Do we need to detect isoniazid resistance in addition to rifampicin resistance in diagnostic tests for tuberculosis?

BACKGROUND

Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is resistant to both rifampicin (RIF) and isoniazid (INH). Whereas many TB diagnostics detect RIF-resistance, few detect INH-monoresistance, which is common and may increase risk of acquired MDR-TB. Whether inclusion of INH-resistance in a first-line rapid test for TB would have an important impact on MDR-TB rates remains uncertain.

METHODS

WE DEVELOPED A TRANSMISSION MODEL TO EVALUATE THREE TESTS IN A POPULATION SIMILAR TO THAT OF INDIA: a rapid molecular test for TB, the same test plus RIF-resistance detection ("TB+RIF"), and detection of RIF and INH-resistance ("TB+RIF/INH"). Our primary outcome was the prevalence of INH-resistant and MDR-TB at ten years.

RESULTS

Compared to the TB test alone and assuming treatment of all diagnosed MDR cases, the TB+RIF test reduced the prevalence of MDR-TB among all TB cases from 5.5% to 3.8% (30.6% reduction, 95% uncertainty range, UR: 17-54%). Despite using liberal assumptions about the impact of INH-monoresistance on treatment outcomes and MDR-TB acquisition, expansion from TB+RIF to TB+RIF/INH lowered this prevalence only from 3.8% to 3.6% further (4% reduction, 95% UR: 3-7%) and INH-monoresistant TB from 15.8% to 15.1% (4% reduction, 95% UR: (-8)-19%).

CONCLUSION

When added to a rapid test for TB plus RIF-resistance, detection of INH-resistance has minimal impact on transmission of TB, MDR-TB, and INH-monoresistant TB.