Centre for Lung Infection and Immunity, Division of Pulmonology and UCT Lung Institute, Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town (UCT), Cape Town, South Africa.
Task Applied Science and Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2021 Jun 1;25(6):453-460. doi: 10.5588/ijtld.21.0035.
There are no data comparing the 6-9 month oral three-drug Nix regimen (bedaquiline, pretomanid and linezolid [BPaL]) to conventional regimens containing bedaquiline (B, BDQ) and linezolid (L, LZD). Six-month post end-of-treatment outcomes were compared between Nix-TB ( = 109) and 102 prospectively recruited extensively drug-resistant TB patients who received an ˜18-month BDQ-based regimen (median of 8 drugs). A subset of patients received BDQ and LZD ( = 86), and a subgroup of these ( = 75) served as individually matched controls in a pairwise comparison to determine differences in regimen efficacy. Favourable outcomes (%) were significantly better with BPaL than with the B-L-based combination regimen (98/109, 89.9% vs. 56/86, 65.1%; adjusted relative risk ratio [aRRR] 1.35; < 0.001) and in the matched pairwise analysis (67/75, 89.3% vs. 48/75, 64.0%; aRRR 1.39; = 0.001), despite significantly higher baseline bacterial load and prior second-line drug exposure in the BPaL cohort. Time to culture conversion ( < 0.001), time to unfavourable outcome ( < 0.01) and time to death ( < 0.03) were significantly better or lower with BPaL than the B-L-based combinations. The BPaL regimen (and hence substitution of multiple other drugs by pretomanid and/or higher starting-dose LZD) may improve outcomes in drug-resistant TB patients with poor prognostic features. However, prospective controlled studies are required to definitively answer this question.
尚无数据比较 6-9 个月口服三药 Nix 方案(贝达喹啉、普托马尼和利奈唑胺[BPaL])与包含贝达喹啉(B,BDQ)和利奈唑胺(L,LZD)的常规方案。在治疗结束后 6 个月时,比较了 Nix-TB(n=109)和 102 例前瞻性招募的广泛耐药结核病患者的治疗结局,后者接受了含 ˜18 个月 BDQ 的方案(中位数 8 种药物)。部分患者接受了 BDQ 和 LZD(n=86),其中 75 例作为亚组患者进行了个体匹配对照,以确定方案疗效的差异。与 B-L 联合方案(98/109,89.9%比 56/86,65.1%;调整后的相对风险比[aRRR]1.35;<0.001)和配对比较中的匹配亚组(67/75,89.3%比 48/75,64.0%;aRRR 1.39;=0.001)相比,BPaL 方案的治疗结局显著更好,尽管 BPaL 组的基线细菌负荷和二线药物暴露更高。培养物转换时间(<0.001)、不良结局时间(<0.01)和死亡时间(<0.03)均显著低于 B-L 联合方案。与 B-L 联合方案相比,BPaL 方案(以及通过普托马尼和/或更高起始剂量 LZD 替代多种其他药物)可能改善预后不良的耐药结核病患者的治疗结局。然而,需要前瞻性对照研究来明确回答这个问题。