Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
David Wilkinson a Centre
for Epidemiological Research in Southern Africa, Medical Research
Council, PO Box 187, Mtubatuba 3935, South Africa, b Tropical Medicine
Division, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool L3 5QA, c International
Health Division, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine
Correspondence to: Dr
Wilkinson wilkinsd{at}mrc.ac.za
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objective: To determine whether preventive treatment
for tuberculosis in adults infected with HIV reduces the frequency of
tuberculosis and overall mortality.
Design: Systematic review and data synthesis of
randomised placebo controlled trials.
Main outcome measures: Active tuberculosis,
mortality, and adverse drug reaction requiring cessation of the study
regimen. Outcomes stratified by status of purified protein derivative
skin test.
Results: Four trials comprising 4055 adults from
Haiti, Kenya, the United States, and Uganda were included. All compared isoniazid (6-12 months) with placebo, and one trial also compared multidrug treatment for 3 months with placebo. Mean follow up was 15-33 months. Overall, frequency of tuberculosis (relative risk 0.57, 95%
confidence interval 0.41 to 0.79) was reduced in those receiving
preventive treatment compared with placebo: mortality was not
significantly reduced (0.93, 0.83 to 1.05). In subjects positive for
purified protein derivative receiving preventive treatment, the risk of
tuberculosis was reduced substantially (0.32, 0.19 to 0.51) and the
risk of death was reduced moderately (0.73, 0.57 to 0.95) compared with
those taking placebo. In adults negative for purified protein
derivative receiving preventive treatment, the risk of tuberculosis
(0.82, 0.50 to 1.36) and the risk of death (1.02, 0.89 to 1.17) were
not reduced significantly. Adverse drug reactions were more frequent,
but not significantly so, in patients receiving drug compared with
placebo (1.45, 0.98 to 2.14).
Conclusions: Preventive treatment given for 3-12 months protects against tuberculosis in adults infected with HIV, at
least in the short to medium term. Protection is greatest in subjects
positive for purified protein derivative, in whom death is also less
frequent. Long term benefits remain to be shown.
|
Key messages
|
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Strategies to control tuberculosis comprise case treatment, preventive treatment, and vaccination with BCG, with the expectation that improved socioeconomic conditions will lead to a decline in disease incidence. 1 2 Preventive treatment aims to eradicate latent infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis before active disease develops. Latent infection is shown by a positive reaction to intradermal injection with purified protein derivative (tuberculin skin test). Trials in people with tuberculosis infection but not infected with HIV have shown that isoniazid given for 6-12 months substantially reduces the incidence of active tuberculosis.3
Infection with HIV has changed the natural history of infection with M tuberculosis.4 People who are infected with HIV and who have a positive tuberculin skin test have a 30% or more lifetime risk of developing active tuberculosis,5 and tuberculosis is the most common HIV related disease in developing countries. 1 4 Thus, preventive treatment may be an important intervention to reduce the burden of tuberculosis in people infected with HIV, and their contacts, but its efficacy cannot simply be extrapolated from studies in people not infected with HIV.
As several fairly small trials have been done, we conducted this systematic review to summarise the evidence available to date as to whether preventive treatment for tuberculosis is effective in reducing the incidence of active tuberculosis and of death.
| |
Subjects and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Criteria for selecting studies for review
We included only randomised controlled trials that compared
drug regimens aimed at preventing tuberculosis with placebo. Trials were considered irrespective of setting or target group, and we included all different drug regimens tested. Preventive treatment was
defined as tuberculosis chemotherapy given to people who have a
particular risk of developing tuberculosis. Particular risk refers to
people who are infected with HIV and either infected with M
tuberculosis (positive for purified protein derivative), or who
are negative for purified protein derivative but live in a community
where tuberculosis is endemic, or have a high risk of
infection.6 Our definition of negative for purified
protein derivative allowed inclusion of anergic patients (defined as a skin test reaction of <5 mm to 5 tuberculin units, and <2 mm
reaction to mumps, tetanus toxoid, and candida antigen). In some
instances we were unable to stratify outcomes by anergy in subjects
negative for purified protein derivative as not all trials tested for
it.
Search strategy
We searched Medline using the search terms HIV, tuberculosis,
preventive therapy, and chemoprophylaxis. We also searched the Cochrane
Controlled Trials Register, the most comprehensive source of controlled
trials (disk issue 1, 1998).7 In addition, we searched
references of all retrieved articles and contacted relevant researchers
to ensure that all completed trials had been identified.
Review procedure
Trials considered for inclusion were examined to determine
completeness of reporting. One of us (DW) collated data on study methods, participants, interventions, and outcomes for each study, and
another (PG) checked the collated data. Authors of incomplete or
abstracted trials were contacted for further details. The quality of
each trial was graded using predefined criteria, assessing method of
allocation sequence generation, allocation concealment, inclusion of
all randomised participants, follow up of subjects, and analysis by
intention to treat.
Outcome measures
The outcome measures were (a) frequency of active
tuberculosis, defined microbiologically (preferably by culture) or
histologically, or as a clinical syndrome consisting of typical
symptoms, independently assessed chest x ray, and a
documented response to treatment,8 (b)
frequency of mortality, and (c) occurrence of adverse
drug reaction (defined as a reaction resulting in cessation of the study drugs). Where possible, outcome measures were stratified by
purified protein derivative status (positive, negative, and unknown).
Owing to the small number of subjects with unknown purified protein
derivative status no stratum specific analysis of this group is
reported.
Statistical analysis
We used the Mantel-Haenszel method to calculate summary statistics
(relative risk and 95% confidence interval). A fixed effects model was
used, and results were little different when using a random effects
model. All analyses were done with Revman 3.0.1. (Update Software,
Oxford).
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Included trials
Of seven identified trials, four were eligible for inclusion in
this review.9-12 Of the remaining three, one was reported to be incomplete after contacting the investigators,13 one
compared two different drug regimens,14 and a third had
not yet been published
the authors declined inclusion of their data in
our review.
|
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Available evidence to date indicates that preventive treatment reduces the frequency of active tuberculosis in adults infected with HIV by approximately half. Protection against tuberculosis is greatest in adults infected with HIV who have a positive tuberculin skin test (approximately 70% reduction), and reduced incidence of mortality is also observed in this group (approximately 25%). Average follow up in these trials was 15 to 33 months, and it is not possible to conclude that benefit persists beyond this time. A small and non-significant reduction in tuberculosis incidence was observed in adults with a negative tuberculin skin test, and no effect on mortality was observed in this group.
Thus, in settings where testing for purified protein derivative is possible, preventive treatment might best only be offered to adults infected with HIV with a positive tuberculin skin test. In settings where testing for purified protein derivative is not possible, if preventive treatment is given to all adults infected with HIV, it is likely that the frequency of tuberculosis will still be reduced, but to a smaller extent.
Our review shows the value of systematic review and meta-analysis. Most of the trials studied were underpowered and reported results of borderline significance. By combining data we are able to provide more precise estimates of effect for the main outcome measures. The direction of effect of the intervention in the different settings was the same (fig), supporting the validity of combining data. A meta-analysis of individual patient data would be required to provide summary estimates of measures such as time to disease and death, and efforts to gather data to conduct such an analysis are under way.
Possible biases
A systematic review may be biased if trials reporting negative
findings are not published. The trial reported to be
incomplete13 published positive findings in abstract form,
and the trial in preparation has also reported positive results. We
found no statistical evidence of heterogeneity in this meta-analysis,
but the power to detect heterogeneity was limited by the small number
of trials. While there seems to be some clinical heterogeneity (fig)
this tends to be limited to one trial in each subgroup, and varying levels of adherence in the different trials might explain this, at
least in part.
Choice of drug regimen
Which drug regimen should be recommended? This review did not set
out to answer this question. However, in the trial which tested three
different regimens against placebo, isoniazid had the greatest
effect,12 although isoniazid and rifampicin combined and
isoniazid, rifampicin, and pyrazinamide combined also reduced the
incidence of tuberculosis. Halsey et al compared two regimens and
reported similar protection conferred by twice weekly isoniazid given
for 6 months and combined rifampicin and pyrazinamide given for 2 months.14 Trials using combination treatment report higher rates of adverse drug reaction than do those using isoniazid alone. Adherence to preventive treatment was generally poor in these trials.
Choice of regimen to implement in practice is likely to depend on
anticipated adherence, cost, availability of drugs, concern over
adverse drug reactions, and prevalence of drug resistance in the
population. The strongest available evidence is for the use of
isoniazid.
Preventive treatment and tuberculosis control
Although reduction in individual risk of tuberculosis is
substantial, unless a large proportion of the affected population receives preventive treatment it seems unlikely that this intervention will substantially reduce disease transmission in countries with a high
tuberculosis prevalence. The priority for tuberculosis control remains
the early detection and treatment of active cases. Preventive treatment
may be a useful intervention for individuals and for targeted groups
such as factory workers, hospital staff, police, and the armed
forces17 who may have access to HIV testing, counselling,
and ongoing care. These conclusions are in accord with current
recommendations from the World Health Organisation and the
International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung
Disease.18 This policy, and future refinements to it, can
now be based on a body of systematically reviewed data from relevant
trials that provides accurate estimates of effect, and that is
constantly updated.19
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
This review is concurrently available on the infectious diseases module of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and will be updated as new data become available. We thank Dr Mark Hawken, who made original trial data available rapidly and courteously.
Contributors: DW generated the idea for this review, developed the protocol, conducted the review, and wrote the paper; he will act as guarantor for the paper. SBS provided input on the protocol development and interpretation of the review and commented on the manuscript. PG was coordinating editor for the review and oversaw its quality throughout, provided methodological support, and commented on the manuscript.
Funding: This work was funded by the South African Medical Research Council and a grant from the directorate: HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases of the department of health of the South African government. PG and the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group are supported by the Department for International Development (UK) and the European Union. None of these bodies can accept any responsibility for the information provided in this review or for the views expressed.
Conflict of interest: None.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
(Accepted 16 July 1998)