Drug-resistant tuberculosis: emerging treatment options

BackgroundAlthough delamanid has been approved for the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in numerous regions, in areas where it is not yet registered, it can be accessed as part of salvage therapy—in particular, for those patients with limited treatment options—via the Otsuka Compassionate Use (CU) programme. Here we present the analysis of interim treatment outcomes by 24 weeks of more than 200 multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) patients globally who received delamanid under the Otsuka CU programme.MethodsWe evaluated the treatment efficacy, with respect to culture negativity at 24 weeks, and safety profile of delamanid in a MDR-TB cohort of patients treated under CU between 2014 and 2019.ResultsAmong patients who received delamanid as part of a multidrug regimen, 123/202 (61%) had extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB), 66/202 (33%) had HIV co-infection, and 34/202 (17%) were children ages between 6 and 17 years. Of those patients who were culture positive at delamanid treatment initiation and completed 24 weeks of delamanid treatment in combination with other anti-TB drugs, culture negativity was achieved in 116/147 (79%). The corresponding rates of culture negativity for patients with XDR-TB, HIV co-infection, and the paediatric subgroup were 69/90 (77%), 44/48 (92%), and 20/25 (80%), respectively. QT interval prolongation was the most frequently observed serious adverse event (reported in 8% of patients receiving delamanid). Overall, treatment safety outcomes did not reveal any new or unidentified risks.ConclusionsThe use of delamanid combined with other active drugs has the potential to achieve high rates of culture negativity in difficult-to-treat drug-resistant tuberculosis cases, with a favourable safety profile.

Download Full-text

1884. Clinical Outcomes Among Patients with Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis Receiving Bedaquiline or Delamanid Containing Regimens

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofz359.114 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽

pp. S52-S52

Author(s):

Russell R Kempker ◽

Lali Mikiashvili ◽

Yuan Zhao ◽

David Benkeser ◽

Ketino Barbakadze ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Drug Resistance ◽

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Treatment Options ◽

Drug Resistant ◽

Drug Resistant Tuberculosis ◽

Acquired Drug Resistance ◽

Treatment Regimens ◽

Resistant Tuberculosis ◽

Conversion Rates ◽

Culture Conversion

Abstract Background Bedaquiline and delamanid are new and much-needed treatment options for drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB); however, there are limited data guiding their use and no direct comparison of the two drugs. We thus sought to compare the clinical outcomes of patients with drug-resistant tuberculosis receiving either a bedaquiline- or delamanid-based treatment regimen. Methods This is a prospective observational study among patients with drug-resistant pulmonary TB in the country of Georgia from 2015 to 2017. Patients receiving bedaquiline or delamanid were eligible to be enrolled. Monthly sputum cultures and MIC testing on Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates were performed. Clinical outcomes included time to culture conversion, rate of acquired drug resistance and treatment outcomes. Results Among 156 patients with MDR-TB who were approached, 100 were enrolled, and 95 were receiving a bedaquiline (n = 64) or delamanid (n = 31) based regimen and included in the study. Patients receiving bedaquiline or delamanid were similar with regards to age, BMI, substance use, comorbidities, rate of cavitary disease, and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) TB. Rates of additional Class A drug use including linezolid (78 vs. 81%) and a fluoroquinolone (39 vs. 36%) were similar and the mean effective drugs received per group was 4 (IQR 3–4, P = 0.33). Median drug duration was 171 days for bedaquiline and 182 days for delamanid; no patient discontinued due to QTC prolongation. Adjusted cumulative culture conversion rates at 60 days (64% vs. 48%, P = 0.14) and 180 days (95% vs. 77%, P = 0.02) were higher in patients receiving bedaquiline compared with delamanid (see figure). Rates of acquired drug resistance were higher in patients receiving delamanid compared with bedaquiline (35 vs. 12%, P < 0.01). Lastly, patients receiving a bedaquiline-based regimen had higher rates of favorable outcomes as compared with patients receiving delamanid (94% vs. 67%, P < 0.01). Conclusion Patients receiving bedaquiline- and delamanid-based treatment regimens for drug-resistant TB had similar characteristics and those receiving bedaquiline had better clinical outcomes. Our results provide an important first comparison of bedaquiline vs. delamanid containing regimens. Disclosures All Authors: No reported Disclosures.

Download Full-text