Background Expanding latent tuberculosis treatment is important to decrease active disease globally. Once-weekly isoniazid and rifapentine for 12 doses is effective but limited by requiring direct observation. Objective To compare treatment completion and safety of once-weekly isoniazid and rifapentine by self-administration versus direct observation. Design An open-label, phase 4 randomized clinical trial designed as a noninferiority study with a 15% margin. Seventy-five percent or more of study patients were enrolled from the United States for a prespecified subgroup analysis. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01582711) Setting Outpatient tuberculosis clinics in the United States, Spain, Hong Kong, and South Africa. Participants 1002 adults (aged ≥18 years) recommended for treatment of latent tuberculosis infection. Intervention Participants received once-weekly isoniazid and rifapentine by direct observation, self-administration with monthly monitoring, or self-administration with weekly text message reminders and monthly monitoring. Measurements The primary outcome was treatment completion, defined as 11 or more doses within 16 weeks and measured using clinical documentation and pill counts for direct observation, and self-reports, pill counts, and medication event–monitoring devices for self-administration. The main secondary outcome was adverse events. Results Median age was 36 years, 48% of participants were women, and 77% were enrolled at the U.S. sites. Treatment completion was 87.2% (95% CI, 83.1% to 90.5%) in the direct-observation group, 74.0% (CI, 68.9% to 78.6%) in the self-administration group, and 76.4% (CI, 71.3% to 80.8%) in the self-administration–with–reminders group. In the United States, treatment completion was 85.4% (CI, 80.4% to 89.4%), 77.9% (CI, 72.7% to 82.6%), and 76.7% (CI, 70.9% to 81.7%), respectively. Self-administered therapy without reminders was noninferior to direct observation in the United States; no other comparisons met noninferiority criteria. A few drug-related adverse events occurred and were similar across groups. Limitation Persons with latent tuberculosis infection enrolled in South Africa would not routinely be treated programmatically. Conclusion These results support using self-administered, once-weekly isoniazid and rifapentine to treat latent tuberculosis infection in the United States, and such treatment could be considered in similar settings when direct observation is not feasible. Primary Funding Source Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Background In response to reported COVID-19 outbreaks among people experiencing homelessness (PEH) in other U.S. cities, we conducted multiple, proactive, facility-wide testing events for PEH living sheltered and unsheltered and homelessness service staff in Atlanta, Georgia. We describe SARS-CoV-2 prevalence and associated symptoms and review shelter infection prevention and control (IPC) policies Methods PEH and staff were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) during April 7–May 6, 2020. A subset of PEH and staff was screened for symptoms. Shelter assessments were conducted concurrently at a convenience sample of shelters using a standardized questionnaire Results Overall, 2,875 individuals at 24 shelters and nine unsheltered outreach events underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing and 2,860 (99.5%) had conclusive test results. SARS-CoV-2 prevalence was 2.1% (36/1,684) among PEH living sheltered, 0.5% (3/628) among PEH living unsheltered, and 1.3% (7/548) among staff. Reporting fever, cough, or shortness of breath in the last week during symptom screening was 14% sensitive and 89% specific for identifying COVID-19 cases compared with RT-PCR. Prevalence by shelter ranged 0%–27.6%. Repeat testing 3–4 weeks later at four shelters documented decreased SARS-CoV-2 prevalence (0%–3.9%). Nine of 24 shelters completed shelter assessments and implemented IPC measures as part of the COVID-19 response Conclusions PEH living in shelters experienced higher SARS-CoV-2 prevalence compared with PEH living unsheltered. Facility-wide testing in congregate settings allowed for identification and isolation of COVID-19 cases and is an important strategy to interrupt SARS-CoV-2 transmission

Rationale: Isoniazid given daily for 9 months is the standard treatment for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), but its effectiveness is limited by poor completion rates. Shorter course regimens and regimens using directly observed therapy result in improved adherence but have higher upfront costs. Objectives: To evaluate the costs and cost-effectiveness of regimens for the treatment of LTBI. Methods: We used a computerized Markov model to estimate total societal costs and benefits associated with four regimens for the treatment of LTBI: self-administered isoniazid daily for 9 months, directly observed isoniazid twice-weekly for 9 months, directly observed isoniazid plus rifapentine once weekly for 3 months, and self-administered rifampin daily for 4 months. In the base-case analysis, subjects were assumed to have newly positive tuberculin skin tests after recent exposure to infectious tuberculosis. Measurements and Main Results:We determined the costs of treatment, quality-adjusted life-years gained, and cases of active tuberculosis prevented. In the base-case analysis, rifampin dominated (less costly with increased benefits) all other regimens except isoniazid plus rifapentine, which was more effective at a cost $48,997 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Isoniazid plus rifapentine dominated all regimens at a relative risk of disease 5.2 times the baseline estimate, or with completion rates less than 34% for isoniazid or 37% for rifampin. Rifampin could be 17% less efficacious than self-administered isoniazid and still be cost-saving compared with this regimen. Conclusions: In our model, rifampin is cost-saving compared with the standard therapy of self-administered isoniazid. Isoniazid plus rifapentine is cost-saving for extremely high-risk patients and is costeffective for lower-risk patients.

No abstract

OBJECTIVE We previously showed that in patients with diabetes mellitus, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) monitoring outside international guidance on testing frequency is widespread. Here we examined the relationship between testing frequency and diabetes control to test the hypothesis that retest interval is linked to change in HbA1c level. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We examined repeat HbA1c tests (400,497 tests in 79,409 patients, 2008–2011) processed by three U.K. clinical laboratories. We examined the relationship between retest interval and 1) percentage change in HbA1c and 2) proportion of cases showing a significant HbA1c rise. The effect of demographics factors on these findings was also explored. RESULTS Our data showed that the optimal testing frequency required to maximize the downward trajectory in HbA1c was four times per year, particularly in those with an initial HbA1c of ≥7% (≥53 mmol/mol), supporting international guidance. Testing 3-monthly was associated with a 3.8% reduction in HbA1c compared with a 1.5% increase observed with annual testing; testing more frequently provided no additional benefit. Compared with annual monitoring, 3-monthly testing was associated with a halving of the proportion showing a significant rise in HbA1c (7–10 vs. 15–20%). CONCLUSIONS These findings provide, in a large, multicenter data set, objective evidence that testing outside guidance on HbA1c monitoring frequency is associated with a significant detrimental effect on diabetes control. To achieve the optimum downward trajectory in HbA1c, monitoring frequency should be quarterly, particularly in cases with suboptimal HbA1c. While this impact appears small, optimizing monitoring frequency across the diabetes population may have major implications for diabetes control and comorbidity risk.

BACKGROUND:Estimates suggest that approximately 25% of requests for pathology tests are unnecessary. Even in diabetes, for which international guidance provides recommended testing frequency, considerable variability in requesting practice exists. Using the diabetes marker, Hb A 1c , we examined (a) the prevalence of under-and overrequesting, (b) the impact of international guidance on prevalence, and (c) practice-to-practice variability.

Low serum concentrations of antituberculous drugs, which suggest malabsorption, are common among patients with advanced HIV who also have tuberculosis but can be overcome with higher doses. Therapeutic drug monitoring may be an effective tool to optimize therapy, but needs further study.

SUMMARY SETTING A large randomized controlled trial recently showed that for treating latent tuberculous infection (LTBI) in persons at high risk of progression to tuberculosis (TB) disease, a 12-dose regimen of weekly rifapentine plus isoniazid (3HP) administered as directly observed treatment (DOT) can be as effective as 9 months of daily self-administered isoniazid (9H). OBJECTIVES To assess the cost-effectiveness of 3HP compared to 9H. DESIGN A computational model was designed to simulate individuals with LTBI treated with 9H or 3HP. Costs and health outcomes were estimated to determine the incremental costs per active TB case prevented and per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained by 3HP compared to 9H. RESULTS Over a 20-year period, treatment of LTBI with 3HP rather than 9H resulted in 5.2 fewer cases of TB and 25 fewer lost QALYs per 1000 individuals treated. From the health system and societal perspectives, 3HP would cost respectively US$21 525 and $4294 more per TB case prevented, and respectively $4565 and $911 more per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS 3HP may be a cost-effective alternative to 9H, particularly if the cost of rifapentine decreases, the effectiveness of 3HP can be maintained without DOT, and 3HP treatment is limited to those with a high risk of progression to TB disease.