MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168509294 · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001300

Multidrug Resistant Pulmonary Tuberculosis Treatment Regimens and Patient Outcomes: An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis of 9,153 Patients

2012· review· en· W2168509294 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Medicine · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Public Health ServiceSecretaría de SaludCenters for Disease Control and PreventionOtsuka PharmaceuticalSouth African Medical Research CouncilWellcome TrustOpen Society InstituteNational Institutes of HealthUnited States Agency for International DevelopmentGlobal Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and MalariaWorld Health OrganizationGlaxoSmithKlineFogarty International CenterPfizerBill and Melinda Gates FoundationEli Lilly and CompanyNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesMedical Research CouncilHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsMedicineEthionamideOdds ratioTuberculosisInternal medicineOfloxacinObservational studyMeta-analysisExtensively drug-resistant tuberculosisIntensive care medicineMycobacterium tuberculosisAntibioticsPathologyCiprofloxacin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Treatment of multidrug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is lengthy, toxic, expensive, and has generally poor outcomes. We undertook an individual patient data meta-analysis to assess the impact on outcomes of the type, number, and duration of drugs used to treat MDR-TB. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Three recent systematic reviews were used to identify studies reporting treatment outcomes of microbiologically confirmed MDR-TB. Study authors were contacted to solicit individual patient data including clinical characteristics, treatment given, and outcomes. Random effects multivariable logistic meta-regression was used to estimate adjusted odds of treatment success. Adequate treatment and outcome data were provided for 9,153 patients with MDR-TB from 32 observational studies. Treatment success, compared to failure/relapse, was associated with use of: later generation quinolones, (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.5 [95% CI 1.1-6.0]), ofloxacin (aOR: 2.5 [1.6-3.9]), ethionamide or prothionamide (aOR: 1.7 [1.3-2.3]), use of four or more likely effective drugs in the initial intensive phase (aOR: 2.3 [1.3-3.9]), and three or more likely effective drugs in the continuation phase (aOR: 2.7 [1.7-4.1]). Similar results were seen for the association of treatment success compared to failure/relapse or death: later generation quinolones, (aOR: 2.7 [1.7-4.3]), ofloxacin (aOR: 2.3 [1.3-3.8]), ethionamide or prothionamide (aOR: 1.7 [1.4-2.1]), use of four or more likely effective drugs in the initial intensive phase (aOR: 2.7 [1.9-3.9]), and three or more likely effective drugs in the continuation phase (aOR: 4.5 [3.4-6.0]). CONCLUSIONS: In this individual patient data meta-analysis of observational data, improved MDR-TB treatment success and survival were associated with use of certain fluoroquinolones, ethionamide, or prothionamide, and greater total number of effective drugs. However, randomized trials are urgently needed to optimize MDR-TB treatment. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.376
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.057 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it