IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1004356.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of 3 optimized delivery strategies for completion of isoniazid-rifapentine (3HP) for tuberculosis prevention among people living with HIV in Uganda: A single-center randomized trial

Author

Listed:
  • Fred C Semitala
  • Jillian L Kadota
  • Allan Musinguzi
  • Fred Welishe
  • Anne Nakitende
  • Lydia Akello
  • Lynn Kunihira Tinka
  • Jane Nakimuli
  • Joan Ritar Kasidi
  • Opira Bishop
  • Suzan Nakasendwa
  • Yeonsoo Baik
  • Devika Patel
  • Amanda Sammann
  • Payam Nahid
  • Robert Belknap
  • Moses R Kamya
  • Margaret A Handley
  • Patrick PJ Phillips
  • Anne Katahoire
  • Christopher A Berger
  • Noah Kiwanuka
  • Achilles Katamba
  • David W Dowdy
  • Adithya Cattamanchi

Abstract

Background: Expanding access to shorter regimens for tuberculosis (TB) prevention, such as once-weekly isoniazid and rifapentine taken for 3 months (3HP), is critical for reducing global TB burden among people living with HIV (PLHIV). Our coprimary hypotheses were that high levels of acceptance and completion of 3HP could be achieved with delivery strategies optimized to overcome well-contextualized barriers and that 3HP acceptance and completion would be highest when PLHIV were provided an informed choice between delivery strategies. Methods and findings: In a pragmatic, single-center, 3-arm, parallel-group randomized trial, PLHIV receiving care at a large urban HIV clinic in Kampala, Uganda, were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 3HP by facilitated directly observed therapy (DOT), facilitated self-administered therapy (SAT), or informed choice between facilitated DOT and facilitated SAT using a shared decision-making aid. We assessed the primary outcome of acceptance and completion (≥11 of 12 doses of 3HP) within 16 weeks of treatment initiation using proportions with exact binomial confidence intervals (CIs). We compared proportions between arms using Fisher’s exact test (two-sided α = 0.025). Trial investigators were blinded to primary and secondary outcomes by study arm. Between July 13, 2020, and July 8, 2022, 1,656 PLHIV underwent randomization, with equal numbers allocated to each study arm. One participant was erroneously enrolled a second time and was excluded in the primary intention-to-treat analysis. Among the remaining 1,655 participants, the proportion who accepted and completed 3HP exceeded the prespecified 80% target in the DOT (0.94; 97.5% CI [0.91, 0.96] p

Suggested Citation

  • Fred C Semitala & Jillian L Kadota & Allan Musinguzi & Fred Welishe & Anne Nakitende & Lydia Akello & Lynn Kunihira Tinka & Jane Nakimuli & Joan Ritar Kasidi & Opira Bishop & Suzan Nakasendwa & Yeonso, 2024. "Comparison of 3 optimized delivery strategies for completion of isoniazid-rifapentine (3HP) for tuberculosis prevention among people living with HIV in Uganda: A single-center randomized trial," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(2), pages 1-16, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1004356
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004356
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004356
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004356&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004356?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1004356. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.