For decades, second-line injectable agents (IAs) have been the cornerstone of treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB). Although evidence on the efficacy of IAs is limited, there is an expanding body of evidence on the serious adverse events caused by these drugs. Here, we present the results of a structured literature review of the safety and efficacy of IAs. We review the continued widespread use of these agents in the context of therapeutic alternatives-most notably the newer TB drugs, bedaquiline and delamanid-and from the context of human rights, ethics and patient-centered care. We conclude that there is limited evidence of the efficacy of IAs, clear evidence of the risks of these drugs, and that persons living with MDR-TB should be informed about these risks and provided with access to alternative therapeutic options.

Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is on the rise, and is difficult to treat. The approval of two new drugs, bedaquiline and delamanid, and growing evidence for the use of linezolid, offer renewed hope for addressing MDR-TB. However, access to these medicines remains a significant challenge. These drugs have not been registered for TB in most settings; barriers to preapproval access persist; and high pricing and intellectual property restrictions limit access. Many unanswered research questions about optimal use of these drugs also limit access, particularly for vulnerable populations. This review outlines challenges in accessing drugs encountered from the perspective of clinicians, patients and affected communities, and offers potential solutions.

No abstract

Stigma is a critical barrier for TB care delivery; yet data on stigma reduction interventions is limited. This review maps the available literature on TB stigma reduction interventions, using the Health Stigma and Discrimination framework and an implementation analysis to identify research gaps and inform intervention design. Using search terms for TB and stigma, we systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. Two independent reviewers screened all abstracts, full-texts, extracted data, conducted a quality assessment, and assessed implementation. Results were categorized by socio-ecological level, then sub-categorized by the stigma driver or manifestation targeted. After screening 1865 articles, we extracted data from nine. Three studies were implemented at the individual and interpersonal level using a combination of TB clubs and interpersonal support to target internal and anticipated stigma among persons with TB. Two studies were implemented at the interpersonal level using counselling or a video based informational tool delivered to households to reduce stigma drivers and manifestations. Three studies were implemented at the organizational level, targeting drivers of stigma among healthcare workers (HW) and enacted stigma among HWs. One study was implemented at the community level using an educational campaign for community members. Stakeholder consultation emphasized the importance of policy level interventions and education on the universality of risk to destigmatize TB. Review findings suggest that internal and anticipated TB stigma may be addressed effectively with interventions targeted towards individuals using counselling or support groups. In contrast, enacted TB stigma may be better addressed with information-based interventions implemented at the organizational or community level. Policy level interventions were absent but identified as critical by stakeholders. Implementation barriers included the lack of high-quality training and integration with mental health services. Three key gaps must be addressed in future research: consistent stigma definitions, standardized stigma measurement, and measurement of implementation outcomes.

Background Tuberculosis (TB) care cascade analyses show large gaps at early stages, including care-seeking and diagnostic evaluation, where promising interventions to decrease attrition are urgently needed. Person-centered care is prioritized in the World Health Organization’s End TB strategy; yet little is known about how it is delivered and can be optimized. Recommendations for counselling, a core component of person-centered care, are largely limited to its role in improving TB treatment adherence. The role of counselling to close key diagnostic gaps in the care cascade is poorly understood. Methods We conducted a scoping review to identify evidence on the use of counselling at TB diagnosis, for both people with presumptive TB and index patients to promote patient retention and contact tracing. Using search terms for TB, diagnosis and counselling, we systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. Two independent reviewers screened all abstracts, full-texts, extracted data and conducted a quality assessment. We used thematic analysis to identify key themes. Results After screening 1785 articles, we extracted data from 15 studies and determined that the major themes best corresponded to the following gaps in the TB care cascade: care-seeking, pre-diagnosis, and pre-treatment. Studies were conducted across varied settings including pharmacies, primary health centres, and clinics, primarily in high TB incidence countries. No study directly evaluated the impact of counselling on outcomes such as treatment initiation or retention in care. Included studies suggested counselling may play an important role in improving the uptake of diagnostic testing and contact tracing. Barriers to counselling included time and personnel requirements. Stakeholder consultation emphasized the importance of high-quality counselling as a core tenet of TB care. Conclusion Data on the impact of counselling to improve TB case detection are absent from the literature. The shift towards person-centred care for TB presents an opportunity to incorporate counselling during earlier stages of the TB care cascade; however, evidence-based approaches are needed. Implementation research is needed to operationalize and evaluate counselling to strengthen high-quality TB care delivery.