Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25726085›Full record

Observational studyThe Lancet. Respiratory medicine2015

Sputum culture conversion as a prognostic marker for end-of-treatment outcome in patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: a secondary analysis of data from two observational cohort studies.

Ekaterina V Kurbatova, J Peter Cegielski, Christian Lienhardt, Rattanawadee Akksilp, Jaime Bayona, Mercedes C Becerra, Janice Caoili, Carmen Contreras, Tracy Dalton, Manfred Danilovits and 26 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in The Lancet. Respiratory medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 93 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
93citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

93 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Beyond culturability: VBNC-like and differentially culturableFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Clinical Implications of Time to Culture Conversion inOpen forum infectious diseases · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

33 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

36 authors.

Ekaterina V KurbatovaDivision of Tuberculosis Elimination, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA. Electronic address: ekurbatova@cdc.gov.
J Peter CegielskiDivision of Tuberculosis Elimination, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Christian LienhardtWHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
Rattanawadee AkksilpOffice of Disease Prevention and Control, Region 7, Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand.
Jaime BayonaHarvard Medical School and Partners In Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Mercedes C BecerraHarvard Medical School and Partners In Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Janice CaoiliTropical Disease Foundation, Manila, Philippines.
Carmen ContrerasSocios en Salud Sucursal, Lima, Peru.
Tracy DaltonDivision of Tuberculosis Elimination, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Manfred DanilovitsTartu University Hospital, Tartu, Estonia.
Olga V DemikhovaCentral Tuberculosis Research Institute, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
Julia ErshovaDivision of Tuberculosis Elimination, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Victoria M GamminoDivision of Tuberculosis Elimination, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Irina GelmanovaHarvard Medical School and Partners In Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Charles M HeiligDivision of Tuberculosis Elimination, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Ruwen JouReference Laboratory of Mycobacteriology, Taiwan Centers for Disease Control, Taipei, Taiwan.
Boris KazennyyOrel Oblast Tuberculosis Dispensary, Orel, Russia.
Salmaan KeshavjeeHarvard Medical School and Partners In Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Hee Jin KimKorean Institute of Tuberculosis, Seoul, South Korea.
Kai KliimanTartu University Hospital, Tartu, Estonia.
Charlotte KvasnovskyDivision of Tuberculosis Elimination, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Vaira LeimaneRiga East University Hospital, Tuberculosis and Lung Disease Center, Riga, Latvia.
Carole D MitnickHarvard Medical School and Partners In Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Imelda QuelapioTropical Disease Foundation, Manila, Philippines.
Vija RiekstinaRiga East University Hospital, Tuberculosis and Lung Disease Center, Riga, Latvia.
Sarah E SmithDivision of Tuberculosis Elimination, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Thelma TupasiTropical Disease Foundation, Manila, Philippines.
Martie van der WaltMedical Research Council, Pretoria, South Africa.
Irina A VasilyevaCentral Tuberculosis Research Institute, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
Laura E ViaNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Piret ViikleppNational Tuberculosis Registry, National Institute for Health Development, Tallinn, Estonia.
Grigory VolchenkovVladimir Oblast Tuberculosis Dispensary, Vladimir, Russia.
Allison Taylor WalkerDivision of Tuberculosis Elimination, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Melanie WolfgangDivision of Tuberculosis Elimination, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Martin YaguiNational Institute of Health, Lima, Peru.
Matteo ZignolWHO, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

International Research in Korea: Clinical Studies of Drug-Resistant TuberculosisZIAAI001067 · NIAID · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES · PI BARRY, CLIFTON · 2009 to 2017
$6.9M
Intramural CDC HHS CC999999Intramural NIH HHSWorld Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSputum culture conversion is often used as an early microbiological endpoint in phase 2 clinical trials of tuberculosis treatment on the basis of its assumed predictive value for end-of-treatment outcome, particularly in patients with drug-susceptible tuberculosis. We aimed to assess the validity of sputum culture conversion on solid media at varying timepoints, and the time to conversion, as prognostic markers for end-of-treatment outcome in patients with multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis.

methodsWe analysed data from two large cohort studies of patients with MDR tuberculosis. We defined sputum culture conversion as two or more consecutive negative cultures from sputum samples obtained at least 30 days apart. To estimate the association of 2 month and 6 month conversion with successful treatment outcome, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs with random-effects multivariable logistic regression. We calculated predictive values with bivariate random-effects generalised linear mixed modelling.

findingsWe assessed data for 1712 patients who had treatment success, treatment failure, or who died. Among patients with treatment success, median time to sputum culture conversion was significantly shorter than in those who had poor outcomes (2 months [IQR 1-3] vs 7 months [3 to ≥24]; log-rank p<0·0001). Furthermore, conversion status at 6 months (adjusted OR 14·07 [95% CI 10·05-19·71]) was significantly associated with treatment success compared with failure or death. Sputum culture conversion status at 2 months was significantly associated with treatment success only in patients who were HIV negative (adjusted OR 4·12 [95% CI 2·25-7·54]) or who had unknown HIV infection (3·59 [1·96-6·58]), but not in those who were HIV positive (0·38 [0·12-1·18]). Thus, the overall association of sputum culture conversion with a successful outcome was substantially greater at 6 months than at 2 months. 2 month conversion had low sensitivity (27·3% [95% confidence limit 16·6-41·4]) and high specificity (89·8% [82·3-94·4]) for prediction of treatment success. Conversely, 6 month sputum culture conversion status had high sensitivity (91·8% [85·9-95·4]), but moderate specificity (57·8% [42·5-71·6]). The maximum combined sensitivity and specificity for sputum culture conversion was reached between month 6 and month 10 of treatment.

interpretationTime to sputum culture conversion, conversion status at 6 months, and conversion status at 2 months in patients without known HIV infection can be considered as proxy markers of end-of-treatment outcome in patients with MDR tuberculosis, although the overall association with treatment success is substantially stronger for 6 month than for 2 month conversion status. Investigators should consider these results regarding the validity of sputum culture conversion at various timepoints as an early predictor of treatment efficacy when designing phase 2 studies before investing substantial resources in large, long-term, phase 3 trials of new treatments for MDR tuberculosis.

fundingUS Agency for International Development, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Intramural Research of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedHumansMiddle AgedMycobacterium tuberculosisProspective StudiesSputumTreatment OutcomeTuberculosis, Multidrug-ResistantTuberculosis, PulmonaryYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID25726085
PMCPMC4401426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.