Comparative Effectiveness of Regimens for Drug-Susceptible Tuberculous Meningitis in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Aggregate-Level Data Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Before August 2021, the only regimen recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) to treat pediatric drug-susceptible tuberculous meningitis was a 12-month regimen consisting of isoniazid, rifampicin, ethambutol, and pyrazinamide (2HRZE/10HR). The comparative effectiveness of shorter regimens is unknown. Methods: To inform a WHO guideline update, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate outcomes from regimens of 6- to less than 12-months' duration that included, at a minimum, isoniazid, rifampicin, and pyrazinamide. We included studies that applied rigorous diagnostic criteria and reported outcomes for ≥10 children or adolescents. Using generalized linear mixed models, we estimated the random effects pooled proportions of patients with key outcomes. Results: Of 7 included studies, none compared regimens head-to-head. Three studies (724 patients) used a 6-month intensive regimen, which includes isoniazid and rifampicin at higher doses, pyrazinamide, and ethionamide instead of ethambutol (6HRZEto). Outcomes for this versus the 12-month regimen (282 patients, 3 studies) were, respectively, as follows: death, 5.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1%-13.4%) vs 23.9% (95% CI, 17.5%-31.7%); treatment success (survival with or without sequelae), 94.6% (95% CI, 73.9%-99.1%) vs 75.4% (95% CI, 68.7%-81.1%); and neurological sequelae among survivors, 66.0% (95% CI, 55.3%-75.3%) vs 36.3% (95% CI, 30.1%-43.0%). Relapse did not occur among 148 patients followed-up for 2 years after completing the 6-month intensive regimen. Conclusions: Our findings are limited by the small number of studies and substantial potential for confounding. Nonetheless, the 6HRZEto regimen was associated with high treatment success and is now recommended by WHO as an alternative to the 12-month regimen.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.044 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".