Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2020 Oct 29;15(10):e0239225. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239225

Treatment outcomes of Nigerian patients with tuberculosis: A retrospective 25-year review in a regional medical center

Michael A Alao 1,2,*, Stacene R Maroushek 3,4, Yiong Huak Chan 5, Adanze O Asinobi 6, Tina M Slusher 1,2,3,4,*, Daniel A Gbadero 1,2
Editor: Tom E Wingfield7
PMCID: PMC7595370  PMID: 33119601

Abstract

Introduction

Tuberculosis (TB) remains a global health challenge and leading infectious killer worldwide. The need for continuous evaluation of TB treatment outcomes becomes more imperative in the midst of a global economic meltdown substantially impacting resource-limited-settings.

Methods

This study retrospectively reviewed 25-years of treatment outcomes in 3,384 patients who were managed for TB at a tertiary hospital in Nigeria. Confirmed TB cases were given directly observed therapy of a short-course treatment regimen and monitored for clinical response.

Results

Out of 1,146,560 patients screened, there were 24,330 (2.1%) presumptive and 3,384 (13.9%) confirmed TB cases. The patients’ mean age was 35.8 years (0.33–101 years). There were 1,902 (56.2%) male, 332(9.8%) pediatric, and 2,878 (85%) pulmonary TB cases.

The annual mean measured treatment outcomes were as follows: adherence, 91.4(±5.8) %; successful outcome, 75.3(±8.8) % potentially unsatisfactory outcome, 14.8(±7.2) %; and mortality 10.0(±3.6) %.

Female, extra-pulmonary TB (EPTB), newly diagnosed, and relapsed patients compliant with treatment had successful outcomes. Adulthood and HIV infection were mortality risk factors.

Conclusion

The mean annual successful treatment outcome is 75.3(±8.8) %. Female, pediatric, EPTB, new, and relapsed patients were predisposed to successful treatment outcomes. Lessons learned will guide future program modifications.

Introduction

Despite the general improvement in global health standards in the second decade of the 21st Century, the prevalence and mortality of tuberculosis (TB) in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) remain high [1]. Since 1993, when the World Health Organization (WHO) declared tuberculosis (TB), a disease of increasing global concern, millions of people are still being infected and die annually as a result of TB [1,2]. Multi-drug resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) infection is also on the rise, making TB infection of more concern [1,2]. The factors contributing to the persistence of high TB with poor outcomes in LMICs include a high level of extreme poverty, low-quality health care, inadequate nutrition, and overcrowding [1,3].

The third sustainable development goal (SDG3) target is to end the TB epidemic by 2030. In order to achieve this goal, LMIC TB programs must have comprehensive and ongoing reviews of successes and failures in order to guide systematic improvements that will aid in achieving the WHO set target of 85% treatment success. In the past three decades, studies reported varying TB treatment outcomes ranging from 34.0% to 85.45% in the LMICs [1,4]. However, comprehensive data of TB treatment in LMICs are scarce, often of poor quality, or of a limited time span, making these data sub-optimal for informed decision-making.

The present study evaluated data collected over 25 years of a continuing TB treatment program and focuses on the outcomes and lessons that can be learned as the world strives towards achieving the SDG3 targets.

Materials and methods

This is a retrospective review of the TB treatment program at Bowen University Teaching Hospital (BUTH) formally called Baptist Medical Centre Ogbomoso (BMCO), Nigeria from 1992 to 2017. In the early 1990s, using the National Tuberculosis Leprosy Control Program (NTBLCP) protocol, the Damien Foundation (Netherlands) in collaboration with Oyo State chose BMCO, a regional referral center, as one of the program’s initial healthcare facilities. Together BMCO/BUTH, the Damien Foundation and the Oyo State government provided free medications, education, diagnostics, counseling, contact tracing and ongoing updates and reviews. All patients were fully evaluated and had all or some of the following laboratory investigations performed depending on their presenting features: white blood cell count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, tuberculin skin testing (TST), chest and spinal X-rays, sputum microscopy for acid-fast bacilli (AFB) stain and culture, fine needle aspirate for cytology, histology, and GeneXpert from 2015. Since 2006 all TB patients were screened for HIV1 and HIV2 by parallel testing using Determine® Kits (Alere Medical, Chiba-ken Japan), and Uni-GoldTM HIV (Trinity Biotech, Wicklow, Ireland), and tie-break with STAT-PAK® (Chembio Diagnostic System, Medford NY).

A patient was confirmed to have active TB if any of the following were found.

  1. AFB positive sputum microscopy.

  2. TST induration >15 mm and/or ulceration or TST of 10mm plus background history suggestive of TB.

  3. AFB positive spinal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) on microscopy.

  4. Spinal gibbus with characteristic x-ray.

  5. Fine needle aspiration cytology showing granulomatous giant Langhans cells.

  6. Positive histopathological tissue findings of chronic granulomatous inflammation with giant cell and caseous necrosis.

  7. Positive GeneXpert test on tissue/body fluids.

A definitive diagnosis of TB in children was difficult as most children cannot produce sputum. The NTBLCP workers manual 5 and most recently the Childhood Tuberculosis Desk Guide for diagnosis and management of childhood tuberculosis was used, an adaptation from the NTBLCP workers manual. This entails a composite clinical and laboratory reference standard5 of history and exam plus one or more of the following. Chest X-ray, tuberculin skin test, gastric aspirate, non-response to routine antibiotics in a child with history and exam consistent with TB with subsequent response to TB drugs.

All patients diagnosed with TB received directly observed therapy (DOT) daily in the TB Unit where they received individual education about their disease, treatment course and were observed for complications from the disease or treatment. Home visits were carried out prior to discharge with contact tracing and locating patients who defaulted. Patients were followed up by physicians at two weeks; one, two and five months and as needed unless “lost to follow-up” or transferred to another center.

Treatment protocol and regimen

Modifications of the treatment protocol did occur over the 25 years in order to follow WHO protocol changes adopted by the NTBLCP. Treatment was divided into categories I and II. Category I was for newly-diagnosed pulmonary TB while category II was for extra-pulmonary TB, treatment failure, or relapse. Between 1992 and 2000, children (<18years) received intramuscular streptomycin instead of oral ethambutol during the intensive/initial 2-month treatment phase. Drug combinations evolved over the years to the current combination of rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (RIPE) for drug-sensitive MTB.

Adherence was defined as patients taking ≥80% of the prescribed anti-TB via the DOT intervention or treatment completed. The study used a daily dosing treatment regimen and calculated adherence for the entire treatment course (no separation was made between the intensive and the continuation phase).

In addition to DOT, patients were encouraged to eat a balanced diet, sleep alone in well-ventilated rooms during the intensive treatment phase and ensure that their sputa were appropriately disposed of to prevent spread of TB to others.

Definition of treatment outcomes

Treatment outcomes as defined by WHO guidelines and the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases (IUATLD) follow [3,5].

  1. Cure: Sputum smears negative on two occasions, one of which must be at treatment end.

  2. Treatment completed: Patient completed treatment but last smear unavailable or extrapulmonary TB.

  3. Successful treatment is a or b.

  4. Relapse: When a patient who had been declared cured later has a positive smear.

  5. Treatment failure: Patient remains smear positive ≥5-months after beginning treatment.

  6. Default: Patient had ≥1-month of treatment with >2month interruption.

  7. Death: Mortality from any cause during the course of receiving treatment.

  8. Transfer out: Patient referred out of catchment area and outcome of treatment unknown.

  9. Potentially unsatisfactory treatment outcome is a combination of treatment default, transferred out and treatment failure [3].

Data analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using IBM’s Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)TM, Version 23.0 for Windows with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. Descriptive statistics for categorical variables were presented as number (%). The significant variables of sociodemographic characteristics of age (adult or children), gender (male or female) and clinical variables of categories of diseases (pulmonary, extrapulmonary disease, pre-treatment status, and HIV status) on bivariate analysis were subjected to binary logistic regression to adjust for co-variance to determine the predictors of successful treatment outcomes, treatment adherence potentially unsatisfactory outcome and death. Interaction effects were built from the statistical perspective (only significant independent variables from the main effects multivariate analyses were interacted). The trend in incidence was assessed for significance using a linear regression model.

Ethical approval

This retrospective review was approved by the Bowen University Teaching Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (Approval No. BUTH/REC-029). As a result of the retrospective nature of the study design, informed consent was waived by the ethics committee.

Results

Of the 1,146,560 patients seen in the hospitals’ clinics during the study period, 24,330 presumptive cases were investigated for TB and 3,443 (14.2%) cases were confirmed following WHO TB diagnosis guidelines (Fig 1). Fifty-nine (1.7%) patients were excluded because of insufficient data. There were no significant differences in demographic and clinical characteristics between study subjects and those excluded.

Fig 1. The flow diagram of program enrolment and treatment outcome of TB cases.

Fig 1

The flow diagram of program enrolment and treatment outcome of TB cases. The final outcome data excludes 26 missing data points (TB:tuberculosis; EPTB: Extrapulmonary tuberculosis).

Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of study population

The median age of patients was 35.7 (range 4 months to 101 years) with 52.5% in the 20–39 years (Fig 2) range and 1,904(56.2%) giving a male:female ratio of 1.3:1. Children accounted for one-tenth 332 (9.8%) of TB cases. The female gender predominate the TB cases in childhood. Fewer children 141 (69.5%) were sputum positive compared with the adults 2020 (75.5%). Additionally, the most common extrapulmonary sites for TB differed between children and adults. New cases constituted 90.3% (3,059). The second largest category were patients who had previously failed TB treatment (132; 3.9%). Other clinical characteristics are shown in Table 1 and Fig 3.

Fig 2. Age distribution of TB patients.

Fig 2

Table 1. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of study population.

Variable Adults n (%) Children n (%) Population n (%)
Age in distribution
3052 (90.2) 332 (9.8) 3384 (100.0)
Gender
FEMALE 1265 (41.8) 201 (60.4) 1466(43.6)
MALE. 1761 (58.2) 132 (39.6) 1893(56.4)
HIV Status
HIV positive 140 (4.6) 12 (3.6) 152 (4.5)
HIV negative 782 (25.8) 71 (21.3) 852 (25.2)
HIV Not tested/status unknown/ 2104 (69.5) 249 (75.0) 2380 (70.3)
Type of Tuberculosis
PTB
Sputum Positive 2020 (75.5) 141 (69.5) 2161 (75.1)
Sputum Negative 655 (24.5) 62 (30.5) 717 (24.9)
EPTB 392(12.8) 114 (34.3) 506 (100.0)
Pleural Effusion 4 (3.6) 53 (13.5) 57 (11.3)
TB Arthritis 5 (4.4) 12 (3.1) 17 (3.3)
TB Spine 50 (43.8) 234 (59.7) 284 (56.1)
TB Abdomen 18 (15.8) 27 (6.9) 45 (8.9)
Miliary 3 (2.6) 11 (2.8) 14 (2.8)
Adenitis 31 (27.2) 50 (12.7) 81 (16.0)
Endometriosis 0 (0.0) 1 (0.3) 1 (0.2)
Meningitis 2 (1.8) 1 (0.3) 3 (0.6)
TB Pericarditis 1 (0.8) 3 (0.7) 4 (0.8)
Pre-Treatment status
New 2716 (89.8) 317 (95.2) 3033 (90.3)
Relapse 96 (3.2) 6 (1.8) 102 (3.0)
Transfer 6 (0.2) 0 (0.0) 6 (0.2)
Default 30(1.0) 3(0.9) 33 (1.0)
Failure 127(4.2) 5 (1.5) 132 (3.9)
Others 51 (1.7) 2 (0.6) 53 (1.6)

The variables of gender 25 (0.7%), HIV status 26(0.8%), and pre-treatment status 21 (0.6%) have the respective missing data.

Fig 3. Annual incidence of TB.

Fig 3

The figure shows the annual incidence of tuberculosis for children and adult over the 25-year study period.

Annual TB incidence, HIV infection and multi-drug resistance rate

Fig 3 shows the trend in incidence of TB over the 25 years under review. The annual number of newly diagnosed tuberculosis cases peaked in 1993 and 1998. The time trend incidences were 401.3 and 607.7 per 100,000 population respectively as estimated from hospital records (S1 Appendix). The incidence however declined after 2005 with a record of 175.6 cases per 100,000 population in 2014. The incidence in TB among the pediatric population declined by 0.003% (95% CI 0.001% to 0.005%) per year, p = 0.012. A decline of 0.010% (95% CI 0.004% to 0.016%) per year, p = 0.002 was also noted in adults. The mean decline in the entire population with TB was 0.007% (95% CI 0.002% to 0.011%) per year, p = 0.005. Of the 3,467/24,330 (14.2%) screened for HIV, 1,243 were positive giving a seroprevalence rate of 36.70%.

The proportion of patients screened for HIV infection over the study period is shown in Table 2. Of the 3,384 diagnosed with TB, only 1,004 were tested for HIV infection out of which 152 tested positive giving a seroprevalence rate of 15.0%. The prevalence shows unstable pattern (sine wave pattern) with peaked in 2009.

Table 2. Proportion of patients screened for HIV infections in the tuberculosis treatment program.

HIV Status
Year HIV positive n (%) HIV Negative n (%) Unknown/Not evaluated n (%) Total n (%)
1992–2006 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2388 (100.0) 2388(100.0)
2007 13(7.2) 90 (49.7) 78 (43.1) 181 (100.0)
2008 28 (19.9) 105(74.5) 8(5.7) 141 (100.0)
2009 24 (22.6) 47 (44.3) 35(33.0) 106(100.0)
2010 19 (18.1) 71 (67.6) 15 (14.3) 105 (100.0)
2011 13 (12.6) 80 (77.7) 10 (9.7) 103 (100.0)
2012 10(10.0) 78 (78.0) 12 (12.0) 100 (100.0)
2013 7(8.0) 79(89.8) 2 92.3) 88 (100.0)
2014 11(14.9) 59(79.7) 4 (5.4) 74 (100.0)
2015 5(5.4) 66(71.0) 22 (23.7) 93 (100.0)
2016 6 (5.7) 99 (93.4) 1 (0.9) 106(100.0)
2017 16 (16.7) 78 (81.3) 2 (2.1) 96(100.0)

Multidrug resistance TB identified via drug sensitivity test was found in only 6 patients (0.2%).

TB treatment outcomes

The mean annual adherence rates over the 25-year study period was 91.4 (±5.8) %. This outcome was fairly constant except for declines in 1994 (78.5%) and 2013 (74.2%) (Fig 4). The mean successful annual treatment outcome was 75.3(±8.8) %, varied between 91.8% in 1992 and 77.8% in 2017. The nadir of successful outcomes occurred in 1994 (58.9%). The mean annual death was 10.0(±3.6) %. Annual mean unsatisfactory treatment outcome was 14.8 (±7.4) % being at all-time low at the outset of the program (1992) but peaked in 1994 (41.1%) (Fig 4).

Fig 4. Showing annual treatment outcomes for TB treatment.

Fig 4

Successful treatment outcome = cure+ treatment completed; Potentially Unsatisfactory outcome = default + transferred out + treatment failure.

Factors associated with adherence

Factors with statistically higher adherence rates were females (90.9% vs 87.4%, aOR = 1.4, 95% CI 1.1–1.7, p = 0.005), EPTB (93.7% vs 88.1%, aOR = 1.8, 95% CI 1.3–2.7, p = 0.002), newly diagnosed TB (94.2%, aOR = 3.1, 95% CI 1.4–6.7, p = 0.005) and relapsed TB (95.1%, aOR = 2.8, 95% CI 1.1–7.5, p = 0.037) subjects. Children and those with positive HIV also displayed higher adherence rates (Table 3). About 301 (10.0%) of the patients with treatment adherent could not submit sputum sample at the end of their treatment course.

Table 3. Factors associated with treatment adherence.

Factors Treatment compliance Unadjusted Adjusted
Yes n(%) No n (%) OR (95% CI) p-value OR (95% CI) p-value
Sex
Female 1347(90.9) 135(9.1) 1.4 (1.1–1.8) 0.002* 1.4 (1.1–1.7) 0.005*
Male 1663(87.4) 239(12.6) Ref
Age group
Children 305(91.9) 27(8.1) 1.4 (0.96–2.2) 0.076 1.2 (0.76–1.8) 0.490
Adult 2705(88.6) 347(11.4) Ref
TB Classification
EPTB 474(93.7) 32(6.3) 2.0 (1.4–2.9) < 0.001* 1.8 (1.3–2.7) 0.002*
PTB 2536(88.1) 342(11.9) Ref
Pre-treatment
New 2879 (94.2) 178 (5.8) 5.2 (2.3–11.6) < 0.001* 3.1 (1.4–6.7) 0.005*
Relapse 97 (95.1) 5 (4.9) 6.2 (1.9–20.6) 0.003* 2.8 (1.1–7.5) 0.037*
Transfer IN 5 (83.3) 1 (16.7) 1.6 (0.16–15.8) 0.687 0.6 (0.10–4.2) 0.639
Default IN 25 (75.8) 8 (24.2) Ref
Failure IN 114 (86.4) 18 (13.6) 2.0 (0.79–5.2) 0.140 1.2 (0.49–2.8) 0.723
Unknown IN 49 (90.7) 5 (9.3) 3.1 (0.93–10.7) 0.066 2.0 (0.68–5.9) 0.203
HIV Status
Positive 144(94.7) 8(5.3) 1.2 (0.69–2.2) 0.480 1.2 (0.65–2.1) 0.590
Negative 793(93.1) 59(6.9) Ref
Unknown 2232 (93.8) 148 (6.2) 1.0 (0.78–1.3) 0.990 0.9 (0.72–1.2) 0.578

*statistically significant at p < 0.05, ref: Reference level. Significant variables on bivariate analysis for treatment adherence were gender, age, forms of TB, pre-treatment and HIV status were subjected to binary logistic regression with reference indicator as the male gender, adult, pulmonary tuberculosis, pre- treatment default and HIV negative respectively.

Factors associated with successful treatment outcome

Factors associated with successful treatment outcome were females (80.4% vs 76.1%, aOR = 1.3, 95% CI 1.1–1.5, p = 0.006), EPTB (83.0% vs 77.1%, aOR = 1.3, 95% CI 1.01–1.7, p = 0.036), newly diagnosed TB (79.1%, aOR = 2.7, 95% CI 1.3–5.4, p = 0.005) and relapsed TB (79.4%, aOR = 2.9, 95% CI 1.3–6.8, p = 0.012) compared with defaulters. Trend was close to significance for children and negative HIV patients (Table 4).

Table 4. Factors associated outcomes: Successful treatment outcome.

Factors Successful Treatment Unadjusted Adjusted
Yes n(%) No n (%) OR (95% CI) p-value OR (95% CI) p-value
Sex
Female 1192(80.4) 290(19.6) 1.3 (1.1–1.5) 0.003* 1.3 (1.1–1.5) 0.006*
Male 1448(76.1) 454(23.9) Ref
Age group
Children 279(84.0) 53(16.0) 1.5 (1.1–2.1) 0.005* 1.3 (0.98–1.8) 0.067
Adult 2361(77.4) 691(22.6) Ref
TB Classification
EPTB 420(83.0) 86(17.0) 1.4 (1.1–2.9) 0.004* 1.3 (1.01–1.7) 0.036*
PTB 2220(77.1) 658(22.9) Ref
Pre-treatment
New 2419(79.1) 638(20.9) 2.8 (1.4–5.6) 0.004* 2.7 (1.3–5.4) 0.005*
Relapse 81(79.4) 21(20.6) 2.8 (1.2–6.6) 0.015* 2.9 (1.3–6.8) 0.012*
Transfer IN 33(50) 33(50.0) 0.7 (0.13–4.2) 0.731 0.8 (0.13–4.4) 0.759
Default IN 19(57.6) 14 (42.4) Ref
Failure IN 83 (62.9) 49 (37.1) 1.2 (0.58–2.7) 0.575 1.3 (0.60–2.9) 0.489
Unknown IN 35 (64.8) 19(35.2) 1.4 (0.56–3.3) 0.500 1.4 (0.57–3.4) 0.459
HIV Status
Positive 109(71.7) 43(28.3) 0.7 (0.51–1.1) 0.150 0.7 (0.49–1.1) 0.099
Negative 657(77.1) 195(22.9) Ref
Unknown 1874 (78.7) 506 (21.3) 1.1 (0.91–1.3) 0.323 1.0 (0.85–1.3) 0.730

*statistically significant at p < 0.05, ref: Reference level. Significant variables on bivariate analysis for successful treatment were gender, age, forms of TB, pre-treatment and HIV status were subjected to binary logistic regression with reference indicator as the male gender, adult, pulmonary tuberculosis, pre- treatment default and HIV negative respectively.

Factors associated with death/unsatisfactory outcomes

Adulthood (9.9% vs 5.4%, aOR = 1.9, 95% CI 1.2–3.1, p = 0.011) and HIV+ (16.4% vs 8.7%, aOR = 2.1, 95% CI 1.3–3.5, p = 0.003) were risk predictors for death (S2 Appendix). The male gender, pulmonary tuberculosis, relapse and smear positivity at two and five months of treatment were significantly associated with potentially unsatisfactory outcome (S3 Appendix).

Discussion

The sociodemographic characteristics of TB cases in the current review shows a male preponderance with a gradual rise in incidence from pubertal years with peak at age 20–39 years similar to reports in literature [68]. The second-to-third decade of life has been associated with high-risk behaviours such as drug abuse, smoking, alcoholism, socioeconomic struggles (poverty, poor housing) which are risk-factors for TB and TB-HIV co-infection [8,9]. The 2016 global, regional and national burden of TB report for 1990–2016 shows a similar age distribution of incidence and mortality [10]. Screening young adults at job sites and recreational centers could potentially lead to early treatment and less impact.

The mean adherence rate of 91.4 (±5.8) % observed in this study appears to be well above the national average in Nigeria [1]. The higher rate of adherence of the present study is in contrast to a higher default rate reported in Southwestern Nigeria [11] and those reported in Europe [1]. Our improved adherence among females may be due to more attention to counseling provided by public health nurses and ability to find them at home when contacting defaulting patients as well as their comparatively lower incidence of HIV-TB co-infection [5,6]. Data suggest health education and intensive adherence counselling are more essential for males [9].

The mean successful treatment rate observed in our study 75.3(±8.8) % is higher than the 34%, 37%, reported in other areas in Nigeria [1114] as well as that reported in Angola and Brazil (25% and 31–71% respectively) [4]. It is similar to 76.0% mean average rate reported in Africa [15] and 71% in Europe [15]. However, it is lower than the reported success of 94%, and 86% in Bangladesh, 93% and 83% in China and 92% and 84% in Myanmar among new and previously treated cases [4]. It is noteworthy that the review period for aforementioned studies was between 1–10 years period as compared with our 25 years, which provides a better long-term perspective. The lower successful treatment outcome observed in the present study may be consequent on the inability of 10.0% of patients with treatment adherence to produce sputum as a requisite to define cure. Requesting for sputum in an asymptomatic apparently well individual may a tough and futile effort, perhaps the use of sputum induction or the development newer biomarker to define cure may be a necessity for an objective assessment of cure as a component of treatment success.

The four common predictors associated with successful treatment outcome are new pre-treatment status, female gender, EPTB and early sputum conversion similar to findings from other studies [1,16]. Existing literature demonstrates prompt treatment of new cases can be highly successful with minimal treatment failures thus preventing the development of multidrug resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis [6,8,10].

The mean mortality rate of 10.0(±3.6) % in our study is higher than the reports by Olarewaju et al [8] and Ukwaja et al [17] from Nigeria. However, if the time under review (1999 and 2011) is matched with the same interval in the referenced studies [8,17], there is no significant mortality difference. The mortality peak occurred in 1993–1995 which corresponds to a period of national food crisis and intense poverty [18]. Recent reports show a clear relationship between poor sociodemographic indexes, a low gross domestic product and excess mortality in patients with TB [1,10].

The factors associated with potentially unsatisfactory outcomes, a combination of treatment default, treatment failure and transfer out in our study were adult population, TB/HIV co-infection and delayed sputum conversion were consistent with the report from Morocco by Dooley et al [19] and were also identified in the systematic review by Waitt et al [20] and others colleagues [21,22].

Despite the positive adherence rates in our study, the sub-optimal overall mean treatment outcomes call for strengthening of our TB programs, improving patient-centred care models and individualised treatment plans. It would include mandatory TB screening/diagnosis with a nucleic acid-based test (GeneXpert) and upfront drug sensitivity test with appropriate drug intervention based on standard WHO guidelines. Additionally, a comprehensive model should factor in ways of addressing structural problems such as poverty while addressing behavioural problems among high-risk patients such as HIV/TB co-infected and young male patients. It should provide a humanistic-holistic approach of psychosocial care and spiritual support already established mediators of treatment outcome in the literature [23,24]. In 2020, a high index of suspicion of MDR TB with early therapeutic drug monitoring and testing for patients with poor response is mandatory. Mandatory outreach contact tracing, annual reporting and evaluation of treatment outcomes should be evaluated as per the recommendations of the IUATLD. Annual feedback provided to the State Ministry of Health by clinicians could be used for ongoing evidence-based decisions and future planning. Finally, efforts should be made to enhance the effectiveness of existing collateral preventive interventions such as BCG vaccination, INH prophylaxis for TB contacts, and expanded screening of HIV-infected individuals, who do not yet have TB. Future efforts should also include improved funding/resources for more susceptibility test and better diagnostics/outreach in children to decrease their rates dramatically. Finally, improving overall socio-economic conditions in LMICs will ultimately be a major factor in significantly decreasing TB.

Our study limitations include missing data, lack of sensitivity test and genetic fingerprinting before commencement of treatment. Due to financial limitations, only subjects who failed treatment were subjected to sensitivity testing prior to use of Gene Xpert for multi-drug sensitivity in 2015. Additionally, a comprehensive review of HIV/TB co-infections was limited as free HIV screening only became available in 2006.

Conclusion

Meeting SDG goals and having a world without TB requires tackling socio-economic factors including improving education, community sanitation/hygiene and reducing extreme poverty. It also requires increasing financial support to ensure adherence, equipping motivated trained personnel, providing subsidized/free TB diagnostics, and finally annual evaluation and monitoring of treatment programs throughout each region/country worldwide.

Supporting information

S1 Appendix. Hospital attendance and number of TB cases managed in a regional health centre.

(DOCX)

S2 Appendix. Factors associated outcomes: Death outcome.

(PDF)

S3 Appendix. Factors associated with potentially unsatisfactory treatment outcome.

(PDF)

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the efforts of all the staff who have worked assiduously at the TB treatment center from the onset of the program. We also thank Professor Aderele Ilemobade Wilson, Professor Oyedeji Ademola Gabriel, Professor Cynthia Howard and Emily Danich for reviewing the manuscript.

Data Availability

All data is fully available without restrictions. The data underlying the results presented are available by contacting Dr. Michael Alao at michael.alao@bowen.edu.ng or the Director of Clinical Services at Bowen University Teaching Hospital Dr. Adewumi, O. Durodola at adewumi.durodola@bowen.edu.ng. Data will be made available to all interested researchers upon request including all supporting data.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Kyu HHME, Henry NJ, Mumford JE, Barber R, Shields C, et al. , The global burden of tuberculosis: results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet Infect Dis, 2018. 18(3): p. 261–284. 10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30703-X [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Obermeyer Z, Abbott-Klafter J and Murray CJ, Has the DOTS strategy improved case finding or treatment success? An empirical assessment. PLoS One, 2008. 3(3): p. e1721 10.1371/journal.pone.0001721 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Veen J, et al. , Standardized tuberculosis treatment outcome monitoring in Europe. Recommendations of a Working Group of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Region of the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (IUATLD) for uniform reporting by cohort analysis of treatment outcome in tuberculosis patients. Eur Respir J, 1998. 12(2): p. 505–10. 10.1183/09031936.98.12020505 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.World Health O, Global tuberculosis report 2019. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2019. 2019.
  • 5.Federal Ministry of Health Nigeria Department of Public Health, National tuberculosis and leprosy control programme: workers manual. Revised 5th ed Abuja, Nigeria: Federal Ministry of Health; 2010. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Lienhardt C, et al. , Factors determining the outcome of treatment of adult smear-positive tuberculosis cases in The Gambia. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis, 1998. 2(9): p. 712–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Muture BN, et al. , Factors associated with default from treatment among tuberculosis patients in Nairobi province, Kenya: a case control study. BMC Public Health, 2011. 11: p. 696 10.1186/1471-2458-11-696 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Sunday O, et al. , Treatment Outcome of Tuberculosis Patients Registered at DOTS Centre in Ogbomoso, Southwestern Nigeria: A 4-Year Retrospective Study. Tuberc Res Treat, 2014. 2014: p. 201705 10.1155/2014/201705 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kaona FA, et al. , An assessment of factors contributing to treatment adherence and knowledge of TB transmission among patients on TB treatment. BMC Public Health, 2004. 4: p. 68 10.1186/1471-2458-4-68 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Kyu HH, et al. , Global, regional and national burden of tuberculosis, 1990–2016: results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factors 2016 Study. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 2018. 18(12): p. 1329–1349. 10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30625-X [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Salami TATSS Eze KC, Oziegbe OE, Tuberculosis in a Nigeria teaching hospital: Incidence and pattern of distribution. Tropical Journal of Health Sciences, 2007. 14(2): p. 26–30. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Akinyoola A, Adegbehingbe O and Ashaleye C, Tuberculosis of the spine in Nigeria: Has anything changed. Internet J Third World Med, 2007. 4(1). [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Daniel OJ and Alausa OK, Treatment outcome of TB/HIV positive and TB/HIV negative patients on directly observed treatment, short course (DOTS) in Sagamu, Nigeria. Niger J Med, 2006. 15(3): p. 222–6. 10.4314/njm.v15i3.37217 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Erhabor G, et al. , Ten year review of pattern of presentation and outcome of pulmonary tuberculosis in OAUTHC, Ile-Ife. J Health Sci, 2003. 3: p. 34–39. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.World Health O, Global tuberculosis control: surveillance, planning, financing: WHO report 2005. 2005, Geneva: World Health Organization.
  • 16.Yassin MA, Datiko DG and Shargie EB, Ten-year experiences of the tuberculosis control programme in the southern region of Ethiopia. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis, 2006. 10(10): p. 1166–71. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Ukwaja KN, Trends in treatment outcome of smear-positive pulmonary tuberculosis in Southeastern Nigeria, 1999–2008. Italian Journal of Public Health, 2012. 9(4). [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Ibadin MO and Oviawe O, Trend in childhood tuberculosis in Benin City, Nigeria. Ann Trop Paediatr, 2001. 21(2): p. 141–5. 10.1080/02724930120058205 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Dooley KE, et al. , Risk factors for tuberculosis treatment failure, default, or relapse and outcomes of retreatment in Morocco. BMC Public Health, 2011. 11: p. 140 10.1186/1471-2458-11-140 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Waitt CJ and Squire SB, A systematic review of risk factors for death in adults during and after tuberculosis treatment. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis, 2011. 15(7): p. 871–85. 10.5588/ijtld.10.0352 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Gebrezgabiher G, et al. , Treatment Outcome of Tuberculosis Patients under Directly Observed Treatment Short Course and Factors Affecting Outcome in Southern Ethiopia: A Five-Year Retrospective Study. PLoS One, 2016. 11(2): p. e0150560 10.1371/journal.pone.0150560 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Nm NNR, et al. , Factors associated with unsuccessful treatment outcome of pulmonary tuberculosis in Kota Bharu, Kelantan. Malaysian Journal of Public Health Medicine, 2011. 11(1): p. 6–15. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Koenig HG, George LK and Titus P, Religion, spirituality and health in medically ill hospitalized older patients. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2004. 52(4): p. 554–62. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2004.52161.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Lorenz KA, et al. , Religiousness and spirituality among HIV-infected Americans. J Palliat Med, 2005. 8(4): p. 774–81. 10.1089/jpm.2005.8.774 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Tom E Wingfield

8 Jul 2020

PONE-D-20-11827

Treatment Outcomes of Nigerian Patients with Tuberculosis: A Retrospective 25-year Review in a Regional Medical Center

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Slusher,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 22 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Tom E. Wingfield

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear Tina M. Slusher and colleagues,

Thank you for your submission to PLOS One. Firstly, please let me apologise for the Covid-19 related delay in review of this manuscript. One of the reviewers had hoped to review but due to heavy clinical commitments in Nigeria had been unable to do so. I apologise for this unintentional delay.

Your manuscript is an important piece because it supports understanding of risk factors for adverse TB treatment outcome in a high TB burden setting. It is also an excellent use of programmatic data, which is fantastic to see and could be emulated by other NTPs and researchers in diverse settings.

The manuscript is well written but there are a number of mainly methodological issues which need addressing prior to re-submission for re-review. I have recommended major revisions and my comments and those of the reviewer are listed in this email below.

EDITOR COMMENTS

MAJOR

1) Table 1: is this incidence rate or number of TB cases? The right hand column says "total TB cases" suggesting the latter. I would suggest moving Table 1 to supplementary file and keeping Figure 2 which is explanatory.

I think that a more helpful Table 1 would summarise the sociodemographic (age / sex / poverty level if you have that data, smoker etc) and clinical characteristics (e.g. PTB/EPTB, HIV status, treatment category) of a) all patients b) adults and c) children. This could potentially be integrated with Table 2

2) Figure 1: unsatisfactory listed twice and numbers not clear. Don't seem to compute. Suggest splitting adult and child outcome data please.

3) Figure 2: remove decimal point and suggest incidence rate is "per 100,000 per year" as opposed to % as this will help the reader and be comparable

4) Please explain in a bit more detail how adherence was calculated for both intensive and continuation phase (e.g. TB treatment registers, if patients who were LTFU had any measure of adherence measured prior to being LTFU) and if DOTS was maintained throughout this period or whether in continuation phase there was 3x week treatment

5) Disease characteristics: I don't think that statistical calculations are necessarily needed for this comparison and don't add much to the raw numbers so would suggest dropping. If you feel strongly that these should stay in then please indicate how the differences in proportion were calculated and present the estimates of error related to these calculations.

6) Proportion of patients with HIV each year would be useful to understand, please can you add this data either in text, integrate into existing table/figure, or new figure/table

7) Table 3 is unclear. Please can the authors indicate a) what factors were adjusted for in the multivariate analysis? What is "negative" (presumably HIV)? I think tables throughout the manuscript require explanatory legends please. Please can the authors consider whether a separate analysis of the factors associated with treatment adherence and treatment success in a) adults and b) children. This could help to tailor recommendations/advice for different age groups.

8) Table 3 also highlights that the authors seem to have omitted how good adherence was calculated. It seems that they used logistic regression so it must be as a dependent binary variable so it would be useful to know what this threshold was. I think the authors should consider whether, given they have the data on adherence, a linear regression model of number of tablets taken / % adherence as the dependent variable might be more fitting. Another consideration would be a time to event (e.g. completing or stopping treatment) would be achievable with the data available.

9) I appreciate the massive efforts that this follow-up and analysis would have taken. However, given the missing data on treatment outcomes (e.g. a quick calculation of n/N for Table 3 shows there are a significant number of people without a treatment outcome). This could be dealt with in two ways: firstly, the authors could do an analysis of the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of those with MISSING outcome data; or second, which is more straightforward, is just to mention the missing data in the limitations section and that those with missing data might represent a more vulnerable subgroup of patients.

10) All the comments above relating to Table 3 apply equally to Table 4.

MINOR

11) Referencing needs to be reviewed throughout including formatting of references in main text.

12) Please can the authors make clear in the methods if they included any interaction terms / likelihood ratio when doing their regression tables. If they did not then suggest that they do this to check for interactions between independent variables.

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please provide additional details regarding partient consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

3. We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The paper is generally well written and interesting to read. I recognise that is difficult to collect data from the last 25 years of treatment outcomes in Nigeria. It needs persistence and patience. The value of this work is great as provides the scientific community with useful information and conclusions on how the disease expands. The introduction is giving the reader a good, generalized background of the tuberculosis disease and the protocol and results are generally clear and well presented. However, I see the following minor issues that should be resolved before publishing this paper:

L134:”develops smear-positive TB” can be replaced with “has a positive smear”

L137: “Patient dies of any cause” can that be rephrased? Not sure how correctly expressed it is.

L173: “Testing” can be preferably replaced with “test”

L182: “Giving a M:F of 1.3:1”, can be replaced with “giving a male:female ratio of 1.3:1”

L182-183: “Children constituted 332 (9.8%)”, the meaning is not clear. Does it mean that 332 of the study population were children?

L187-188: Numbers should be expressed with words or numbers, so they match the final picture.

L199-200: Please write this sentence in a clearer way

L219-220: The word “about” should be emitted.

L249-251: Not clear meaning, not clearly written

L254: “this studies higher rate…”. Does it mean “the higher rate of adherence of these studies”?

L279: “our mean mortality rate” can be rephrased

L308: “more” can be emitted

Comment on the table with Proportion with TB-Age: Is age expressed in years? Is proportion with TB expressed in %? Please enter the units.

Comment on the flowchart: not sure/unclear the two unsatisfactory results

General comments:

Please check again the numbers of the references. They are expressed in different ways (mixed). Focus on the discussion.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Decision Letter 1

Tom E Wingfield

2 Sep 2020

Treatment Outcomes of Nigerian Patients with Tuberculosis: A Retrospective 25-year Review in a Regional Medical Center

PONE-D-20-11827R1

Dear Dr. Slusher,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements. Thank you for addressing the reviewers' comments on your original submission.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Tom E. Wingfield

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Tom E Wingfield

20 Oct 2020

PONE-D-20-11827R1

Treatment Outcomes of Nigerian Patients with Tuberculosis: A Retrospective 25-year Review in a Regional Medical Center

Dear Dr. Slusher:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Tom E. Wingfield

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Appendix. Hospital attendance and number of TB cases managed in a regional health centre.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Appendix. Factors associated outcomes: Death outcome.

    (PDF)

    S3 Appendix. Factors associated with potentially unsatisfactory treatment outcome.

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers 08-22-2020.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All data is fully available without restrictions. The data underlying the results presented are available by contacting Dr. Michael Alao at michael.alao@bowen.edu.ng or the Director of Clinical Services at Bowen University Teaching Hospital Dr. Adewumi, O. Durodola at adewumi.durodola@bowen.edu.ng. Data will be made available to all interested researchers upon request including all supporting data.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES