ArticlePloS one2012
Strategies for treating latent multiple-drug resistant tuberculosis: a decision analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Cost-effectiveness of Treatment of Latent Tuberculosis to Reduce Progression to Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2017Pooled it
- Preventive Therapy for Contacts of Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Tuberculosis in Pediatric Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Recipients.Global pediatric health · 2021Review
- Fluoroquinolones for the treatment of latentWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2019Review
- A systematic synthesis of direct costs to treat and manage tuberculosis disease applied to California, 2015.BMC research notes · 2017Article
- A review of computational and mathematical modeling contributions to our understanding of Mycobacterium tuberculosis within-host infection and treatment.Current opinion in systems biology · 2017Article
- Treatment of Latent Tuberculosis Infection.Current treatment options in infectious diseases · 2017Review
- Current management options for latent tuberculosis: a review.Infection and drug resistance · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal treatment for latent multiple-drug resistant tuberculosis infection remains unclear. In anticipation of future clinical trials, we modeled the expected performance of six potential regimens for treatment of latent multiple-drug resistant tuberculosis.
methodsA computerized Markov model to analyze the total cost of treatment for six different regimens: Pyrazinamide/ethambutol, moxifloxacin monotherapy, moxifloxacin/pyrazinamide, moxifloxacin/ethambutol, moxifloxacin/ethionamide, and moxifloxacin/PA-824. Efficacy estimates were extrapolated from mouse models and examined over a wide range of assumptions.
resultsIn the base-case, moxifloxacin monotherapy was the lowest cost strategy, but moxifloxacin/ethambutol was cost-effective at an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $21,252 per quality-adjusted life-year. Both pyrazinamide-containing regimens were dominated due to their toxicity. A hypothetical regimen of low toxicity and even modest efficacy was cost-effective compared to "no treatment."
conclusionIn our model, moxifloxacin/ethambutol was the preferred treatment strategy under a wide range of assumptions; pyrazinamide-containing regimens fared poorly because of high rates of toxicity. Although more data are needed on efficacy of treatments for latent MDR-TB infection, data on toxicity and treatment discontinuation, which are easier to obtain, could have a substantial impact on public health practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.