Using a Composite Maternal-Infant Outcome Measure in Tuberculosis-Prevention Studies Among Pregnant Women.


Journal

Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America
ISSN: 1537-6591
Titre abrégé: Clin Infect Dis
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9203213

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 08 2021
Historique:
received: 12 07 2020
accepted: 28 10 2020
pubmed: 5 11 2020
medline: 7 8 2021
entrez: 4 11 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Tuberculosis (TB-)-preventive therapy (TPT) among pregnant women reduces risk of TB in mothers and infants, but timing of initiation should consider potential adverse effects. We propose an analytical approach to evaluate the risk-benefit of interventions. A novel outcome measure that prioritizes maternal and infant events was developed with a 2-stage Delphi survey, where a panel of stakeholders assigned scores from 0 (best) to 100 (worst) based on perceived desirability. Using data from TB APPRISE, a trial among pregnant women living with human immunodeficiency virus (WLWH) that randomized the timing of initiation of isoniazid, antepartum versus postpartum, was evaluated. The composite outcome scoring/ranking system categorized mother-infant paired outcomes into 8 groups assigned identical median scores by stakeholders. Maternal/infant TB and nonsevere adverse pregnancy outcomes were assigned similar scores. Mean (SD) composite outcome scores were 43.7 (33.0) and 41.2 (33.7) in the antepartum and postpartum TPT initiation arms, respectively. However, a modifying effect of baseline antiretroviral regimen was detected (P = .049). When women received nevirapine, composite scores were higher (worse outcomes) in the antepartum versus postpartum arms (adjusted difference, 14.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4-26.2; P = .02), whereas when women received efavirenz there was no difference by timing of TPT (adjusted difference, .62; 95% CI, -3.2-6.2; P = .53). For TPT, when used by otherwise healthy persons, preventing adverse events is paramount from the perspective of stakeholders. Among pregnant WLWH in high-TB-burden regions, it is important to consider the antepartum antiretroviral regimen taken when deciding when to initiate TPT. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT01494038 (IMPAACT P1078).

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Tuberculosis (TB-)-preventive therapy (TPT) among pregnant women reduces risk of TB in mothers and infants, but timing of initiation should consider potential adverse effects. We propose an analytical approach to evaluate the risk-benefit of interventions.
METHODS
A novel outcome measure that prioritizes maternal and infant events was developed with a 2-stage Delphi survey, where a panel of stakeholders assigned scores from 0 (best) to 100 (worst) based on perceived desirability. Using data from TB APPRISE, a trial among pregnant women living with human immunodeficiency virus (WLWH) that randomized the timing of initiation of isoniazid, antepartum versus postpartum, was evaluated.
RESULTS
The composite outcome scoring/ranking system categorized mother-infant paired outcomes into 8 groups assigned identical median scores by stakeholders. Maternal/infant TB and nonsevere adverse pregnancy outcomes were assigned similar scores. Mean (SD) composite outcome scores were 43.7 (33.0) and 41.2 (33.7) in the antepartum and postpartum TPT initiation arms, respectively. However, a modifying effect of baseline antiretroviral regimen was detected (P = .049). When women received nevirapine, composite scores were higher (worse outcomes) in the antepartum versus postpartum arms (adjusted difference, 14.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4-26.2; P = .02), whereas when women received efavirenz there was no difference by timing of TPT (adjusted difference, .62; 95% CI, -3.2-6.2; P = .53).
CONCLUSIONS
For TPT, when used by otherwise healthy persons, preventing adverse events is paramount from the perspective of stakeholders. Among pregnant WLWH in high-TB-burden regions, it is important to consider the antepartum antiretroviral regimen taken when deciding when to initiate TPT. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT01494038 (IMPAACT P1078).

Identifiants

pubmed: 33146706
pii: 5955952
doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1674
pmc: PMC8326545
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT01494038']

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e587-e593

Subventions

Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : HHSN275201800001C
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : UM1 AI068632
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : K23 AI120793
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : UM1 AI068616
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : UM1 AI069465
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : UM1 AI106716
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : HHSN275201800001I
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Références

Stat Med. 1991 Sep;10(9):1349-59
pubmed: 1925166
Clin Trials. 2020 Dec;17(6):617-626
pubmed: 32666831
PLoS Med. 2011 Jan 25;8(1):e1000393
pubmed: 21283604
Eur Heart J. 2012 Jan;33(2):176-82
pubmed: 21900289
Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Dec 15;59 Suppl 7:S437-44
pubmed: 25425722
J Biomed Biotechnol. 2011;2011:783528
pubmed: 21785566
N Engl J Med. 2019 Oct 3;381(14):1333-1346
pubmed: 31577875
Stat Methods Med Res. 2015 Dec;24(6):980-8
pubmed: 22275378
BJOG. 2016 Jan;123(2):190-8
pubmed: 26841002
Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Dec;55(11):1532-49
pubmed: 22942202
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Jun 1;72(11):e784-e790
pubmed: 32997744
Clin Infect Dis. 2019 May 2;68(10):1691-1698
pubmed: 30321315
Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Feb 3;70(4):698-703
pubmed: 31414121
Stat Med. 2010 Dec 30;29(30):3245-57
pubmed: 21170918
Control Clin Trials. 1992 Apr;13(2):148-55
pubmed: 1316829
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012 Apr 1;185(7):779-84
pubmed: 22161161
Clin Infect Dis. 2015 Sep 1;61(5):800-6
pubmed: 26113652
Stat Med. 2017 Feb 10;36(3):442-454
pubmed: 27782312
Stat Biopharm Res. 2016;8(4):386-393
pubmed: 28435515

Auteurs

Grace Montepiedra (G)

Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Soyeon Kim (S)

Frontier Science Foundation, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Adriana Weinberg (A)

University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, USA.

Gerhard Theron (G)

Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.

Timothy R Sterling (TR)

Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.

Sylvia M LaCourse (SM)

University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.

Sarah Bradford (S)

FHI 360, Durham, North Carolina, USA.

Nahida Chakhtoura (N)

National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Patrick Jean-Philippe (P)

National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Scott Evans (S)

The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.

Amita Gupta (A)

Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH