Treatment of Active Tuberculosis in HIV‐Coinfected Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and tuberculosis have an increased risk of death, treatment failure, and relapse. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials and cohort studies was conducted to evaluate the impact of duration and dosing schedule of rifamycin and use of antiretroviral therapy in the treatment of active tuberculosis in HIV-positive patients. In included studies, the initial tuberculosis diagnosis, failure, and/or relapse were microbiologically confirmed, and patients received standardized rifampin- or rifabutin-containing regimens. Pooled cumulative incidence of treatment failure, death during treatment, and relapse were calculated using random-effects models. Multivariable meta-regression was performed using negative binomial regression. RESULTS: After screening 5158 citations, 6 randomized trials and 21 cohort studies were included. Relapse was more common with regimens using 2 months rifamycin (adjusted risk ratio, 3.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-11.7) than with regimens using rifamycin for at least 8 months. Compared with daily therapy in the initial phase (n=3352 patients from 35 study arms), thrice-weekly therapy (n=211 patients from 5 study arms) was associated with higher rates of failure (adjusted risk ratio, 4.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-10.4) and relapse [adjusted risk ratio, 4.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-12.8). There were trends toward higher relapse rates if rifamycins were used for only 6 months, compared with > or =8 months, or if antiretroviral therapy was not used. CONCLUSIONS: This review raises serious concerns regarding current recommendations for treatment of HIV-tuberculosis coinfection. The data suggest that at least 8 months duration of rifamycin therapy, initial daily dosing, and concurrent antiretroviral therapy might be associated with better outcomes, but adequately powered randomized trials are urgently needed to confirm this.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".