ArticleIJTLD open2025
Using linezolid as a substitute for the injectable in case of ototoxicity is safer and as effective as all-oral treatment for rifampicin-resistant TB.
Article in IJTLD open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWHO recommends all-oral bedaquiline (BDQ) and linezolid (LZD)-containing regimens for rifampicin-resistant TB (RR-TB). In Niger, high cure rates were achieved using an adaptive short treatment regimen (aSTR) with a second-line injectable drug (SLID) and LZD, where LZD replaced the SLID in case of any ototoxicity detected on monthly audiometry. In 2020, WHO recommended a short oral BDQ/LZD regimen (oSTR). However, the success reported for oSTR was lower than for aSTR in Niger. The 'SHOrt ORal Treatment' trial therefore compared the safety and efficacy between aSTR and oSTR in Niger.
methodsIn this pragmatic clinical trial, patients with fluoroquinolone-susceptible RR-TB were assigned by alternate months to aSTR or oSTR. Regression models estimated the association between regimen and safety (grade 3-4 adverse events [AEs]) and efficacy (excluding loss to follow-up).
resultsBetween 2021-2022, 158 RR-TB patients were included, 80 on oSTR and 78 on aSTR. Overall, 34 patients experienced 43 grade 3-4 AEs (anaemia: 15, neurotoxicity: 11, vomiting: 8, hepatitis: 7, arthralgia: 1, QTc prolongation: 1). Grade 3-4 AEs occurred in 26/80 (32.5 %) on oSTR versus 8/78 (10.3%) on aSTR, with anaemia, neurotoxicity and arthralgia being significantly higher in the oSTR group. Ototoxicity and nephrotoxicity appeared more frequently during the aSTR, but none evolved to grade 3. Patients treated with oSTR had a 3-fold increase in grade 3-4 AE (aHR 3.04;95% CI:1.36-6.80). End-of-treatment success was similar for oSTR compared to aSTR.
conclusionaSTR was safer than oSTR and both approaches had a similar treatment efficacy.
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.