Effectiveness and safety of bedaquiline-containing regimens in the treatment of MDR- and XDR-TB: a multicentre study

Abstract
Large studies on bedaquiline used to treat multidrug-resistant (MDR-) and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB) are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of bedaquiline-containing regimens in a large, retrospective, observational study conducted in 25 centres and 15 countries in five continents.
428 culture-confirmed MDR-TB cases were analysed (61.5% male; 22.1% HIV-positive, 45.6% XDR-TB). MDR-TB cases were admitted to hospital for a median (interquartile range (IQR)) 179 (92–280) days and exposed to bedaquiline for 168 (86–180) days. Treatment regimens included, among others, linezolid, moxifloxacin, clofazimine and carbapenems (82.0%, 58.4%, 52.6% and 15.3% of cases, respectively).
Sputum smear and culture conversion rates in MDR-TB cases were 63.6% and 30.1%, respectively at 30 days, 81.1% and 56.7%, respectively at 60 days; 85.5% and 80.5%, respectively at 90 days and 88.7% and 91.2%, respectively at the end of treatment. The median (IQR) time to smear and culture conversion was 34 (30–60) days and 60 (33–90) days. Out of 247 culture-confirmed MDR-TB cases completing treatment, 71.3% achieved success (62.4% cured; 8.9% completed treatment), 13.4% died, 7.3% defaulted and 7.7% failed. Bedaquiline was interrupted due to adverse events in 5.8% of cases. A single case died, having electrocardiographic abnormalities that were probably non-bedaquiline related.
Bedaquiline-containing regimens achieved high conversion and success rates under different nonexperimental conditions.
Abstract
Bedaquiline is safe and effective in treating MDR- and XDR-TB patients http://ow.ly/6MWK30adHkw
Footnotes
This article has supplementary material available from erj.ersjournals.com
Earn CME accreditation by answering questions about this article. You will find these at erj.ersjournals.com/journal/cme
Conflict of interest: Disclosures can be found alongside this article at erj.ersjournals.com
The authors alone are responsible for the views expressed in this publication and they do not necessarily represent the decisions and policies of their institutions.
- Received February 23, 2017.
- Accepted March 16, 2017.
- Copyright ©ERS 2017