Factors predictive of the success of tuberculosis treatment: A systematic review with meta-analysis
Authors:
Ninfa Marlen Chaves Torres aff001; Jecxy Julieth Quijano Rodríguez aff002; Pablo Sebastián Porras Andrade aff003; María Belen Arriaga aff004; Eduardo Martins Netto aff001
Authors place of work:
Department of Medicine and Health, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil
aff001; Department of Medicine, Nueva Granada Military University, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia
aff002; Department of Biology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
aff003; Gonzalo Moniz Institute, Gonzalo Cruz Foundation, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil
aff004; Department of Epidemiology, José Silveira Foundation, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil
aff005
Published in the journal:
PLoS ONE 14(12)
Category:
Research Article
doi:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226507
Summary
Objective
To produce pooled estimates of the global results of tuberculosis (TB) treatment and analyze the predictive factors of successful TB treatment.
Methods
Studies published between 2014 and 2019 that reported the results of the treatment of pulmonary TB and the factors that influenced these results. The quality of the studies was evaluated according to the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. A random effects model was used to calculate the pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). This review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) in February 2019 under number CRD42019121512.
Results
A total of 151 studies met the criteria for inclusion in this review. The success rate for the treatment of drug-sensitive TB in adults was 80.1% (95% CI: 78.4–81.7). America had the lowest treatment success rate, 75.9% (95% CI: 73.8–77.9), and Oceania had the highest, 83.9% (95% CI: 75.2–91.0). In children, the success rate was 84.8% (95% CI: 77.7–90.7); in patients coinfected with HIV, it was 71.0% (95% CI: 63.7–77.8), in patients with multidrug-resistant TB, it was 58.4% (95% CI: 51.4–64.6), in patients with and extensively drug-resistant TB it was 27.1% (12.7–44.5). Patients with negative sputum smears two months after treatment were almost three times more likely to be successfully treated (OR 2.7; 1.5–4.8), whereas patients younger than 65 years (OR 2.0; 1.7–2.4), nondrinkers (OR 2.0; 1.6–2.4) and HIV-negative patients (OR 1.9; 1.6–2.5 3) were two times more likely to be successfully treated.
Conclusion
The success of TB treatment at the global level was good, but was still below the defined threshold of 85%. Factors such as age, sex, alcohol consumption, smoking, lack of sputum conversion at two months of treatment and HIV affected the success of TB treatment.
Keywords:
tuberculosis – Drug therapy – Alcohol consumption – Extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis – China – Sputum
Introduction
Tuberculosis (TB) remains the leading global cause of death by a single infectious agent; it caused approximately 1.6 million deaths in 2017. An estimated 10 million people developed the disease, of whom 6.4 million (64%) were notified[1]. Additionally, of the 558,000 estimated cases of rifampicin- and isoniazid-resistant TB (multidrug-resistant TB—MDR-TB)/rifampin-resistant TB (RR-TB), a total of 139,114 people (87%) received the second-line regimen, and the proportion of MDR-TB cases with extensively drug-resistant TB (XDR-TB) defined as MDR-TB plus resistance to at least one drug in both of the two most important classes of medicines in an MDR-TB regimen: fluoroquinolones and second-line injectable agents (amikacin, capreomycin or kanamycin) was 8.5% (95% CI: 6.2–11%) [1].
The innumerable efforts to end the global TB epidemic have resulted in remarkable developments in research focused on multiple aspects of the disease. Unfortunately, we should rely on poor diagnostic, therapeutic, and preventive options. However, it is estimated that with the current strategies for TB control, the goals of reducing the number of deaths by 95%, reducing the incidence rate by 90% and increasing the cure rate of patients receiving first-line treatment to 90% between 2015 and 2035 will not be reached without intensifying research and development[2]. It is also necessary to strengthen health systems’ ability to detect cases early and to improve the quality of care, diagnosis and treatment of people with TB[3].
TB treatment coverage is one of the ten priority indicators for achieving the goals of the End TB Strategy, and it has increased from 51% in 2013 to 70% in 2017[2,4]. However, the treatment success rate has decreased from 86% in 2013 to 82% in 2016; in MDR-TB/RR-TB and XDR-TB cases, the success rate remains low: 55% and 34% in 2015[1]. This situation could be related to the limited evaluation of treatment outcomes in countries with limited resources and to the presence of factors that affect the outcome of TB treatment. Exhaustive estimates of TB treatment outcomes are needed to improve the programmatic management of TB. Therefore, this review with meta-analysis was performed to produce pooled estimates of global TB treatment outcomes and to analyze the predictive factors of successful TB treatment.
Methods
This review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) in February 2019 under number CRD42019121512.
Search strategy
PubMed, Medline, Embase, ProQuest, Scopus and Scielo were searched for publications of the last 6 years that is, published between January 2014 and November 2019 that reported the results of treatment for pulmonary tuberculosis and the factors that influenced these results. We also searched other sources, such as Google and Google Scholar, and bibliographies to obtain additional references. Our search contained the following terms: tuberculosis, predictive factors, risk factors and treatment outcomes (tuberculosis AND (risk factors OR associated factors OR predictive factors OR characteristics) AND (treatment results OR treatment outcome OR successful treatment OR unsuccessful treatment OR unfavorable outcome OR (poverty OR poor)) AND tuberculosis treatment results) in English, Spanish and Portuguese. Trying to include as many publications as possible about our topic of interest. Approval from the ethics committee was not required.
Data extraction and definitions
The step-by-step selection of the studies is described in Fig 1. All article titles and abstracts were evaluated by two investigators (JR and PP), including all the studies that reported quantitative measurements of the results of tuberculosis treatment, and these results were clearly described according to the WHO criteria. For cases of drug-sensitive TB, only studies that clearly described patients receiving the standard treatment for tuberculosis recommended by the WHO known as short-term treatment (6 months) that includes 4 drugs. Studies that reported exclusively on extrapulmonary tuberculosis and those that did not allow the adequate extraction of quantitative data were not included. The full text of articles identified as relevant by any of the reviewers was read.
To determine which full-text articles met the inclusion criteria, two investigators (JR and PP) reviewed all full-text articles, and a third investigator (NC) reviewed a random selection of studies. In cases of disagreement, the two investigators discussed the article until they agreed. One investigator (JR) extracted data from all included studies. The second investigator (NC) independently extracted all numerical data regarding the estimation of the main effect to validate the first review. If data from the same cohort were included in several articles, the article with the most complete data was included. For each included study, detailed information was collected on the design, publication year, country, study population, sample size, definition and measurement of treatment outcomes and associated factors.
Validity assessment
The quality of the included studies was evaluated according to the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale[5]. It evaluates quality based on the content, design and ease of use of the data for meta-analysis. Two investigators (JR and PP) independently evaluated the quality of the studies, classifying each study as being of either good, acceptable or low quality.
Statistical methods and data synthesis
TB treatment outcome measures were evaluated as the percentage of successful and unsuccessful results among all patients who initiated anti-TB therapy. The results of treatment were defined according to WHO criteria[6]. Successful outcomes were those in which patients met the definition of 'cure' or ‘treatment completion’. Unsuccessful outcomes were those in which patients met the definitions of death, default, failure or transfer. The subgroup analysis was performed by continent (Africa, America, Asia, Europe and Oceania), people living with HIV, children (1 to 15 years of age) and MDR/XDR-TB.
The associations of different variables, such as age (<65 years—66 years or older), sex (male—female), area of residence (rural—urban), type of case (new—previously treated), form of TB (pulmonary—extrapulmonary), alcohol consumption (yes—no), smoking (yes—no), HIV status (positive—negative), diabetes (yes—no), baseline sputum smear (positive—negative), and sputum smear microscopy two months after treatment (positive—negative), with the TB treatment outcome were measured. It was not possible to test the association from nutritional status, of educational level or socioeconomic status with TB treatment because these variables were evaluated differently in the studies depending on the country or region of origin. The influence of the health facility providing treatment on the results of TB treatment was not addressed in the studies included in this review.
Because most of the studies did not examine the association between these variables and successful treatment outcome as the main effect, unadjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated as estimates of this association. After a table of results was created for each of the analyses, a random effects model was used to calculate pooled ORs and 95% CIs as there were high levels of heterogeneity in the study populations. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot. All statistical analyses were performed in MedCalc® version 19.03.
Results
As indicated in Fig 1, a total of 1,432 articles were identified. Of these, 992 were not duplicated; 807 of those were excluded after the title and abstract were evaluated, and 185 underwent a detailed review of the full text. A total of 151 studies with 1,550,449 patients with TB from 59 countries distributed among 5 continents met the criteria for inclusion in this review (Table 1).
In total, 95 of the 151 studies were retrospective cohort, 28 were cross-sectional, 25 were prospective cohort and 3 were case-control studies. Of the eligible studies, 91 reported treatment results in cases of TB in adults, 7 in children, 15 in patients coinfected with HIV and 38 in MDR/XDR-TB cases. These studies are detailed in Table 2.
Results of TB treatment
The success rate for the treatment of drug-sensitive TB in adults was 80.1% (95% CI: 78.4–81.7) (Fig 2). A high degree of heterogeneity (I2: 99.8%) was observed among the studies, but no publication bias was found in the funnel plot. Based on the subgroup analysis, America had the lowest treatment success rate at 75.9% (95% CI: 73.8–77.9) (S1 Fig), followed by Africa at 78.9% (95% CI: 75.5–82.2) (S2 Fig), Europe at 79.7% (95% CI: 76.2–83.0) (S3 Fig), Asia at 81.6% (95% CI: 78.5–84.5) (S4 Fig) and Oceania at 83.9% (95% CI: 75.2–91.0) (S5 Fig).
The success rate was 84.8% in children (95% CI: 77.7–90.7) (S6 Fig), 71.0% in patients coinfected with HIV (95% CI: 63.7–77.8) (S7 Fig), 58.4% in patients with MDR-TB (95% CI: 51.4–64.6) (S8 Fig) and 27.1% (95% CI: 12.7–44.5) in patients with XDR-TB (Table 3). A high degree of heterogeneity (I2: 98%; I2: 99.8%; I2: 99.2%; I2: 84.3%, respectively), was observed in these subgroups, but there was no evidence of publication bias in the funnel plot.
Predictors of TB treatment success
Patients who were smear-negative at two months of treatment were almost three times more likely to succeed in treatment (OR 2.7; 1.5–4.8) (Fig 3), whereas patients who were younger than 65 years (OR 2.0; 1.7–2.4) (Fig 4), nondrinkers (OR 2.0; 1.6–2.4) (Fig 5) and HIV-negative (OR 1.9; 1.6–2.3) were two times more likely to succeed in treatment. In contrast, diabetes, the TB form and positive baseline sputum smear did not influence the results of treatment (Table 4).
Discussion
This meta-analysis showed that the success rate for the treatment of drug-sensitive TB in adults was 80.1% (95% CI: 78.4–81.7); for those with associated HIV-TB, it was 71.0% (95% CI: 63.7–77.8), In patients with XDR-TB it was 27.1% (95% CI: 12.7–44.5) and for those with MDR-TB, it was 58.4% (95% CI: 51.4–64.6). These values did not differ significantly from those reported by the WHO for 2016 (82%, 77%, 34% and 55%, respectively)[1]. This result was expected considering that cases of TB require compulsory notification in most countries. A study in Europe (2005), reported a pooled estimate of successful outcomes of 74.4% (95% CI 71.0–77.9%), this lower estimate than the one reported in this review could be attributed to the fact that the studies analyzed in this work are prior to 2005 [158]. While, another study in Ethiopia, reported a global success rate of combined TB treatment of 86% (with a 95% CI: 83%-88%), higher than our estimate of successful treatment [159]. To XDR and MDR TB a review published in 2017 reported pooled treatment success of 26% and 60% respectively, which is not different from our results[160]. However, these results should be improved to cure 90% of patients. The results of tuberculosis treatment improve with the use of adherence interventions, such as patient education and counseling, incentives and enablers, psychological interventions, reminders and tracers, and digital health technologies. Therefore, tuberculosis control programs should keep in mind that in addition to prescribing tuberculosis medications, they need to include resources to help patients overcome individual challenges to complete treatment [161].
In children, the treatment success rate was 83.4% (95% CI: 71.0–92.9). The WHO annual Global Tuberculosis Report does not specify a treatment success rate for children. However, studies from varying countries published in 2016 reported success rates for the treatment of children with TB that were both lower and higher than that those estimated in this review, e.g., 61.5% in Malawi and 91.3% in the European Union[114,119]. Although in 2018 a review was published that calculated the success rate of 78% to MDR TB treatment in children[162], this is the first pooled estimate of treatment of drug-sensitive TB success in children at the global level in the last five years.
Sputum smear conversion in the second month of treatment was previously associated with treatment success[163]. This meta-analysis confirmed that a negative sputum smear at two months of treatment was a predictor of success (OR 2.7; 95% CI: 1.5–4.8). However, sputum smear non-conversion after two months of treatment continues to be controversial as a predictor of unfavorable outcomes due to its low sensitivity and specificity for identifying treatment failure[164]. Therefore, further studies are needed to clarify this controversy.
It was also confirmed that factors such as age <65 years (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.7–2.4), female sex (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.1–1.3) and a new case type favor the success of TB treatment, as reported in previous studies[8,9,17,48,68,69,86,138]. Not drinking alcohol was also a predictor of favorable treatment results (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.6–2.4). Alcohol consumption has been associated with treatment failure and a predisposition toward adverse drug effects, either because those who consumed alcohol skipped more doses during TB treatment or because alcohol may affect the immune response against M. tuberculosis, leading to treatment failure or a late response to treatment[44,92,130].
Nonsmokers also had a higher probability of treatment success (OR 1.5; 95% CI: 1.3–1.7) according to a study conducted in China that suggested smoking adversely affects the bacteriological response to and the result of TB treatment[53]. In Malaysia, smoking was also identified as a risk factor for unfavorable treatment outcomes[61]. In Poland, smoking did not influence the results of TB treatment[92]. In Brazil patients with a history of smoking increase 2.1 (95% CI 1.1–4.1) times, but the possibility of failure in TB treatment. Moreover, having a larger age of 50 years shows that the possibility of failure increases 2.8 (95% CI 1.4–6.0)[165].
The HIV-TB association continues to be a challenge for public health. Studies have identified coinfection as a risk factor for unfavorable TB treatment results, and most have attributed these results to the high mortality in these patients[10,98–100,105,109]. We corroborated these results, showing that HIV-negative patients had a higher proportion of favorable treatment outcomes (OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.6–2.3), while in general, the treatment success rate in coinfected patients was low (70.5%).
In this review, diabetes did not influence treatment outcomes. Our results coincide with those reported in Georgia and Malaysia[40,61], although it was previously suggested that diabetes was associated with unfavorable TB treatment results[56,81].
Among the limitations of this study, it is necessary to mention that the use of observational studies for a meta-analysis could induce errors by finding false significant associations when combining small studies affected by confounding[166]. Additionally, it is known that the quality of a meta-analysis depends on the quality of the included studies; in most studies, the quality was classified as low, which may be associated with the fact that most of the studies were retrospective and based on mandatory notification systems, where it is difficult to control due to loss at follow-up and other confounding factors. The degree of heterogeneity was also high among the studies; therefore, the random effects method was used to obtain the pooled results. Finally, the methodological variations among the included studies could also compromise the results of the meta-analysis.
Conclusion
The study findings suggest that the rate of successful TB treatment at the global level is good but is still below the defined threshold of 85%. Factors such as age, sex, alcohol consumption, smoking, sputum smear non-conversion at two months of treatment and HIV affect the results of TB treatment.
Supporting information
S1 File [doc]
PRISMA 2009 checklist.
S1 Fig [tif]
Pooled estimate of successful tuberculosis treatment outcome in America.
S2 Fig [tif]
Pooled estimate of successful tuberculosis treatment outcome in Africa.
S3 Fig [tif]
Pooled estimate of successful tuberculosis treatment outcome in Europe.
S4 Fig [tif]
Pooled estimate of successful tuberculosis treatment outcome in Asia.
S5 Fig [tif]
Pooled estimate of successful tuberculosis treatment outcome in Oceania.
S6 Fig [tif]
Pooled estimate of successful tuberculosis treatment outcome in children.
S7 Fig [tif]
Pooled estimate of successful tuberculosis treatment outcome in patients coinfected with HIV.
S8 Fig [tif]
Pooled estimate of successful MDR-TB treatment outcome.
Zdroje
1. World Health Organization. Global tuberculosis report 2018. In. Geneva, Swizerland: WHO; 2018.
2. World Health Organization. WHO End TB Strategy [Internet]. 2015. Available from: www.who.int/tb/post2015_strategy/en/
3. Cox H, Nicol MP. Comment Tuberculosis eradication: renewed commitment and global investment required. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18(3):228–9. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30692-8 29223584
4. World Health Organization. Global Health Observatory data repository [Internet]. Treatment coverage Data by WHO region. 2019. Available from: https://apps.who.int/gho/data/view.main.57056ALL
5. Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality if nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses [Internet]. The Ottawa Hospital—Research Institute. 2009. Available from: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp
6. World Health Organization. Revised international definitions in tuberculosis control. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2001;5(3):213–215. 11326818
7. Adane K, Spigt M, Dinant G.J. Tuberculosis treatment outcome and predictors in northern Ethiopian prisons: A five-year retrospective analysis. BMC Pulm Med [Internet]. 2018;18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-018-0600-1
8. Ali MK, Karanja S, Karama M. Factors associated with tuberculosis treatment outcomes among tuberculosis patients attending tuberculosis treatment centres in 2016–2017 in Mogadishu, Somalia. Pan Afr Med J. 2017;28:1–14.
9. Amante TD, Ahemed TA. Risk factors for unsuccessful tuberculosis treatment outcome (failure, default and death) in public health institutions, Eastern Ethiopia. Pan Afr Med J. 2015;20:247. doi: 10.11604/pamj.2015.20.247.3345 26161170
10. Budgell EP, Evans D, Schnippel K, Ive P, Long L, Rosen S. Outcomes of treatment of drug-susceptible tuberculosis at public sector primary healthcare clinics in Johannesburg, South Africa: A retrospective cohort study. South African Med J [Internet]. 2016;106(10):1002–9.
11. Ogbudebe CL, Izuogu S, Abu CE. Magnitude and treatment outcomes of pulmonary tuberculosis patients in a poor urban slum of Abia State, Nigeria. Int J Mycobacteriology [Internet]. 2016 Jun;5(2):205–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmyco.2016.03.003
12. Ejeta E, Beyene G, Balay G, Bonsa Z, Abebe G. Factors associated with unsuccessful treatment outcome in tuberculosis patients among refugees and their surrounding communities in Gambella Regional State, Ethiopia. PLoS One [Internet]. 2018;13(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0205468
13. El-Shabrawy M, El-Shafei DA. Evaluation of treatment failure outcome and its predictors among pulmonary tuberculosis patients in Sharkia Governorate, 2013–2014. Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberc [Internet]. 2017;66(1):145–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcdt.2015.11.002
14. Ershova J V, Podewils LJ, Bronner LE, Stockwell HG, Dlamini S, Mametja LD. Evaluation of adherence to national treatment guidelines among tuberculosis patients in three provinces of South Africa. SAMJ South African Med J [Internet]. 2014;104(5):362–8. doi: 10.7196/SAMJ.7655 25212205
15. Esmael A, Tsegaye G, Wubie M, Abera H, Endris M. Treatment outcomes of tuberculosis patients in Debre Markos Referral Hospital, north west Ethiopia (June 2008-August 2013): A five year retrospective study. Int J Pharm Sci Res [Internet]. 2014;5(4):1500–5. doi: 10.13040/IJPSR.0975-8232.5(4).1500-05
16. Gebrezgabiher G, Romha G, Ejeta E, Asebe G, Zemene E, Ameni G. Treatment Outcome of Tuberculosis Patients under Directly Observed Treatment Short Course and Factors Affecting Outcome in Southern Ethiopia: A Five-Year Retrospective Study. PLoS One [Internet]. 2016;11(2):e0150560. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150560 26918458
17. Kosgei RJ, Sitienei JK, Kipruto H, Kimenye K, Gathara D, Odawa FX, et al. Gender differences in treatment outcomes among 15–49 year olds with smear-positive pulmonary tuberculosis in Kenya. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2015;19(10):1176–81. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.15.0070
18. Mbatchou BH, Dahirou F, Tchieche C, Wandji A, Ngnié C, Nana-Metchedjin A, et al. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of tuberculosis in Douala, Cameroon: A 7-year retrospective cohort study. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2016 Dec;20(12):1609–14. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.15.0731
19. Mhimbira F, Hella J, Maroa T, Kisandu S, Chiryamkubi M, Said K, et al. Home-Based and Facility-Based Directly Observed Therapy of Tuberculosis Treatment under Programmatic Conditions in Urban Tanzania. PLoS One. 2016;11(8):e0161171. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161171 27513331
20. Mlotshwa M, Abraham N, Beery M, Williams S, Smit S, Uys M, et al. Risk factors for tuberculosis smear non-conversion in Eden district, Western Cape, South Africa, 2007–2013: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Infect Dis [Internet]. 2016;16(1):365. Doi 10.1186/s12879-016-1712-y
21. Mugomeri E, Bekele BS, Maibvise C, Tarirai C. Trends in diagnostic techniques and factors associated with tuberculosis treatment outcomes in Lesotho, 2010–2015. South African J Infect Dis [Internet]. 2018;33(1):18–23. doi: 10.1080/23120053.2017.1376545
22. Belachew A, Kebamo S, Teklie T, Alemkere G. Poor treatment outcomes and its determinants among tuberculosis patients in selected health facilities in East Wollega, Western Ethiopia. PLoS One [Internet]. 2018;13(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206227
23. Nafae R, Elshahat H, Said A, Ibrahim M. Reviewing treatment outcomes of tuberculosis patients at Zagazig Chest Hospital (2008–2012). Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberc [Internet]. 2017;66(4):623–30. 10.1016/j.ejcdt.2017.10.006
24. Nanzaluka FH, Chibuye S, Kasapo CC, Langa N, Nyimbili S, Moonga G, et al. Factors associated with unfavourable tuberculosis treatment outcomes in Lusaka, Zambia, 2015: a secondary analysis of routine surveillance data. Pan Afr Med J. 2019 Apr 8;32:159. doi: 10.11604/pamj.2019.32.159.18472 31308862
25. Djouma FN, Noubom M, Ngomba AV, Donfack H, Kouomboua PSM, Saah MAF. Determinants of death among tuberculosis patients in a semi urban diagnostic and treatment centre of Bafoussam, West Cameroon: a retrospective case-control study. Pan Afr Med J [Internet]. 2015;22:253.
26. Oshi SN, Alobu I, Ukwaja KN, Oshi DC. Investigating gender disparities in the profile and treatment outcomes of tuberculosis in Ebonyi state, Nigeria. Epidemiol. Infect. (2015), 143, 932–942. doi: 10.1017/S095026881400291X 25355040
27. Peltzer K, Louw JS. Prevalence and associated factors of tuberculosis treatment outcome among hazardous or harmful alcohol users in public primary health care in South Africa. Afr Health Sci [Internet]. 2014 Mar;14(1):157–66.
28. Ali Saleh AA, Hayat A, Azhar Syed SA. Evaluating treatment outcomes and durations among cases of smear-positive pulmonary tuberculosis in Yemen: A prospective follow-up study. J Pharm Policy Pract. 2017;10(1):1–10. doi: 10.1186/s40545-017-0124-8 29214026
29. Ukwaja KN, Oshib DC, Oshib SN, Alobuc I. Profile and treatment outcome of smear-positive TB patients who failed to smear convert after 2 months of treatment in Nigeria. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg [Internet]. 2014;108(7):431–8. doi: 10.1093/trstmh/tru070 24846911
30. Wondale B, Medihn G, Teklu T, Mersha W, Tamirat M, Ameni G. A retrospective study on tuberculosis treatment outcomes at Jinka General Hospital, southern Ethiopia. BMC Res Notes [Internet]. 2017;10(1):680. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206227
31. Worku S, Derbie A, Mekonnen D, Biadglegne F. Treatment outcomes of tuberculosis patients under directly observed treatment short-course at Debre Tabor General Hospital, northwest Ethiopia: Nine-years retrospective study. Infect Dis Poverty [Internet]. 2018;7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40249-018-0395-6
32. Yoko JL, Tumbo JM, Mills AB, Kabongo CD. Characteristics of pulmonary tuberculosis patients in Moses Kotane region North West Province, South Africa. South African Fam Pract [Internet]. 2017;59(2):78–81. doi: 10.1080/20786190.2016.1272249
33. Zenebea T, Teferab E. Tuberculosis treatment outcome and associated factors among smear-positive pulmonary tuberculosis patients in Afar, Eastern Ethiopia: a retrospective study. Brazilian J Infect Dis [Internet]. 2016;20(6):635–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjid.2016.07.012
34. Zenebe Y, Adem Y, Mekonnen D, Derbie A, Bereded F, Bantie M, et al. Profile of tuberculosis and its response to anti-TB drugs among tuberculosis patients treated under the TB control programme at Felege-Hiwot Referral Hospital, Ethiopia. BMC Public Health. 2016 Aug;16:688. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3362-9 27485507
35. Cailleaux-Cezar M, Loredo C, Silva JRL, Conde MB. Impact of smoking on sputum culture conversion and pulmonary tuberculosis treatment outcomes in Brazil: a retrospective cohort study TT—Impacto do tabagismo na conversão de cultura e no desfecho do tratamento da tuberculose pulmonar no Brasil: estudo d. J Bras Pneumol [Internet]. 2018;44(2):99–105. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1806-37562017000000161
36. Calle AM, Cuartas JM, Álvarez T. Factors associated with successful treatment of tuberculosis patients in Medellin, 2014. CES salud pública. 2017; 8 (7): 34–47.
37. Djibuti M, Mirvelashvili E, Makharashvili N, Magee MJ. Household income and poor treatment outcome among patients with tuberculosis in Georgia: a cohort study. BMC Public Health. 2014 Jan;14:88. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-88 24476154
38. Lackey B, Seas C, Van der Stuyft P, Otero L. Patient Characteristics Associated with Tuberculosis Treatment Default: A Cohort Study in a High-Incidence Area of Lima, Peru. PLoS One. 2015;10(6):e0128541. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128541 26046766
39. Maciel EL, Reis-Santos B. Determinants of tuberculosis in Brazil: from conceptual framework to practical application. Rev Panam Salud Publica [Internet]. 2015;38(1):28–34.
40. Magee MJ, Kempker RR, Kipiani M, Gandhi NR, Darchia L, Tukvadze N, et al. Diabetes mellitus is associated with cavities, smear grade, and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in Georgia. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2015 Jun;19(6):685–92. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.14.0811
41. Pereira JC, Silva MR, Costa RR, Guimarães MD, Leite IC. Profile and follow-up of patients with tuberculosis in a priority city in Brazil TT—Perfil e seguimento dos pacientes com tuberculose em município prioritário no Brasil. Rev Saude Publica [Internet]. 2015;49. doi: 10.1590/S0034-8910.2015049005304 25741659
42. Reis-Santos B, Pellacani-Posses I, Macedo LR, Golub JE, Riley LW, Maciel EL, et al. Directly observed therapy of tuberculosis in Brazil: Associated determinants and impact on treatment outcome. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2015 Oct;19(10):1188–93. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.14.0776
43. Romanowski K, Chiang L, Roth D, Krajden M, Tang P, Cook V, et al. Treatment outcomes for isoniazid-resistant tuberculosis under program conditions in British Columbia, Canada. BMC Infect Dis [Internet]. 2017 Sep;17(1):604. doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2706-0 28870175
44. Silva MR, Pereira JC, Costa RR, Dias JA, Guimarães MD, Leite IC. Drug addiction and alcoholism as predictors for tuberculosis treatment default in Brazil: A prospective cohort study. Epidemiol Infect [Internet]. 2017;145(16):3516–24. doi: 10.1017/S0950268817002631 29173226
45. Snyder RE, Marlow MA, Phuphanich ME, Riley LW, Maciel EL. Risk factors for differential outcome following directly observed treatment (DOT) of slum and non-slum tuberculosis patients: A retrospective cohort study. BMC Infect Dis [Internet]. 2016;16(1). doi: 10.1186/s12879-016-1835-1 27647383
46. Viana PV, Goncalves MJ, Basta PC. Ethnic and Racial Inequalities in Notified Cases of Tuberculosis in Brazil. PLoS One. 2016;11(5):e0154658. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154658 27176911
47. Viegas AM, Miranda SS, Haddad JP, Ceccato MG, Carvalho WS. Association of outcomes with comprehension, adherence and behavioral characteristics of tuberculosis patients using fixed-dose combination therapy in contagem, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo [Internet]. 2017;59. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-9946201759028
48. Ahmad T, Khan MM, Khan MM, Ejeta E, Karami M, Ohia C, et al. Treatment outcome of tuberculosis patients under directly observed treatment short course and its determinants in Shangla, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan: A retrospective study. Int J Mycobacteriology [Internet]. 2017;6(4):360–4. doi: 10.4103/ijmy.ijmy_69_17 29171450
49. Mohammadzadeh KA, Ghayoomi A, Maghsoudloo D. Evaluation of factors associated with failure of tuberculosis treatment under DOTS in northern Islamic Republic of Iran. East Mediterr Health J. 2016 Apr;22(2):87–94. doi: 10.26719/2016.22.2.87 27180736
50. Alqahtani S, Kashkary A, Asiri A, Kamal H, Binongo J, Castro K, et al. Impact of mobile teams on tuberculosis treatment outcomes, Riyadh Region, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 2013–2015. J Epidemiol Glob Health [Internet]. 2018;7:S29–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jegh.2017.09.005
51. Atif M, Sulaiman SA, Shafie AA, Ali I, Asif M, Babar ZU. Treatment outcome of new smear positive pulmonary tuberculosis patients in Penang, Malaysia. BMC Infect Dis. 2014 Jul;14:399. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-14-399 25037452
52. Babalik A, Kiziltas S, Gencer S, Kilicaslan Z. An investigation into the relationship between region specific quality of life and adverse tuberculosis treatment outcomes in Istanbul, Turkey. Rev Port Pneumol [Internet]. 2014;20(5):248–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rppneu.2014.01.003
53. Leung CC, Yew WW, Chan CK, Chang KC, Law WS, Lee SN, et al. Smoking adversely affects treatment response, outcome and relapse in tuberculosis. Eur Respir J [Internet]. 2015;45(3):738–45. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.00114214
54. Choi H, Lee M, Chen R, Kim Y, Yoon S, Joh J, et al. Predictors of pulmonary tuberculosis treatment outcomes in South Korea: A prospective cohort study, 2005–2012. BMC Infect Dis [Internet]. 2014;14(1).
55. Gadoev J, Asadov D, Tillashaykhov M, Tayler-Smith K, Isaakidis P, et al. Factors Associated with Unfavorable Treatment Outcomes in New and Previously Treated TB Patients in Uzbekistan: A Five Year Countrywide Study. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(6): e0128907. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128907 26075615
56. Hongguang C, Min L, Shiwen J, Fanghui G, Shaoping H, Tiejie G, et al. Impact of diabetes on clinical presentation and treatment outcome of pulmonary tuberculosis in Beijing. Epidemiol Infect [Internet]. 2015;143(1):150–6. doi: 10.1017/S095026881400079X 24717600
57. Jackson C, Stagg HR, Doshi A, Pan D, Sinha A, Batra R, et al. Tuberculosis treatment outcomes among disadvantaged patients in India. Public Heal Action [Internet]. 2017;7(2):134–40. https://doi.org/10.5588/pha.16.0107
58. Khaing PS, Kyaw NT, Satyanarayana S, Oo NL, Aung TH, Oo HM, et al. Treatment outcome of tuberculosis patients detected using accelerated vs. passive case finding in Myanmar. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2018;22(10):1145–51. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.18.0038
59. Khazaei S, Hassanzadeh J, Rezaeian S, Ghaderi E, Khazaei S, Hafshejani A, et al. Treatment outcome of new smear positive pulmonary tuberculosis patients in Hamadan, Iran: A registry-based cross-sectional study. Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberc [Internet]. 2016;65(4):825–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcdt.2016.05.007
60. Kwon YS, Kim YH, Song JU, Jeon K, Song J, Ryu YJ, et al. Risk factors for death during pulmonary tuberculosis treatment in Korea: a multicenter retrospective cohort study. J Korean Med Sci [Internet]. 2014 Sep;29(9):1226–31. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2014.29.9.1226
61. Liew SM, Khoo EM, Ho BK, Lee YK, Mimi O, Fazlina MY, et al. Tuberculosis in malaysia: Predictors of treatment outcomes in a national registry. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2015;19(7):764–71. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.14.0767A
62. Lin Y, Enarson DA, Du J, Dlodlo RA, Chiang CY, Rusen ID. Risk factors for unfavourable treatment outcome among new smear-positive pulmonary tuberculosis cases in China. Public Heal Action [Internet]. 2017;7(4):299–303. https://doi.org/10.5588/pha.17.0056
63. Lo H-Y, Yang S-L, Lin H-H, Bai K-J, Lee J-J, Lee T-I, et al. Does enhanced diabetes management reduce the risk and improve the outcome of tuberculosis? Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2016;20(3):376–82. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.15.0654
64. Lwin ZM, Sahu SK, Owiti P, Chinnakali P, Majumdar SS. Public-private mix for tuberculosis care and control in Myanmar: A strategy to scale up? Public Heal Action [Internet]. 2017;7(1):15–20. https://doi.org/10.5588/pha.16.0103
65. Morishita F, Gonzales AM, Lew W, Hyun K, Yadav RP, Reston JC, et al. Bringing state-of-The-Art diagnostics to vulnerable populations: The use of a mobile screening unit in active case finding for tuberculosis in Palawan, the Philippines. PLoS One [Internet]. 2017;12(2). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171310 28152082
66. Mukhtar F, Butt ZA. Cohort profile: the diabetes-tuberculosis treatment outcome (DITTO) study in Pakistan. BMJ Open. 2016 Dec;6(12):e012970. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012970 27913560
67. Mundra A, Deshmukh P, Dawale A. Magnitude and determinants of adverse treatment outcomes among tuberculosis patients registered under Revised National Tuberculosis Control Program in a Tuberculosis Unit, Wardha, Central India: A record-based cohort study. J Epidemiol Glob Health [Internet]. 2017;7(2):111–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jegh.2017.02.002
68. Mundra A, Deshmukh P, Dawale A. Determinants of adverse treatment outcomes among patients treated under Revised National Tuberculosis Control Program in Wardha, India: Case–control study. Med J Armed Forces India [Internet]. 2018;74(3):241–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2017.07.008
69. Ni W, Yan M, Hong L, Jian D, Hui Z, Heng X, et al. Risk of Treatment Failure in Patients with Drug-susceptible Pulmonary Tuberculosis in China. Biomed Environ Sci [Internet]. 2016;29(8):612–7.
70. Piparva K.G. Treatment outcome of tuberculosis patients on dots therapy for category 1 and 2 at district tuberculosis centre. Int J Pharm Sci Res [Internet]. 2017;8(1):207–12. doi: 10.13040/IJPSR.0975-8232.8(1).207-12
71. Rahimy N, Luvira V, Charunwatthana P, Iamsirithaworn S, Sutherat M, Phumratanaprapin W, et al. Predicting factors of treatment failure in smear positive pulmonary tuberculosis: A retrospective cohort study in Bangkok using a combination of symptoms and sputum smear/chest radiography. J Med Assoc Thail [Internet]. 2018;101(2):181–8.
72. Rao P, Chawla K, Shenoy V, Mukhopadhyay C, Brahmavar V, Kamath A, et al. Study of drug resistance in pulmonary tuberculosis cases in south coastal Karnataka. J Epidemiol Glob Health [Internet]. 2015;5(3):275–81.
73. Sadykova L, Abramavičius S, Maimakov T, et al. A retrospective analysis of treatment outcomes of drug-susceptible TB in Kazakhstan, 2013–2016. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98(26):e16071. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016071 31261516
74. Schwitters A, Kaggwa M, Omiel P, Nagadya G, Kisa N, Dalal S. Tuberculosis incidence and treatment completion among Ugandan prison inmates. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2014;18(7):781–786+i. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.13.0934
75. Shahrezaei M, Reza Maracy MR, Farid F. Factors affecting mortality and treatment completion of tuberculosis patients in Isfahan Province from 2006 to 2011. Int J Prev Med [Internet]. 2015;2015-Septe. Doi:10.4103/2008-7802.165157A
76. Thomas BE, Thiruvengadam K, S. R, Kadam D, Ovung S, Sivakumar S, et al. Smoking, alcohol use disorder and tuberculosis treatment outcomes: A dual co-morbidity burden that cannot be ignored. PLoS ONE. 2019. 14(7): e0220507. 10.1371/journal.pone.0220507 31365583
77. Wang X, Cai J, Wang D, Wang Q, Liang H, Ma A, et al. Registration and management of community patients with tuberculosis in north-west China. Public Health [Internet]. 2015;129(12):1585–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2015.09.005
78. Wang X-M, Yin S-H, Du J, Du M-L, Wang P-Y, Wu J, et al. Risk factors for the treatment outcome of retreated pulmonary tuberculosis patients in China: an optimized prediction model. Epidemiol Infect. 2017 Jul;145(9):1805–14. Doi:10.1017/S0950268817000656 28397611
79. Wen Y, Zhang Z, Li X, Xia D, Ma J, Dong Y, et al. Treatment outcomes and factors affecting unsuccessful outcome among new pulmonary smear positive and negative tuberculosis patients in Anqing, China: A retrospective study. BMC Infect Dis [Internet]. 2018;18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-018-3019-7
80. He X-C, Tao N-N, Liu Y, Zhang X-X, Li H-C. Epidemiological trends and outcomes of extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis in Shandong, China. BMC Infect Dis. 2017 Aug;17(1):555. doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2652-x 28793873
81. Yoon Y, Jung J, Jeon E, Seo H, Ryu Y, Yim J, et al. The effect of diabetes control status on treatment response in pulmonary tuberculosis: A prospective study. Thorax [Internet]. 2017;72(3):263–70. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-207686 27553224
82. Zhang Q, Gaafer M, El-Bayoumy I. Determinants of default from pulmonary tuberculosis treatment in Kuwait. Sci World J [Internet]. 2014;2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/672825
83. Aibana O, Slavuckij A, Bachmaha M, Krasiuk V, Rybak N, Flanigan TP, et al. Patient predictors of poor drug sensitive tuberculosis treatment outcomes in Kyiv Oblast, Ukraine. F1000Research [Internet]. 2018;6. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.12687.1
84. Cruz-Ferro E, Ursúa-Díaz MI, Taboada-Rodríguez JA, Hervada-Vidal X, Anibarro L, Túñez V. Epidemiology of tuberculosis in galicia, spain, 16 years after the launch of the galician tuberculosis programme. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2014;18(2):134–40. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.13.0419
85. Dias M, Gaio R, Sousa P, Abranches M, Gomes M, Oliveira O, et al. Tuberculosis among the homeless: Should we change the strategy? Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2017 Mar;21(3):327–32. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.16.0597
86. Gaborita BJ, Revest M, Roblotc F, Maakaroun-Vermessed Z, Bemere P, Guimard T, et al. Characteristics and outcome of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in a low-incidence area. Med Mal Infect [Internet]. 2018;48(7):457–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medmal.2018.04.400
87. Holden IK, Lillebaek T, Seersholm N, Andersen PH, Wejse C, Johansen IS. Predictors for Pulmonary Tuberculosis Treatment Outcome in Denmark 2009–2014. Sci Rep 9, 12995 (2019) doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-49439-9 31506499
88. Karo B, Hauer B, Hollo V, Van-Der-Werf MJ, Fiebig L, Haas W. Tuberculosis treatment outcome in the European Union and European Economic Area: an analysis of surveillance data from 2002‒2011. Eurosurveillance [Internet]. 2016;20(48):30087. 10.2807/1560-7917
89. Lucenko I, Riekstina V, Perevoscikovs J, Mozgis D, Khogali M, Gadoev J, et al. Treatment outcomes among drug-susceptible tuberculosis patients in Latvia, 2006–2010. Public Heal Action [Internet]. 2014;4:S54–8. https://doi.org/10.5588/pha.14.0040
90. Moreno-Gómez M, Alonso-Sardón M, Iglesias-de-Sena H, Aranha de Macèdo L, Mirón-Canelo J. Prospective follow-up of results of tuberculosis treatment. Rev Esp Quimioter [Internet]. 2014;27(4):244–51.
91. Priedeman M, Curtis S, Angeles G, Mullen S, Senik T. Evaluating the impact of social support services on tuberculosis treatment default in Ukraine. PLoS One [Internet]. 2018;13(8). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199513
92. Przybylski G, Dąbrowska A, Trzcińska H. Alcoholism and other socio-demographic risk factors for adverse TB-drug reactions and unsuccessful tuberculosis treatment–data from ten years’ observation at the Regional Centre of Pulmonology, Bydgoszcz, Poland. Med Sci Monit, 2014; 20: 444–453. doi: 10.12659/MSM.890012 24643127
93. Rodríguez-Valín E, Villarrubia Enseñat S, Díaz García O, Martínez Sánchez EV. Risk Factors for Potentially Unsuccessful Results and Mortality during Tuberculosis Treatment in Spain. Rev Esp Salud Publica [Internet]. 2015;89(5):459–70.
94. Alo A, Gounder S, Graham S. Clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of tuberculosis cases hospitalised in the intensive phase in Fiji. Public Heal Action [Internet]. 2014;4(3):164–8. https://doi.org/10.5588/pha.14.0022
95. Itogo N, Hill C, Bissell K, Harries A, Viney K, Gounder S. Tuberculosis notifications, characteristics and treatment outcomes: Urban vs. rural Solomon Islands, 2000–2011. Public Heal Action [Internet]. 2014;4(SUPPL. 1):S25–8. https://doi.org/10.5588/pha.13.0078
96. Scheelbeek P, Wirix A, Hatta M, Usman R, Bakker M, et al. Risk factors for poor tuberculosis treatment outcomes in Makassar, Indonesia. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health [Internet]. 2014 Jul;45(4):853–8.
97. Tagaro M, Harries A, Kool B, Ram S, Viney K, Marais B, et al. Tuberculosis case burden and treatment outcomes in children, adults and older adults, Vanuatu, 2007–2011. Public Heal Action [Internet]. 2014;4(SUPPL. 1):S14–8. https://doi.org/10.5588/pha.13.0074
98. Agbor A, Bigna J, Billong S, Tejiokem M, Ekali G, Plottel C, et al. Factors associated with death during tuberculosis treatment of patients co-infected with HIV at the Yaoundé Central Hospital, Cameroon: An 8-year hospital-based retrospective cohort study (2006–2013). PLoS One [Internet]. 2014;9(12). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0115211 25506830
99. Ambadekar NN, Zodpey SP, Soni RN, Lanjewar SP. Treatment outcome and its attributes in TB-HIV co-infected patients registered under Revised National TB Control Program: A retrospective cohort analysis. Public Health [Internet]. 2015;129(6):783–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2015.03.006
100. Belayneha M, Giday K, Lemma H. Treatment outcome of human immunodeficiency virus and tuberculosis co-infected patients in public hospitals of eastern and southern zone of Tigray region, Ethiopia. Brazilian J Infect Dis [Internet]. 2015;19(1):47–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjid.2014.09.002
101. Do-Prado TN, Rajan J V, Miranda AE, Dias EDS, Cosme LB, Possuelo LG, et al. Clinical and epidemiological characteristics associated with unfavorable tuberculosis treatment outcomes in TB-HIV co-infected patients in Brazil: a hierarchical polytomous analysis. Braz J Infect Dis. 2017 Mar;21(2):162–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjid.2016.11.006 27936379
102. Engelbrecht M, Kigozi N, Chikobvu P, Botha S, Rensburg H. Unsuccessful TB treatment outcomes with a focus on HIV co-infected cases: a cross-sectional retrospective record review in a high-burdened province of South Africa. BMC Health Serv Res [Internet]. 2017;17(1):470. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2406-x 28693508
103. Jacobson K, Moll A, Friedland G, Shenoi S. Successful tuberculosis treatment outcomes among HIV/TB coinfected patients down-referred from a district hospital to primary health clinics in rural South Africa. PLoS One [Internet]. 2015;10(5). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125588
104. Lawal A, Aliyu M, Galadanci N, Musa B, Lawan U, Bashir U, et al. The impact of rural residence and HIV infection on poor tuberculosis treatment outcomes in a large urban hospital: A retrospective cohort analysis. Int J Equity Health [Internet]. 2018;17(1). doi: 10.1186/s12939-017-0714-8 29310659
105. Mahtab S, Coetzee D. Influence of HIV and other risk factors on tuberculosis. SAMJ South African Med J [Internet]. 2017;107(5):428–34.
106. Monge S, Diez M, Pulido F, Iribarren J, Campins A, Arazo P, et al. Tuberculosis in a cohort of HIV-positive patients: Epidemiology, clinical practice and treatment outcomes. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2014;18(6):700–708+i. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.13.0778
107. Parchure R, Kulkarni V, Gangakhedkar G, Swaminathan S. Treatment outcomes of daily anti-tuberculosis treatment in HIV-infected patients seeking care at a private clinic in India. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2016;20(10):1348–53. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.16.0098
108. Sinshaw Y, Alemu S, Fekadu A, Gizachew M. Successful TB treatment outcome and its associated factors among TB/HIV co-infected patients attending Gondar University Referral Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: An institution based cross-sectional study. BMC Infect Dis [Internet]. 2017 Feb;17(1):132. doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2238-7 28178936
109. Tanue EA, Nsagha DS, Njamen TN, Assob NJC. Tuberculosis treatment outcome and its associated factors among people living with HIV and AIDS in Fako Division of Cameroon. PLoS ONE. 2019 14(7): e0218800. 10.1371/journal.pone.0218800 31361755
110. Theingia P, Harries AD, Thet-Waid K, Shewade HD, Sawd S, Winf T, et al. National scale-up of tuberculosis-human immunodeficiency virus collaborative activities in Myanmar from 2005 to 2016 and tuberculosis treatment outcomes for patients with human immunodeficiency virus-positive tuberculosis in the Mandalay Region in 2015. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg [Internet]. 2017;111(9):402–9. doi: 10.1093/trstmh/trx073 29361150
111. Torrens A, Bartholomay P, Silva S, Khogali M, Verdonck K, Bissell K. HIV testing, antiretroviral therapy, and treatment outcomes in new cases of tuberculosis in Brazil, 2011. Rev Panam Salud Publica [Internet]. 2016;39(1):26–31.
112. Wannheden C, Norrby M, Berggren I, Westling K. Tuberculosis among HIV-infected patients in Stockholm, Sweden, 1987–2010: Treatment outcomes and adverse reactions. Scand J Infect Dis [Internet]. 2014 May;46(5):331–9. doi: 10.3109/00365548.2013.878033 24512373
113. Alavi SM, Salmanzadeh S, Bakhtiyariniya P, Albagi A, Hemmatnia F, Alavi L. Prevalence and treatment outcome of pulmonary and extrapulmonary pediatric tuberculosis in southwestern Iran. Casp J Intern Med [Internet]. 2015;6(4):213–9.
114. Flick RJ, Kim MH, Simon K, Munthali A, Hosseinipour M, Nora E. Rosenberg 2,5, et al. Burden of disease and risk factors for death among children treated for tuberculosis in Malawi. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2016 Aug;20(8):1046–54. doi: 10.5588/ijtld.15.0928 27393538
115. Hamid M, Brooks MB, Madhani F, Ali H, Naseer MJ, The Childhood Tuberculosis Karachi Group, et al. Risk factors for unsuccessful tuberculosis treatment outcomes in children. PLoS ONE. 2019 14(9): e0222776. 10.1371/journal.pone.0222776 31553758
116. Laghari M, Sulaiman SA, Khan AH, Memon N. Epidemiology of tuberculosis and treatment outcomes among children in Pakistan: A 5 year retrospective study. PeerJ [Internet]. 2018;2018(7). doi: 10.7717/peerj.5253 30065869
117. Ohene SA, Fordah S, Dela Boni P. Childhood tuberculosis and treatment outcomes in Accra: a retrospective analysis. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19(1):749. Published 2019 Aug 28. doi: 10.1186/s12879-019-4392-6 31455234
118. Tilahun G, Gebre-Selassie S. Treatment outcomes of childhood tuberculosis in Addis Ababa: a five-year retrospective analysis. BMC Public Health [Internet]. 2016;16:612. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3193-8 27443308
119. Turkova A, Chappell E, Chalermpantmetagul S, Negra MD, Volokha A, Primak N, et al. Tuberculosis in HIV-infected children in Europe, Thailand and Brazil: paediatric TB-HIV EuroCoord study. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2016;20(11):1448–56. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.16.0067
120. Addis-Alene KA, Viney K, McBryde ES, Tsegaye AT, Clements AC. Treatment outcomes in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in north-west Ethiopia. Trop Med Int Health. 2017 Mar;22(3):351–62. Doi:10.1111/tmi.12826 27978594
121. Aibana O, Bachmaha M, Krasiuk V, Rybak N, Flanigan TP, Petrenko V, et al. Risk factors for poor multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment outcomes in Kyiv Oblast, Ukraine. 2017;1–7. doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2230-2
122. Altena R, Vries G, Haar CH, Lange WC, Magis-Escurra C, Hof S, et al. Highly successful treatment outcome of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in the Netherlands, 2000–2009. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2015 Apr;19(4):406–12. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.14.0838 25859995
123. Atif M, Bashir A, Ahmad N, Fatima RK, Saba S, Scahill S. Predictors of unsuccessful interim treatment outcomes of multidrug resistant tuberculosis patients. BMC Infect Dis [Internet]. 2017 Sep;17(1):655. doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2746-5 28962599
124. Bastard M, Sanchez-Padilla E, Cros P, Khamraev AK, Parpieva N, Tillyashaykov M, et al. Outcomes of HIV-infected versus HIV-non-infected patients treated for drug-resistance tuberculosis: Multicenter cohort study. PLoS One [Internet]. 2018;13(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193491
125. Brust J, Shah NS, Mlisana K, Moodley P, Allana S, Campbell A, et al. Improved Survival and Cure Rates with Concurrent Treatment for Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis-Human Immunodeficiency Virus Coinfection in South Africa. Clin Infect Dis [Internet]. 2018;66(8):1246–53. 10.1093/cid/cix1125/4774985
126. Cegielski JP, Kurbatova E, Van der Walt M, Brand J, Ershova J, Tupasi T, et al. Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis Treatment Outcomes in Relation to Treatment and Initial Versus Acquired Second-Line Drug Resistance. Clin Infect Dis [Internet]. 2015 Feb;62(4):418–30.
127. Chen Y, Yuan Z, Shen X, Wu J, Wu Z, Xu B. Time to multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment initiation in association with treatment outcomes in Shanghai, China. Antimicrob Agents Chemother [Internet]. 2018;62(4). https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.02259-17
128. Chiang S, Starke J, Miller AC, Cruz A, Castillo H, Valdivia WJ, et al. Baseline Predictors of Treatment Outcomes in Children with Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Clin Infect Dis [Internet]. 2016;63(8):1063–71. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciw489 27458026
129. Demile B, Amare Zenebu A, Shewaye H, Xia S, Guadie A. Risk factors associated with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in a tertiary armed force referral and teaching hospital, Ethiopia. BMC Infect Dis [Internet]. 2018;18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-018-3167-9
130. Duraisamy K, Mrithyunjayan S, Ghosh S, Nair SA, Balakrishnan S, Subramoniapillai J, et al. Does alcohol consumption during multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment affect outcome? A population-based study in Kerala, India. Ann Am Thorac Soc [Internet]. 2014 Jun;11(5):712–5. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201312-447OC 24735096
131. Francis JR, Manchikanti P, Blyth CC, Denholm J, Lowbridge C, Coulter C. Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in Western Australia, 1998–2012. Med J Aust [Internet]. 2014;200(6):328–32. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.17.0412
132. Heysell SK, Ogarkov OB, Zhdanova S, Zorkaltseva E, Shugaeva S, Gratz J, et al. Undertreated HIV and drug-resistant tuberculosis at a referral hospital in Irkutsk, Siberia. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2016 Feb;20(2):187–92. doi: 10.5588/ijtld.14.0961 26792470
133. Ibrahim E, Baess AI, Al-Messery MA. Pattern of prevalence, risk factors and treatment outcomes among Egyptian patients with multidrug resistant tuberculosis. Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberc [Internet]. 2017;66(3):405–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcdt.2016.11.002
134. Jagielski T, Brzostek A, van Belkum A, Dziadek J, Augustynowicz-Kopec E, Zwolska Z. A close-up on the epidemiology and transmission of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in Poland. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015 Jan;34(1):41–53. doi: 10.1007/s10096-014-2202-z 25037868
135. Janmeja AK, Aggarwal D, Dhillon R. Factors predicting treatment success in multi-drug resistant tuberculosis patients treated under programmatic conditions. Indian J Tuberc [Internet]. 2018;65(2):135–9. https://doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.ijtb.2017.12.015
136. Javaid A, Shaheen Z, Shafqat M, Khan AH, Ahma N. Risk factors for high death and loss-to-follow-up rates among patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis at a programmatic management unit. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2017;45(2):190–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2016.07.026
137. Javaid A, Ullah I, Masud H, Basit A, Ahmad W, Butt ZA, et al. Predictors of poor treatment outcomes in multidrug-resistant tuberculosis patients: a retrospective cohort study. Clin Microbiol Infect [Internet]. 2018 Jun;24(6):612–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2017.09.012
138. Jensenius M, Winje BA, Blomberg B, Mengshoel AT, Von der Lippe B, Hannula R, et al. Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in Norway: A nationwide study, 1995–2014. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis [Internet]. 2016;20(6):786–92. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.15.0895
139. Kawatsu L, Uchimura K, Izumi K, Ohkado A, Yoshiyama T. Treatment outcome of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in Japan—the first cross-sectional study of Japan tuberculosis surveillance data. BMC Infect Dis. 2018 Aug;18(1):445. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-018-3353-9 30170549
140. Khan MA, Mehreen S, Basit A, Khan RA, Jan F, Ullah I, et al. Characteristics and treatment outcomes of patients with multi-drug resistant tuberculosis at a tertiary care hospital in Peshawar, Pakistan. Saudi Med J [Internet]. 2015 Dec;36(12):1463–71. doi: 10.15537/smj.2015.12.12155 26620989
141. Liu Q, Lu P, Martinez L, Yang H, Lu W, Ding X, et al. Factors affecting time to sputum culture conversion and treatment outcome of patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in China. BMC Infect Dis. 2018 Mar;18(1):114. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-018-3021-0 29510666
142. Marais E, Mlambo CK, Lewis JJ, Rastogi N, Zozio T, Grobusch MP, et al. Treatment outcomes of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis patients in Gauteng, South Africa. Infection. 2014 Apr;42(2):405–13. doi: 10.1007/s15010-013-0572-2 24363208
143. Perez-Navarro LM, Restrepo BI, Fuentes-Dominguez FJ, Duggirala R, Morales-Romero J, Lopez-Alvarenga JC, et al. The effect size of type 2 diabetes mellitus on tuberculosis drug resistance and adverse treatment outcomes. Tuberculosis [Internet]. 2017;103:83–91. Available from: http://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&from=export&id=L614301639 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tube.2017.01.006
144. Muñoz-Torrico M, Caminero-Lunab J, Battista-Migliori G, D’Ambrosio L, Carrillo-Alduenda JL, Villareal-Velarde H, et al. Diabetes is Associated With Severe Adverse Events in Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis. Arch Bronconeumol [Internet]. 2017;53(5):245–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arbres.2016.10.021
145. Nair D, Velayutham B, Kannan T, Tripathy JP, Harries AD, Natrajan M, et al. Predictors of unfavourable treatment outcome in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in India. Public Heal Action [Internet]. 2017;7(1):32–8. https://doi.org/10.5588/pha.16.0055
146. Pang Y, Lu J, Huo F, Ma Y, Zhao L, Li Y, et al. Prevalence and treatment outcome of extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis plus additional drug resistance from the National Clinical Center for Tuberculosis in China: A five-year review. J Infect [Internet]. 2017 Nov;75(5):433–40. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2017.08.005 28804028
147. Parmar MM, Sachdeva KS, Dewan PK, Rade K, Nair SA, Pant R, et al. Unacceptable treatment outcomes and associated factors among India’s initial cohorts of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) patients under the revised national TB control programme (2007–2011): Evidence leading to policy enhancement. PLoS One. 2018;13(4):e0193903. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193903 29641576
148. Phuong N, Nhung N, Hoa N, Thuy T, Takarinda K, Tayler-Smith K, et al. Management and treatment outcomes of patients enrolled in MDR-TB treatment in Viet Nam. Public Heal Action [Internet]. 2016;6(1):25–31. https://doi.org/10.5588/pha.15.0068
149. Schnippel K, Shearer K, Evans D, Berhanu R, Dlamini S, Ndjeka N. Predictors of mortality and treatment success during treatment for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis within the South African National TB Programme, 2009 to 2011: a cohort analysis of the national case register. Int J Infect Dis [Internet]. 2015;39:89–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2015.09.002
150. Trébucq A, Schwoebel V, Kashongwe Z, Bakayoko A, Kuaban C, Noeske J, et al. Treatment outcome with a short multidrug-resistant tuberculosis regimen in nine African countries. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2017;22(1):17–25. https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.17.0498 29149917
151. Udwadia ZF, Moharil G. Multidrug-resistant-tuberculosis treatment in the Indian private sector: Results from a tertiary referral private hospital in Mumbai. Lung India [Internet]. 2014;31(4):336–41. doi: 10.4103/0970-2113.142101 25378840
152. Verdecchia M, Keus K, Blankley S, Vambe D, Ssonko C, Piening T, et al. Model of care and risk factors for poor outcomes in patients on multi-drug resistant tuberculosis treatment at two facilities in eSwatini (formerly Swaziland), 2011–2013. PLoS One [Internet]. 2018;13(10). 10.1371/journal.pone.0205601
153. Viana PV de S, Redner P, Ramos JP. Factors associated with loss to follow-up and death in cases of drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) treated at a reference center in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Cad Saúde Pública [Internet]. 2018;34(5):e00048217—e00048217. doi: 10.1590/0102-311X00048217 29768580
154. Villegas L, Otero L, Sterling T, Huaman M, Van der Stuyft P, Gotuzzo E, et al. Prevalence, risk factors, and treatment outcomes of isoniazid- and rifampicin-mono-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis in Lima, Peru. PLoS One [Internet]. 2016;11(4):e0152933. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152933 27045684
155. Xu C, Pang Y, Li R, Ruan Y, Wang L, Chen M, et al. Clinical outcome of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis patients receiving standardized second-line treatment regimen in China. J Infect [Internet]. 2018;76(4):348–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2017.12.017
156. Zhang L, Meng Q, Chen S, Zhang M, Chen B, Wu B, et al. Treatment outcomes of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis patients in Zhejiang, China, 2009–2013, Clinical Microbiology and Infection (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2017.07.008
157. Zhang Q, Wu Z, Zhang Z, Sha W, Shen X, Xiao H. Efficacy and effect of free treatment on multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Exp Ther Med [Internet]. 2016;11(3):777–82. doi: 10.3892/etm.2015.2966 26997992
158. Faustini A, Hall AJ, Perucci CA. Tuberculosis treatment outcomes in Europe: a systematic review. Eur Respir J 2005; 26: 503–510 doi: 10.1183/09031936.05.00103504 16135735
159. Seid MA, Ayalew MB, Muche EA, Gebreyohannes EA, Abegaz TM. Drugsusceptible tuberculosis treatment success and associated factors in Ethiopia from 2005 to 2017: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2018;8:e022111 doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022111 30257846
160. Bastos ML, Lan Z, Menzies D. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis for treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Eur Respir J 2017; 49: 1600803 [https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.00803-2016]. 28331031
161. Alipanah N, Jarlsberg L, Miller C, Linh NN, Falzon D, Jaramillo E, et al. Adherence interventions and outcomes of tuberculosis treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis of trials and observational studies. PLoS Med. 2018 15(7): e1002595. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002595 29969463
162. Harausz EP, Garcia-Prats AJ, Law S, Schaaf HS, Kredo T, Seddon JA, et al. Treatment and outcomes in children with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2018 15(7): e1002591. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002591 29995958
163. Do Socorro Nantua Evangelista M, Maia R, Toledo JP, De Abreu RG, Braga JU, Barreira D, et al. Second month sputum smear as a predictor of tuberculosis treatment outcomes in Brazil. BMC Res Notes [Internet]. 2018;11(1):4–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-018-3522-3
164. Ramarokoto H, Randriamiharisoa H, Rakotoarisaonina A, Rasolovavalona T, Rasolofo V, Chanteau S, et al. Bacteriological follow-up of tuberculosis treatment: A comparative study of smear microscopy and culture results at the second month of treatment. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2002;6(10):909–12. 12365578
165. Juan Pablo Aguilar JP, Arriaga MB, Rodas MN, Netto E. Tabaquismo y fracaso del tratamiento de la tuberculosis pulmonar. Un estudio de casos y controles. J Bras Pneumol. 2019;45(2):e20180359. doi: 10.1590/1806-3713/e20180359
166. Shapiro S. Is meta-analysis a valid approach to the evaluation of small effects in observational studies? J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50(3):223–9. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(96)00360-5 9120519
Článok vyšiel v časopise
PLOS One
2019 Číslo 12
- Metamizol jako analgetikum první volby: kdy, pro koho, jak a proč?
- Nejasný stín na plicích – kazuistika
- Masturbační chování žen v ČR − dotazníková studie
- Úspěšná resuscitativní thorakotomie v přednemocniční neodkladné péči
- Kombinace metamizol/paracetamol v léčbě pooperační bolesti u zákroků v rámci jednodenní chirurgie
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- Methylsulfonylmethane increases osteogenesis and regulates the mineralization of the matrix by transglutaminase 2 in SHED cells
- Oregano powder reduces Streptococcus and increases SCFA concentration in a mixed bacterial culture assay
- The characteristic of patulous eustachian tube patients diagnosed by the JOS diagnostic criteria
- Parametric CAD modeling for open source scientific hardware: Comparing OpenSCAD and FreeCAD Python scripts