020 due to clinics restricting access to patients, and then a week later due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) national lockdown; by then, we had accrued a similar number of TB diagnoses to that of the power estimates and permanently stopped the trial. In intervention clinics, attendees living with HIV, those self-reporting a recent close contact with TB, or a prior episode of TB were all offered a sputum test for TB, irrespective of whether they reported symptoms of TB. We analyzed data abstracted from the national public sector laboratory database using Poisson regression models and compared the mean number of TB patients diagnosed per clinic per month between the study arms. Intervention clinics diagnosed 6,777 patients with TB, 20.7 patients with TB per clinic month (95% CI 16.7, 24.8) versus 6,750, 18.8 patients with TB per clinic month (95% CI 15.3, 22.2) in control clinics during study months. A direct comparison, adjusting for province and clinic TB case volume strata, did not show a significant difference in the number of TB cases between the 2 arms, incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.14 (95% CI 0.94, 1.38, p = 0.46). However, prespecified difference-in-differences analyses showed that while the rate of TB diagnoses in control clinics decreased over time, intervention clinics had a 17% relative increase in TB patients diagnosed per month compared to the prior year, interaction IRR 1.17 (95% CI 1.14, 1.19, p < 0.001). Trial limitations were the premature stop due to COVID-19 lockdowns and the absence of between-arm comparisons of initiation and outcomes of TB treatment in those diagnosed with TB. Conclusions: Our trial suggests that the implementation of TUTT in these 3 groups at extreme risk of TB identified more TB patients than SoC and could assist in reducing undiagnosed TB patients in settings of high TB prevalence. Trial registration: South African National Clinical Trials Registry DOH-27-092021-4901.

Adverse events (AEs) are common during treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB). Little is known about the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients receiving treatment for DR-TB or the effect of AEs on HRQoL. We conducted a cross-sectional study among adult patients with laboratory-confirmed rifampicin resistant tuberculosis (TB) on DR-TB treatment at a public-sector outpatient DR-TB clinic in Johannesburg, South Africa between 02/2015–01/2018. Data on HRQoL using the Medical Outcomes Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire and self-reported AEs were collected by trained interviewers through face-to-face interviews. We report averages for the eight major domains and mental (MCS) and physical health (PCS) component summary scores, stratified by whether AEs were reported in the last four weeks. For comparative purposes, we enrolled two other patient groups and included data on a separate group of healthy adults. We enrolled 149 DR-TB patients (median age 36 years IQR 29–43, 55% male, 77.9% HIV-positive, 81% on ART, 61.8% on a standard long-course regimen and 44.3% on DR-TB treatment for less than 6 months). 58/149 (38.9%) patients reported a total of 122 AEs in the preceding 4 weeks, of these the most common were joint pain (n = 22), peripheral neuropathy (n = 16), hearing loss (n = 15), nausea and vomiting (n = 12) and dizziness or vertigo (n = 11). SF-36 domains and summary scores (MCS and PCS) were lower in those who reported an AE compared to those who did not, and both were lower than healthy adults. Compared to those who did not report an AE, patients who reported AEs were more likely to have a low MCS (aRR 2.24 95% CI 1.53–3.27) and PCS (aRR 1.52 95% CI 1.07–2.18) summary score. HRQoL was lower among those on DR-TB treatment for 6 months or less. Results show that DR-TB had a substantial impact on patients’ quality of life, but that AEs during the early months on treatment may be responsible for reducing HRQoL even further. Our findings highlight the negative effects of injectable agents on HRQoL. Patients require an integrative patient-centered approach to deal with DR-TB and HIV and the potential overlapping toxicities which may be worsened by concurrent treatment.

Objectives: To estimate the prevalence of adverse drug reactions or events (ADR) during drug-resistant TB (DR-TB) treatment in the context of settings with high HIV prevalence (at least 20% of patients). Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of articles in PubMed and Scopus. Pooled proportions of patients experiencing adverse events and relative risk with 95% CI were calculated. Results: The search yielded 24 studies, all observational cohorts. Ten reported on the number of patients experiencing ADR and were included in the meta-analysis representing 2776 study participants of whom 1943 were known to be HIV infected (70.0%). An average of 83% (95% CI: 82%–84%) of patients experienced one or more ADR. Among the seven articles (n = 664 study participants) with information on occurrence of severe ADR, 24% (95% CI: 21%–27%) of patients experienced at least one severe ADR during drug-resistant TB treatment. Sixteen of the 24 studies analysed the relative risk of ADR by HIV infection, nine of which found no statistically significant association between HIV infection and occurrence of drug-related ADR. There was insufficient information to disaggregate risk by concomitant treatment with HIV antiretrovirals or by immunosuppression (CD4 count). Conclusions: No randomized clinical trials were found for WHO-recommended treatment of drug-resistant TB treatment where at least 20% of the cohort was coinfected with HIV. Nearly all patients (83%) experience ADR during DR-TB treatment. While no significant association between ADR and HIV coinfection was found, further research is needed to determine whether concomitant antiretrovirals or immunosuppression increases the risks for HIV-infected patients.

Gauteng Province has the second lowest tuberculosis (TB) incidence rate in South Africa but the greatest proportion of TB/HIV co-infection, with 68% of TB patients estimated to have HIV. TB treatment outcomes are well documented at the national and provincial level; however, knowledge gaps remain on how outcomes differ across detailed age groups. Using data from South Africa’s National Electronic TB Register (ETR), we assessed all-cause mortality and loss to follow-up (LTFU) among patients initiating treatment for TB between 01/2010 and 12/2015 in the metropolitan municipalities of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and the City of Johannesburg in Gauteng Province. We excluded patients who were missing age, had known drug-resistance, or transferred into TB care from sites outside the two metropolitan municipalities. Among patients assigned a treatment outcome, we investigated the association between age group at treatment initiation and mortality or LTFU (treatment interruption of ≥2 months) within 10 months after treatment initiation using Cox proportional hazard models and present hazard ratios and Kaplan-Meier survival curves. We identified 182,890 children (<10 years), young adolescent (10–14), older adolescent (15–19), young adult (20–24), adult (25–49), and older adult (≥50) TB cases without known drug-resistance. ART coverage among HIV co-infected patients was highest for young adolescents (64.3%) and lowest for young adults (54.0%) compared to other age groups (all over 60%). Treatment success exceeded 80% in all age groups (n = 170,017). All-cause mortality increased with age. Compared to adults, young adults had an increased hazard of LTFU (20–24 vs 25–49 years; aHR 1.43 95% CI: 1.33, 1.54) while children, young adolescents, and older adults had lower hazard of LTFU. Patients with HIV on ART had a lower risk of LTFU, but greater risk of death when compared to patients without HIV. Young adults in urban areas of Gauteng Province experience a disproportionate burden of LTFU and low coverage of ART among co-infected patients. This group should be targeted for interventions aimed at improving clinical outcomes and retention in both TB and HIV care.