[Comprehensive clinical evaluation of bedaquiline in the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis].

X Geng, Y Yang, X T Wen, H F Long, Y X Li, Y X Liu, Z F Mao
{"title":"[Comprehensive clinical evaluation of bedaquiline in the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis].","authors":"X Geng,&nbsp;Y Yang,&nbsp;X T Wen,&nbsp;H F Long,&nbsp;Y X Li,&nbsp;Y X Liu,&nbsp;Z F Mao","doi":"10.3760/cma.j.cn112147-20221031-00859","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> To assess the clinical value of bedaquiline in five dimensions: effectiveness, safety, economics, appropriateness, and social benefits, to provide a reference for medical and health insurance-related decisions. <b>Methods:</b> A total of 792 patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis who were hospitalized at Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital, Ganzhou Fifth People's Hospital and Jiangxi Chest Hospital between January 2018 and December 2020 were included in the study. Based on a retrospective survey of case data, and each evaluation dimension of bedaquiline was statistically analyzed by causal analysis or chi-square test, using linezolid as the reference drug. <b>Results:</b> In terms of effectiveness, bedaquiline significantly increased treatment success by 23.9% (95%<i>CI</i>:4.8%-43.0%) and shortened treatment duration by 64 days(95%<i>CI</i>:18-109 days). In terms of safety, the incidence of adverse reactions to bedaquiline and the discontinuation rate of adverse reactions (5.11%,4.55%) were significantly lower than those for linezolid (22.49%,15.24%), with statistically significant differences (χ<sup>2</sup>=27.50,<i>P</i><0.001;χ<sup>2</sup>=14.09,<i>P</i><0.001). In terms of economics, patients treated with bedaquiline had a significantly higher anti-TB drug course cost of RMB 48 209.4 Yuan(95%<i>CI</i>: 28 336.0-68 082.8 Yuan). In terms of appropriateness, the proportion of bedaquiline in patients' initial treatment regimens was lower than that of linezolid (16.7% <i>vs.</i> 86.5%) in the 2020 observation sample, with a statistically significant difference (χ<sup>2</sup>=238.96,<i>P</i><0.001). In terms of social benefits, the infection control rate was significantly increased by 27.8% (95%<i>CI</i>:8.2%-47.5%) in patients using bedaquiline. <b>Conclusions:</b> Bedaquiline performed well in terms of efficacy, safety, and social benefits. However, it was less economical and the actual use rate of bedaquiline in clinical practice was lower than that of its counterpart drug, linezolid. Price reductions might be needed to increase the clinical use and performance of bedaquiline in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":23961,"journal":{"name":"Zhonghua jie he he hu xi za zhi = Zhonghua jiehe he huxi zazhi = Chinese journal of tuberculosis and respiratory diseases","volume":"46 6","pages":"572-579"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zhonghua jie he he hu xi za zhi = Zhonghua jiehe he huxi zazhi = Chinese journal of tuberculosis and respiratory diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn112147-20221031-00859","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To assess the clinical value of bedaquiline in five dimensions: effectiveness, safety, economics, appropriateness, and social benefits, to provide a reference for medical and health insurance-related decisions. Methods: A total of 792 patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis who were hospitalized at Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital, Ganzhou Fifth People's Hospital and Jiangxi Chest Hospital between January 2018 and December 2020 were included in the study. Based on a retrospective survey of case data, and each evaluation dimension of bedaquiline was statistically analyzed by causal analysis or chi-square test, using linezolid as the reference drug. Results: In terms of effectiveness, bedaquiline significantly increased treatment success by 23.9% (95%CI:4.8%-43.0%) and shortened treatment duration by 64 days(95%CI:18-109 days). In terms of safety, the incidence of adverse reactions to bedaquiline and the discontinuation rate of adverse reactions (5.11%,4.55%) were significantly lower than those for linezolid (22.49%,15.24%), with statistically significant differences (χ2=27.50,P<0.001;χ2=14.09,P<0.001). In terms of economics, patients treated with bedaquiline had a significantly higher anti-TB drug course cost of RMB 48 209.4 Yuan(95%CI: 28 336.0-68 082.8 Yuan). In terms of appropriateness, the proportion of bedaquiline in patients' initial treatment regimens was lower than that of linezolid (16.7% vs. 86.5%) in the 2020 observation sample, with a statistically significant difference (χ2=238.96,P<0.001). In terms of social benefits, the infection control rate was significantly increased by 27.8% (95%CI:8.2%-47.5%) in patients using bedaquiline. Conclusions: Bedaquiline performed well in terms of efficacy, safety, and social benefits. However, it was less economical and the actual use rate of bedaquiline in clinical practice was lower than that of its counterpart drug, linezolid. Price reductions might be needed to increase the clinical use and performance of bedaquiline in the future.

贝达喹啉治疗耐多药结核病的综合临床评价
目的:从有效性、安全性、经济性、适宜性和社会效益五个维度评价贝达喹啉的临床价值,为医疗健康保险相关决策提供参考。方法:选取2018年1月至2020年12月武汉市肺科医院、赣州市第五人民医院和江西省胸科医院住院的792例耐多药结核病患者作为研究对象。在回顾性调查病例资料的基础上,以利奈唑胺为参比药物,采用因果分析或卡方检验对贝达喹啉各评价维度进行统计分析。结果:疗效方面,贝达喹啉显著提高治疗成功率23.9% (95%CI:4.8% ~ 43.0%),缩短治疗时间64天(95%CI:18 ~ 109天)。安全性方面,贝达喹啉不良反应发生率和不良反应停药率(5.11%、4.55%)显著低于利奈唑胺(22.49%、15.24%),差异有统计学意义(χ2=27.50,P2=14.09,PCI: 28 336.0 ~ 68 082.8元)。在适宜性方面,在2020年观察样本中,贝达喹啉在患者初始治疗方案中的比例低于利奈唑胺(16.7% vs. 86.5%),使用贝达喹啉的患者差异有统计学意义(χ2=238.96,PCI:8.2% ~ 47.5%)。结论:贝达喹啉具有良好的疗效、安全性和社会效益。但贝达喹啉的经济性较差,临床实际使用率低于其对应药利奈唑胺。将来可能需要降低价格以增加贝达喹啉的临床使用和性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信