Model-Based Meta-Analysis of Relapsing Mouse Model Studies from the Critical Path to Tuberculosis Drug Regimens Initiative Database.
Mycobacterium
model-based meta-analysis
modeling and simulation
relapsing mouse model
tuberculosis
Journal
Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy
ISSN: 1098-6596
Titre abrégé: Antimicrob Agents Chemother
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0315061
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 03 2022
15 03 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
1
2
2022
medline:
24
3
2022
entrez:
31
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Tuberculosis (TB), the disease caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb), remains a leading infectious disease-related cause of death worldwide, necessitating the development of new and improved treatment regimens. Nonclinical evaluation of candidate drug combinations via the relapsing mouse model (RMM) is an important step in regimen development, through which candidate regimens that provide the greatest decrease in the probability of relapse following treatment in mice may be identified for further development. Although RMM studies are a critical tool to evaluate regimen efficacy, making comprehensive "apples to apples" comparisons of regimen performance in the RMM has been a challenge in large part due to the need to evaluate and adjust for variability across studies arising from differences in design and execution. To address this knowledge gap, we performed a model-based meta-analysis on data for 17 unique regimens obtained from a total of 1592 mice across 28 RMM studies. Specifically, a mixed-effects logistic regression model was developed that described the treatment duration-dependent probability of relapse for each regimen and identified relevant covariates contributing to interstudy variability. Using the model, covariate-normalized metrics of interest, namely, treatment duration required to reach 50% and 10% relapse probability, were derived and used to compare relative regimen performance. Overall, the model-based meta-analysis approach presented herein enabled cross-study comparison of efficacy in the RMM and provided a framework whereby data from emerging studies may be analyzed in the context of historical data to aid in selecting candidate drug combinations for clinical evaluation as TB drug regimens.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35099274
doi: 10.1128/AAC.01793-21
pmc: PMC8923195
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antitubercular Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0179321Références
PLoS One. 2013 Aug 05;8(8):e71116
pubmed: 23940699
Clin Infect Dis. 2016 Feb 15;62(4):484-90
pubmed: 26527614
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011 Dec;55(12):5485-92
pubmed: 21930883
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2004 Feb 1;169(3):421-6
pubmed: 14578218
Sci Rep. 2018 Apr 9;8(1):5714
pubmed: 29632372
J Infect Dis. 2015 Jun 15;211 Suppl 3:S83-95
pubmed: 26009617
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015 Oct 26;60(1):270-7
pubmed: 26503656
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015 Jul;59(7):4026-30
pubmed: 25918146
J Infect Dis. 2021 Feb 19;:
pubmed: 33606880
Tuberculosis (Edinb). 2004;84(6):361-4
pubmed: 15525559
Lancet Respir Med. 2020 Jan;8(1):19
pubmed: 31706931
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Jan 20;112(3):869-74
pubmed: 25561537
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018 Jun 26;62(7):
pubmed: 29735562
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015 Dec 07;60(2):1091-6
pubmed: 26643352
N Engl J Med. 2021 May 6;384(18):1705-1718
pubmed: 33951360
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2004 Nov 15;170(10):1131-4
pubmed: 15306535
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012 Feb;56(2):731-8
pubmed: 22143517
Nat Med. 2018 Nov;24(11):1708-1715
pubmed: 30397355
PLoS Med. 2007 Dec;4(12):e344
pubmed: 18092886
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019 May 24;63(6):
pubmed: 30936097
Tuberculosis (Edinb). 2012 Nov;92(6):453-88
pubmed: 22940006
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008 Apr;52(4):1522-4
pubmed: 18285479
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011 Mar;55(3):1237-47
pubmed: 21135176
Microbiol Spectr. 2017 Jun;5(3):
pubmed: 28643624
Ann Intern Med. 1990 Mar 15;112(6):397-406
pubmed: 2155569