Background: In February 2021 Kazakhstan began offering COVID-19 vaccines to adults. Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections raised concerns about real-world vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to evaluate effectiveness of four vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection.Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis among adults in Almaty using aggregated vaccination data and individual-level breakthrough COVID-19 cases (≥14 days from 2nd dose) using national surveillance data. We ran time-adjusted Cox-proportional-hazards model with sensitivity analysis accounting for varying entry into vaccinated cohort to assess vaccine effectiveness for each vaccine (measured as 1-adjusted hazard ratios) using the unvaccinated population as reference (N = 565,390). We separately calculated daily cumulative hazards for COVID-19 breakthrough among vaccinated persons by age and vaccination month.Results: From February 22 to September 1, 2021, in Almaty, 747,558 (57%) adults were fully vaccinated (received 2 doses), and 108,324 COVID-19 cases (11,472 breakthrough) were registered. Vaccine effectiveness against infection was 79% [sensitivity estimates (SE): 74%–82%] for QazVac, 77% (SE: 71%–81%) for Sputnik V, 71% (SE: 69%–72%) for Hayat-Vax, and 70% (SE: 65%–72%) for CoronaVac. Among vaccinated persons, the 90-day follow-up cumulative hazard for breakthrough infection was 2.2%. Cumulative hazard was 2.9% among people aged ≥60 years versus 1.9% among persons aged 18–39 years (p < 0.001), and 1.2% for people vaccinated in February–May versus 3.3% in June–August (p < 0.001).Conclusion: Our analysis demonstrates high effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against infection in Almaty similar to other observational studies. Higher cumulative hazard of breakthrough among people ≥60 years of age and during variant surges warrants targeted booster vaccination campaigns.

Introduction: Ukraine has gaps in Tuberculosis (TB) service coverage, especially in key populations (KPs). We compared effectiveness of three different strategies for active TB detection among KPs and their linkage to TB treatment during three time periods. Methodology: The KPs included people who inject drugs (PWID), sex workers (SW), men who have sex with men (MSM) and groups at-risk of TB (ex-prisoners, Roma and homeless). The active case finding included decentralized symptom screening and specimen collection (2014, strategy-1), decentralized screening with patient referred for specimen collection (2015-2017, strategy-2) and strategy-2 plus GeneXpert (2018, strategy-3). Results: In total 680,760 KPs were screened, of whom 68% were PWID. TB case detection per 100,000 populations was 1,191 in strategy-1, 302 in strategy-2, and 235 in strategy-3. The number needed to screen (NNS) to identify one case was respectively 84, 332, and 425. TB detection was highest among homeless (range: 1,839-2,297 per 100,000 population). The lowest detection was among the MSM and SW. Between 2014 and 2018, 82-94% of all diagnosed TB patients in KPs started TB treatment. Conclusions: The active case finding in KPs increased detection of TB cases in Ukraine, and the majority of diagnosed KPs initiated TB treatment. Centralization of diagnosis reduced the effectiveness of TB screening. Each region in Ukraine should assess the composition and the needs of KPs which will allow for adoption of specific strategies to detect TB among KPs with high TB prevalence.

From March to May 2020, 1306 oilfield workers in Kazakhstan tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We conducted a case-control study to assess factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The cases were PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2 during June–September 2020. Controls lived at the same camp and were randomly selected from the workers who were PCR-negative for SARS-CoV-2. Data was collected telephonically by interviewing the oil workers. The study had 296 cases and 536 controls with 627 (75%) men, and 527 (63%) were below 40 years of age. Individual factors were the main drivers of transmission, with little contribution by environmental factors. Of the twenty individual factors, rare hand sanitizer use, travel before shift work, and social interactions outside of work increased SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Of the twenty-two environmental factors, only working in air-conditioned spaces was associated with SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Communication messages may enhance workers’ individual responsibility and responsibility for the safety of others to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Tuberculosis patients “resistant to isoniazid and susceptible to rifampicin (Hr-TB)” remain neglected, despite a high burden and poor outcomes. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a 6 month regimen consisting of levofloxacin, rifampicin, ethambutol, and pyrazinamide (LRZE) to treat Hr-TB. In contrast, Uzbekistan uses a 9 month regimen (LRZE plus a second-line injectable in the first 3 months). We aimed to assess the treatment outcomes of this novel regimen among Hr-TB patients treated in two regions of Uzbekistan (Fergana and Bukhara) in 2017–2018. We conducted a cohort study involving secondary analysis of routine surveillance data. Of 132 Hr-TB patients, 105 (80%) were successfully treated. Death was the predominant unsuccessful outcome (13, 10%) followed by “treatment failure” (10, 8%) and “lost to follow-up” (4, 2%). High treatment success is an indicator of the potential effectiveness of the novel regimen and adds to the limited global evidence on this issue. However, the sample size was small and there was no comparison group. Since the study was conducted in two regions of Uzbekistan only, the findings have limited generalizability. We recommend future research using an adequate sample size and an appropriate study design (randomized controlled trial or prospective cohort with a control group receiving the WHO-recommended regimen).

In 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted a survey of the quality of four anti-tuberculosis drugs in the former Soviet Union countries. Kazakhstan had the highest proportion of substandard drugs. To assess the quality of anti-tuberculosis drugs used in Kazakhstan in 2014. Fourteen anti-tuberculosis drugs from the Almaty Interdistrict TB Dispensary were randomly selected and screened for quality using Global Pharma Health Fund Minilab™ testing. First, the product and packaging were physically inspected to determine whether tablets/capsules were intact (i.e., whether they contained the full amount of the drug, and whether the packaging was genuine). Second, the tablets/capsules were dissolved in water to test whether they could be adequately absorbed by the body. Finally, semi-quantitive analyses were undertaken using thin-layer chromatography to verify the presence and concentration of the active pharmaceutical ingredient and to detect impurities. We discovered no counterfeit medicines. However, 163 (19%) of the 854 anti-tuberculosis drugs sampled failed at least one of the three tests. These samples were found among 24/50 (48%) batches of 14 anti-tuberculosis drugs. Our study identified a high proportion of poor-quality first- and second-line anti-tuberculosis drugs. Use of these medicines may lead to treatment failure and the development of drug resistance. Confirmatory testing should be performed to determine if they should be removed from the market.

Introduction: We assessed the influence of a result-based financing (RBF) model, which included incentives for Primary Healthcare facilities on TB treatment outcomes. Methodology: We compared TB patients > 17 years and their treatment outcomes among those who did and did not benefit from RBF-model in 14 districts of Odeska oblast, Ukraine in 2017. Log-binomial regression was used to examine factors associated with being included in RBF-model. Results: Of 2,269 reported TB patients, 308 (14%) were included in RBF-model. Most patients in the RBF-model were from rural areas 229 (74%), unemployed 218 (71%), and HIV-infected 131 (43%). Individuals from urban areas (Adjusted risk ratio, ARR =0.9, 95% Confidence Interval, CI:0.89-0.94), having drug-resistant TB (ARR = 0.3, 95% CI: 0.18-0.45), and relapse TB (ARR = 0.6, 95% CI:0.40-0.83) were less likely to be included in RBF-model. Favorable outcomes in new/relapse cases with RBF-model was 89% compared with 41% (p < 0.001) without RBF. Similarly, for other retreatment this was 83% versus 40% (p < 0.001). Failures in the no-RBF group was 29% for new and relapse cases while for other retreatment cases, it was 26% (significantly higher than in the RBF-model). Conclusion: RBF-model is effective in achieving high levels of favorable TB treatment outcomes. Almost three-in-ten TB patients in non-RBF category failed TB treatment despite having drug-susceptible TB. Efforts are now needed to include it within ongoing public health reforms and assess the feasibility of scaling-up this intervention through implementation research and dedicated funding.