Research

Original Investigation

Treatment for Preventing Tuberculosis in Children

and Adolescents
A Randomized Clinical Trial of a 3-Month, 12-Dose Regimen
of a Combination of Rifapentine and Isoniazid
M. Elsa Villarino, MD, MPH; Nigel A. Scott, MS; Stephen E. Weis, DO; Marc Weiner, MD; Marcus B. Conde, MD; Brenda Jones, MD; Sharon Nachman, MD;
Ricardo Oliveira, MD; Ruth N. Moro, MD, MPH; Nong Shang, PhD; Stefan V. Goldberg, MD; Timothy R. Sterling, MD; for the International Maternal
Pediatric and Adolescents AIDS Clinical Trials Group (IMPAACT) and the Tuberculosis Trials Consortium (TBTC)
Editorial page 208
IMPORTANCE Three months of a once-weekly combination of rifapentine and isoniazid for

treatment of latent tuberculosis infection is safe and effective for persons 12 years or older.
Published data for children are limited.

Supplemental content at
jamapediatrics.com

OBJECTIVES To compare treatment safety and assess noninferiority treatment effectiveness

of combination therapy with rifapentine and isoniazid vs 9 months of isoniazid treatment for
latent tuberculosis infection in children.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A pediatric cohort nested within a randomized,
open-label clinical trial conducted from June 11, 2001, through December 17, 2010, with
follow-up through September 5, 2013, in 29 study sites in the United States, Canada, Brazil,
Hong Kong (China), and Spain. Participants were children (aged 2-17 years) who were eligible
for treatment of latent tuberculosis infection.
INTERVENTIONS Twelve once-weekly doses of the combination drugs, given with supervision

by a health care professional, for 3 months vs 270 daily doses of isoniazid, without
supervision by a health care professional, for 9 months.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES We compared rates of treatment discontinuation because
of adverse events (AEs), toxicity grades 1 to 4, and deaths from any cause. The equivalence
margin for the comparison of AE-related discontinuation rates was 5%. Tuberculosis disease
diagnosed within 33 months of enrollment was the main end point for testing effectiveness.
The noninferiority margin was 0.75%.
RESULTS Of 1058 children enrolled, 905 were eligible for evaluation of effectiveness. Of 471
in the combination-therapy group, 415 (88.1%) completed treatment vs 351 of 434 (80.9%)
in the isoniazid-only group (P = .003). The 95% CI for the difference in rates of
discontinuation attributed to an AE was 2.6 to 0.1, which was within the equivalence range.
In the safety population, 3 of 539 participants (0.6%) who took the combination drugs had a
grade 3 AE vs 1 of 493 (0.2%) who received isoniazid only. Neither arm had any
hepatotoxicity, grade 4 AEs, or treatment-attributed death. None of the 471 in the
combination-therapy group developed tuberculosis vs 3 of 434 (cumulative rate, 0.74%) in
the isoniazid-only group, for a difference of 0.74% and an upper bound of the 95% CI of the
difference of +0.32%, which met the noninferiority criterion.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Treatment with the combination of rifapentine and isoniazid
was as effective as isoniazid-only treatment for the prevention of tuberculosis in children
aged 2 to 17 years. The combination-therapy group had a higher treatment completion rate
than did the isoniazid-only group and was safe.
TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00023452
JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169(3):247-255. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2014.3158
Published online January 12, 2015.

Author Affiliations: Author

affiliations are listed at the end of this
article.
Group Information: A list of the
International Maternal Pediatric and
Adolescents AIDS Clinical Trials Group
(IMPAACT) and the Tuberculosis
Trials Consortium (TBTC) members is
included in eAppendix 1 in the
Supplement.
Corresponding Author: Ruth N.
Moro, MD, MPH, Division of
Tuberculosis Elimination, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention,
Building 12, Mail Stop E-10, Atlanta,
GA 30329 ([email protected]).

(Reprinted) 247

Copyright 2015 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Research Original Investigation

Preventing TB in Children and Adolescents

substantial portion of the global burden of active and

latent tuberculosis (TB) is found in children.1-3 Treatment of latent Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection
(LTBI) in children is beneficial, both for the child and for public health, because it prevents development of TB and limits
future M tuberculosis transmission.4-7 The benefits of treatment of LTBI are greater for children than for adults for several reasons: LTBI in children younger than 5 years is always
recently acquired (ie, within 5 years), and recent infection has
a higher likelihood of progression to disease than infection acquired less recently; children have an increased risk of developing severe TB with sequela (eg, meningitis and disseminated disease); children have more years at risk for the
development of TB than adults; and children tolerate treatment for LTBI better than adults.
Soon after effective treatment was established for active TB,
studies began to determine whether treatment of LTBI could
prevent active TB, as well as in what settings and with what duration. In the 1950s and 1960s, Lincoln and Vera Cruz8,9 and Ferebee et al10,11 established that isoniazid given daily for 12 months
was effective in preventing TB in adults and children with LTBI.
Shorter LTBI treatment regimens are associated with improved
adherence and treatment completion in adults and children.12-14
Supervised (ie, directly observed) LTBI therapy in children increased adherence by 57% in South Africa.15 In the United States,
some TB control departments use directly observed therapy for
the administration of LTBI treatment to persons at highest risk
of developing TB, including children, if sufficient resources are
available.16,17 Recently, the PREVENT TB (Three Months of Rifapentine and Isoniazid for Latent Tuberculosis Infection)18 clinical trial demonstrated that a short-course combination regimen
of rifapentine and isoniazid for 3 months given with direct observation was as effective as the reference-standard 9-month
regimen of self-administered isoniazid in persons 12 years or
older; combination therapy with rifapentine and isoniazid was
safe and had a higher treatment completion rate. However, too
few children were enrolled for safety and effectiveness to be
evaluated separately. Along with additional evidence from 2
smaller clinical trials,19,20 the findings of the PREVENT TB trial
led the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to recommend use of the new 3-month regimen for treatment of LTBI
in adults and children at least 12 years of age.21
The pharmacokinetics of rifapentine in children younger
than 12 years were not known at the start of the PREVENT TB
study. When these data became available in 2005,22 enrollment criteria were modified to include children aged 2 to 11
years. We report here the results among all children aged 2 to
17 years from this multicenter randomized clinical trial.

Methods
Population, Treatment, and Monitoring
Children and adolescents were enrolled from 29 study sites in
the United States, Canada, Brazil, Hong Kong (China), and Spain
in 23 Tuberculosis Trials Consortium (TBTC) sites and 6 International Maternal Pediatric and Adolescents AIDS Clinical Trials
Group (IMPAACT) sites. The study protocol was approved by
248

institutional review boards at the Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and all study
sites. Children had informed consent signed by at least 1 parent and provided informed assent in accordance with local human subjects protection regulations. Children were eligible to
participate in the trial if they met specific criteria indicating
high risk for TB according to age, tuberculin skin test (TST) results, and TB exposure history and did not meet any study exclusion criteria (eAppendix 2 in the Supplement). Enrollment
did not require knowledge of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) serostatus or HIV testing. The age criterion for inclusion of children in the PREVENT TB trial changed with protocol amendments over time: from June 5, 2001, to November
22, 2005, enrollment included children aged 12 years to younger
than 18 years; from November 23, 2005, to February 15, 2008
(starting as soon as was feasible after pharmacokinetic data became available), children aged 2 years to younger than 18 years;
and from February 16, 2008 (end of parent trial enrollment),
to December 17, 2010, children aged 2 years to younger than
12 years regardless of HIV serostatus and 12 years to younger
than 18 years only if they were known to be HIV seropositive
(eFigure in the Supplement).
Children in the isoniazid-only group were prescribed 270
daily doses of isoniazid dispensed in 30-day allotments. For
this arm of the trial, isoniazid was either self-administered (ie,
by the patient or the parent, without supervision by a health
care professional) or directly observed, following the study site
administration guidelines for children. If directly observed
therapy was used during isoniazid-only treatment, frequency remained daily. Children enrolled in the combinationtherapy group were prescribed a regimen of 12 weekly doses
of a combination of rifapentine and isoniazid (eTable in the
Supplement23). All doses for rifapentine plus isoniazid were
given by directly observed therapy. Directly observed therapy
was defined as treatment for which a study health care professional prepared and observed ingestion of each dose.
Completion of rifapentine plus isoniazid therapy was defined as administration of 11 of no more than 12 weekly, directly observed therapy doses in 10 to 16 weeks. Completion
of isoniazid only was defined as receipt of 240 of no more than
270 daily doses in 35 to 52 weeks. Receipt of isoniazid doses
was assessed by interview with the parent and child and verified by pill count at monthly clinic visits, which included standardized symptom evaluations.
Clinician investigators reported adverse events (AEs) from
enrollment through 60 days after the last dose of study medic ations. Information regarding type, management,
seriousness,24 toxicity grade,25 and relatedness to the study
medications (definite, probable, possible, unlikely, or not related) was reported for each event. We categorized AEs as not
attributed to treatment when they had been determined to be
unlikely or not related to the study drugs. Serious AEs included death during therapy or within 60 days of the last dose,
life-threatening events, hospitalization, disability or permanent damage, and congenital anomaly. Posttreatment follow-up began after the participant completed or discontinued treatment with study medications. In each treatment arm,
follow-up evaluations were conducted every 3 months until

JAMA Pediatrics March 2015 Volume 169, Number 3 (Reprinted)

Copyright 2015 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

jamapediatrics.com

Preventing TB in Children and Adolescents

21 months after enrollment, then every 6 months (months 27

and 33) until the end of study follow-up (33 months after enrollment). Case finding was active, following protocol guidelines, with follow-up evaluations conducted by telephone until the final visit, which was in person and conducted at a clinic
with specialized experience in the diagnosis and treatment of
TB in children. The trial protocol defined TB in children as either
confirmed by M tuberculosis in culture or diagnosed clinically
based on the TB diagnostic criteria of the American Thoracic
Society and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,26 with
diagnosis and treatment guidance from the American Academy of Pediatrics.27

Randomization, Study Objectives, and Populations

for Analysis
The trial used a parallel-design unrestricted randomization
method. Children were randomized either individually or by
household. If 2 or more inhabitants agreed to participate in the
trial, they were assigned to the same study treatment as the first
enrolled member of their household (eAppendix 3 in the Supplement). The primary objective of the PREVENT TB pediatric study
was the equivalence comparison of treatment safety between
the 2 study arms. The secondary objective was to assess the treatment effectiveness of combination therapy for noninferiority
compared with the isoniazid-only regimen for the prevention
of TB. We used 3 study populations for analysis: (1) intention
to treatwhich included all children in the studyfor the analysis of demographic characteristics and evaluation of differences between arms; (2) safety populationwhich included all
children who took 1 or more doses of the study medication; and
(3) modified intention to treatwhich included all children who
were protocol eligiblefor the analysis of treatment completion and treatment effectiveness (Figure 1). Follow-up continued through September 5, 2013. Tuberculosis end points were
evaluated and confirmed by consensus of an independent 3-person panel of experts who were masked to the study arm and the
study site that reported the TB end point.

Sample Size, Study Power, and Statistical Methods

We tested the hypothesis that there would be no difference in
the rates of treatment discontinuation attributed to AEs between the 2 treatment arms. We considered results with 5% or
less difference between the rates of treatment discontinuation
attributed to AEs to be clinically equivalent. Assuming 15% loss
to follow-up, 80% power, a type 1 error rate of 0.05, and 1% rate
of discontinuation attributed to AEs in the standard treatment
arm, the sample size estimate for testing the main safety hypothesis was 322 children per arm. The 95% CI of the difference of the rates of discontinuation attributed to AEs was calculated and then compared with the equivalence region (5%
to 5%). P values were calculated using the Fisher exact test to
determine whether the rates were significantly different.
For the PREVENT TB core trial population composed
mostly of adults and some adolescents, the primary objective
was an evaluation for noninferiority of the treatment effectiveness of the combination therapy with rifapentine and
isoniazid.18 In this nested study, treatment effectiveness testing was a secondary objective, and there was neither a sepajamapediatrics.com

Original Investigation Research

rate sample size calculation nor a different proposed noninferiority margin for testing the effectiveness in children.
Because of the small number of TB end points available for the
estimation of noninferior effectiveness in children, the Wilson Score Interval for rare binomial events28,29 was used. This
procedure allowed the construction of a highly conservative
(ie, wider) 95% CI for comparison against the noninferiority
margin. If the upper bound of the 95% CI was less than the noninferiority margin of 0.75%, then the noninferiority of the experimental arm would be established. To evaluate the potential effects of age and sex imbalances between study arms on
the noninferiority test statistic, we ran a Monte Carlo sampling distribution simulation, weighted for age and sex, to
eliminate potential bias from imbalances in enrollment (eAppendix 4 in the Supplement).

Results
We enrolled 1058 participants aged 2 to 17 years from June 11,
2001, through December 17, 2010. There were 552 in the combination-therapy group and 506 in the isoniazid-only group (intention-to-treat population) (Table 1, Figure 1, and eFigure in
the Supplement). Fifteen children (3%) enrolled in the isoniazidonly group received at least some daily doses by directly observed therapy. Of the 1058 children enrolled, 905 were eligible for the efficacy analysis (modified intention-to-treat
population) and 1032 received 1 or more dose of study medication (safety population). The most common reason for exclusion after enrollment was the finding of a negative TST result 8
to 12 weeks after a baseline negative TST result among children 5 years or younger who had a history of contact with an
infectious patient with TB (91 of 153 [59%] children) (Figure 1).
Of 1058 children enrolled, 989 (93%) were enrolled as contacts
and 69 (7%) were enrolled with TST conversion (eAppendix 2
in the Supplement). Five (<1%) were infected with HIV. The differences by treatment arm in age and sex were larger than expected: the median age for the combination-therapy group was
10 years (interquartile range, 4-15) vs 12 years for the isoniazidonly group (interquartile range, 4-15); in the combinationtherapy group, 54% were male vs 48% male in the isoniazidonly group (Table 1). The median TST size of the 929 participants
with a TST reaction size of 5 mm or greater at enrollment was
15 mm (interquartile range, 12-20) and there was no significant
difference in TST reaction size by age category (Table 1).
The overall treatment completion rates were 88.1% in the
combination-therapy group and 80.9% in the isoniazid-only
group (P = .003) (Table 2). The rates of treatment discontinuation attributed to AEs were 1.7% in the combination-therapy
group and 0.5% in the isoniazid-only group (P = .11) (Table 2).
The 95% CI for the difference in rates of discontinuation attributed to an AE was 2.6 to 0.1, which is within the equivalence range of 5% to 5% (Table 2). The AEs that led to treatment discontinuation in the combination-therapy group
included 3 influenza-like events, 3 cutaneous events (all with
pruritic rash and 1 with oral blisters and fever), and 2 gastrointestinal tract events. The AEs that led to treatment discontinuation in the isoniazid-only group were 1 cutaneous reac(Reprinted) JAMA Pediatrics March 2015 Volume 169, Number 3

Copyright 2015 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

249

Research Original Investigation

Preventing TB in Children and Adolescents

Figure 1. Flowchart of Study Participants (Children Aged 2-17 Years): CONSORT Criteria
1335 Assessed for eligibility March 31,
2005-December 17, 2010a

Unknown number assessed for

eligibility June 11, 2001-March 30, 2005a

532 Excluded
219 Declined to participate
259 Did not meet inclusion criteria
54 Declined by site
235 Enrolled June 11, 2001-March 30, 2005

823 Enrolled March 31, 2005-December 17, 2010

1058 Total enrolled

506 Assigned to receive isoniazid

treatment only
493 Received 1 dose of intervention
13 Did not receive intervention
10 Ineligibility documented before
first dose
2 Lost before first dose
1 Refused treatment
0 Treatment not judged advisable
by clinician
0 Parent withdrew consent

552 Assigned to receive combination

drug therapy
539 Received 1 dose of intervention
13 Did not receive intervention
6 Ineligibility documented before
first dose
4 Refused treatment
2 Parent withdrew consent
1 Treatment not judged advisable
by clinician
0 Lost before first dose

434 Eligible for MITT population

72 Ineligibleb
46 Positive TST not confirmedc
14 Source TB case resistant to isoniazid
or rifampin
8 Source TB case culture-negative for
Mycobacterium tuberculosis
2 TST positive with no other risk factors
1 Source TB case missing DST results
1 TB disease diagnosed

471 Eligible for MITT population

81 Ineligibleb
45 Positive TST not confirmedc
19 Source TB case resistant to isoniazid
or rifampin
13 Source TB case culture-negative for
Mycobacterium tuberculosis
3 TST positive with no other risk factors
1 Source TB case missing DST results
0 TB disease diagnosed

This flowchart shows the number of participants who were enrolled, received
the assigned treatment, and were analyzed for the safety and effectiveness
outcomes.Combination drug therapy indicates 3 months of directly observed
once-weekly combination of rifapentine and isoniazid; isoniazid therapy, 9
months of self-administered daily isoniazid; DST, drug susceptibility testing;
MITT, modified intention-to-treat; TB, tuberculosis; TST, tuberculin skin test.
a

Eligibility screening data for the randomized clinical trial were obtained from
March 31, 2005, onward, with the implementation of an eligibility screening
log. This log was implemented in response to the publication of the CONSORT
(Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) reporting recommendations for

tion and 1 gastrointestinal tract event. In the combinationtherapy group, treatment discontinuation attributed to
unavailability for follow-up for 3 months or more during the
treatment phase was significantly less than in the isoniazidonly group (P < .001) (Table 2), and no serious AEs were reported (Table 3).
Four AEs attributed to treatment were scored as toxicity
grade 3, including 3 of 539 (0.6%) in the combination-therapy
group (1 influenza-like event and 2 cutaneous events) and 1 of
493 (0.2%) in the isoniazid-only group (hepatomegaly and rash)
(Table 3). No hepatic events were attributed to treatment in
either arm. One hepatic event was not attributed to treatment in a 3-year-old with a new diagnosis of Kawasaki disease and elevated liver enzyme values. No AEs were attributed to treatment among the 5 pediatric participants (aged 12-17
years) who were known to be HIV infected. There were 2 deaths
250

randomized clinical trials, which were vetted after the PREVENT TB trial
started.
b

Enrollment of participants was allowed before Mycobacterium tuberculosis

culture and susceptibility data were available in the source case of
tuberculosis.

Results of TST not confirmed as positive on postenrollment TST repeated at 8

to 12 weeks; enrollment of close contacts was allowed if children were younger
than 5 years or human immunodeficiency virus seropositive and enrolling
clinicians had the option to discontinue treatment.

in adolescents, both in the isoniazid-only group. One was

caused by cardiac arrhythmia on day 201 of study treatment,
and 1 was caused by a gunshot injury 657 days after completing treatment (Table 3).
The modified intention-to-treat population (n = 905) accumulated 2320 person-years of follow-up. The cumulative proportion of children in whom TB was diagnosed was zero of 471
(0%) in the combination-therapy group vs 3 of 434 (cumulative rate, 0.74%) in the isoniazid-only group (1 with sputum culture positive for M tuberculosis and 2 by clinical criteria alone),
for rates of 0 vs 0.27 per 100 person-years of follow-up. The
observed difference in the rates of TB was 0.74%, of which
the upper limit of the 1-sided 97.5% CI was 0.32%. This limit
was below the noninferiority margin of 0.75% (Figure 2). The
strength of rejecting the null hypothesis and the claim of noninferiority of the combination therapy with rifapentine and iso-

JAMA Pediatrics March 2015 Volume 169, Number 3 (Reprinted)

Copyright 2015 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

jamapediatrics.com

Preventing TB in Children and Adolescents

Original Investigation Research

Table 1. Clinical and Demographic Characteristics of the Study Population

Patients by Treatment Arma
Characteristic

Isoniazid
(n = 506)

Rifapentine Plus Isoniazid

(n = 552)

Total
(N = 1058)

P Valueb

Indication for treatment of LTBI

Close contact
Recent TST result converter
Age, median (IQR)
Male sexc

470 (92.9)

519 (94.0)

989 (93.5)

.46

36 (7.1)

33 (5.9)

69 (6.5)

.46

12 (4-15)

10 (4-15)

11 (4-15)

241 (47.6)

297 (53.8)

538 (50.9)

2-4 y

66 (13.0)

85 (15.4)

151 (14.3)

5-11 y

45 (8.9)

68 (12.3)

113 (10.7)

12-17 y

130 (25.7)

144 (26.1)

274 (25.9)

301/431 (69.8)

337/453 (74.4)

638/884 (72.2)

92/431 (21.3)

113/453 (24.9)

205/884 (23.2)

.02
.005

Race/ethnicity
North America
White Hispanicc
2-4 y
5-11 y

82/431 (19.0)

93/453 (20.5)

175/884 (19.8)

12-17 y

127/431 (29.5)

131/453 (28.9)

258/884 (29.2)

18/431 (4.2)

22/453 (4.9)

40/884 (4.5)

2/431 (0.5)

3/453 (0.7)

5/884 (0.6)

White non-Hispanicc
2-4 y
5-11 y

2/431 (0.5)

6/453 (0.1)

8/884 (0.9)

12-17 y

14/431 (3.2)

13/453 (2.9)

27/884 (3.1)

Blackc

56/431 (13.0)

51/453 (11.3)

107/884 (12.1)

2-4 y

11/431 (2.6)

17/453 (3.8)

28/884 (3.2)

5-11 y

8/431 (1.9)

8/453 (1.8)

16/884 (1.8)

12-17 y

37/431 (8.6)

26/453 (5.7)

63/884 (7.1)

Otherc

56/431 (13.0)

43/453 (9.5)

99/884 (11.2)

2-4 y

13/431 (3.0)

11/453 (2.4)

24/884 (2.7)

5-11 y

7/431 (1.6)

15/453 (3.3)

22/884 (2.5)

12-17 y

36/431 (8.4)

17/453 (3.8)

53/884 (6.0)

73/504 (14.5)

98/551 (17.8)

171/1055 (16.2)

10/504 (2.0)

24/551 (4.4)

34/1055 (3.2)

5-11 y

9/504 (1.8)

11/551 (2.0)

20/1055 (1.9)

12-17 y

54/504 (10.7)

63/551 (11.4)

117/1055 (11.1)

431 (85.2)

453 (82.1)

884 (83.6)

Brazilc,d
2-4 y

.13

.75

.47

Brazil/Spain/Hong Kong
HIV seropositivee
Persons enrolled in a cluster
TST reaction size, median (IQR), mmc,f

75 (14.8)
1/111 (0.9)
155 (30.6)

99 (17.9)
4/105 (3.8)
197 (35.7)

174 (16.4)
5/216 (2.3)
352 (33.3)

15 (11-20)

15 (12-20)

15 (12-20)

2-4 y

14 (11-18)

15 (13-20)

15 (12-20)

5-11 y

15 (12-20)

15 (12-20)

15 (12-20)

12-17 y

15 (11-20)

15 (11-19)

15 (11-20)

19 (17-23)

19 (16-23)

19 (17-23)

2-4 y

16 (15-18)

17 (15-18)

16 (15-18)

5-11 y

17 (16-20)

18 (16-21)

18 (16-21)

12-17 y

22 (19-26)

22 (20-26)

22 (20-26)

BMI, median, (IQR)c

Homeless

5 (0.9)

3 (0.5)

niazid compared with that of isoniazid only was not affected

by the age and sex imbalance between the 2 study arms (eAppendix 4 in the Supplement).
Our trial was an open-label study in which children in the
combination-therapy group were seen for treatment every
week by a study health care professional, whereas particijamapediatrics.com

8 (0.8)

Includes all children aged 2 to 17

years. Data are presented as
number/total (percentage) unless
otherwise specified.

P values are for Fisher exact test

comparing proportions and the
median scores for comparing
continuous distributions. Although
randomization was unrestricted,
there was evidence in the parent
study that household-based
clustering resulted in some
imbalance between arms.

P value refers to the overall

characteristic by regimen, not age
group.

Race not reported in US categories.

Three children were outside North
America or Brazil: 2 in the 5 to 11 age
group and 1 in the 12 to 17 age group.

Of children with known HIV status.

Of children with TST result size

greater than 0 mm (combined
total, 929; 449 in the isoniazid-only
group and 480 in the
combination-therapy group). A total
of 129 close contacts had
enrollment TST result size of zero;
of these, 128 were younger than 5
years, and 1 was aged 12 years and
HIV seropositive.

.11

.16

Enrollment site
US/Canada

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index

(calculated as weight in kilograms
divided by height in meters squared);
HIV, human immunodeficiency virus;
IQR, interquartile range; LTBI, latent
tuberculosis infection; TST, tuberculin
skin test.

.18
.18
.20
.09

.46

.29
.49

pants in the isoniazid-only group were seen monthly. The

knowledge of treatment assignment and increased frequency of contact with the study health care professional in
the combination-therapy group could have introduced ascertainment bias when determining events to be attributed to
study drugs. However, visits for clinical evaluation occurred
(Reprinted) JAMA Pediatrics March 2015 Volume 169, Number 3

Copyright 2015 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

251

Research Original Investigation

Preventing TB in Children and Adolescents

Table 2. Tolerability and Reasons for Discontinuation Among Children in the Modified
Intention-to-Treat Population
Abbreviation: AE, adverse event.

Patients, No. (%)

Isoniazid
(n = 434)

Rifapentine Plus
Isoniazid (n = 471)

P Valuea

Difference (95%
CI)b

351 (80.9)

415 (88.1)

.003

7.2 (2.0 to 2.5)

83 (19.2)

56 (11.9)

.003

7.2 (2.5 to 12.0)

Discontinuation because of AE

2 (0.5)

8 (1.7)

.11

1.2 (2.6 to 0.1)

Withdrawal of informed consent

5 (1.2)

4 (0.9)

.74

0.3 (1.0 to 1.6)

Lost for 3 mo during treatment

26 (6.0)

5 (1.1)

<.001

4.9 (2.5 to 7.4)

7 (1.6)

3 (0.6)

.21

1.0 (0.4 to 2.4)

Characteristic
Treatment completion

P value based on Fisher exact test.

95% CI for the difference in

proportions using the Wilson Score
Interval method.

Combination-therapy group
included 3 influenza-like AEs (grade
2), 3 cutaneous (all with pruritic rash
[2 were grade 2], 1 with oral blisters
and fever [grade 3]), and 2
gastrointestinal reactions (1 was
grade 1 and 1 was grade 2).
Isoniazid-only group included 1
cutaneous AE (grade 2) and 1
gastrointestinal reaction (grade 3).

Measure of adherence.

Reason for not completing treatment

All reasons
c

Physician decision to cancel other than

AE
Participant refusal

15 (3.5)

16 (3.4)

>.99

0.1 (2.3 to 2.4)

Total dose count and/or administration

period outside of protocol guidelinesd

28 (6.5)

20 (4.3)

.18

2.2 (0.7 to 5.2)

Abbreviations: AE, adverse event;

NA, not available.

Table 3. Safety End Points Among Children Who Received at Least 1 Dose of Study Medication
Patients, No. (%)
Isoniazid
(n = 493)

Rifapentine Plus Isoniazid

(n = 539)

Grades 1 and 2

5 (1.0)

11 (2.0)

.21

1.0 (2.5 to 0.5)

Grade 3

1 (0.2)

3 (0.6)

.63

0.4 (1.1 to 0.4)

Grade 4

NA

NA

Grade 5, death

NA

NA

Serious AEs

NA

NA

Characteristic

P Valuea

P value based on Fisher exact test.

95% CI for the differences in

proportions using the Wilson Score
Interval method.

Death 1 was due to malignant

arrhythmia in a 16-year-old girl on
day 201 of study treatment; death 2,
gunshot injury in a 16-year-old boy
at study day 901 (approximately
657 days after the end of the study
treatment phase).

Serious AEs include deaths while

receiving therapy or within 60 days
of the last dose, life-threatening
events, hospitalization, disability or
permanent damage, and congenital
anomaly. For children aged 2
through 16 years, 6 had 1 serious AE
and 1 had more than 1 serious AE.

Difference (95% CI)b

AEs attributed to treatment

AEs not attributed to

treatment
Grades 1 and 2

35 (7.1)

25 (4.6)

.11

2.0 (0.4 to 5.3)

Grade 3

5 (0.2)

3 (0.6)

.49

0.4 (0.6 to 1.5)

Grade 4

2 (0.4)

1 (0.2)

.61

0.2 (0.5 to 0.9)

Grade 5, deathc

2 (0.4)

.23

0.4 (0.2 to 1.0)

Serious AEsd

7 (1.4)

.01

1.0 (0.4 to 2.5)

at the same frequency (ie, monthly) in both study arms. The

sample size obtained for this study population was larger than
necessary for the 80% power needed to assess the main hypothesis of the safety of the 2 regimens. Unfortunately, we were
unable to enroll children younger than 2 years, and only 5 children with HIV infection were enrolled, limiting generalizability to those high-risk groups.
Evaluation of the effectiveness of any regimen for LTBI is
challenging because of the large sample size required for
analysis.3,30,31 Our article describes a large pediatric population (approximately 1000 participants), including 539 children younger than 12 years and 296 children aged 2 to 4 years.
Trial enrollment was expanded to the lower age ranges as soon
as was feasible after completion of targeted pharmacokinetic
studies. Even with active case finding, it is possible that some
cases were missed. However, there is no evidence that ascertainment of cases varied by treatment arm.

Discussion
We found that combination therapy with rifapentine and isoniazid was well tolerated and safe in children aged 2 to 17 years
252

who were treated for LTBI. The overall treatment completion

rate was higher for combination therapy than isoniazid only
(88.1% vs 80.9%). This outcome was consistent with findings
in the main study18 as well as those of previous articles,12,13
which indicated that a shorter treatment regimen and direct
observation of therapy correlate with higher completion rates.
The rates of treatment discontinuation attributed to abandonment or refusal of further treatment for reasons other than
medical indication were high, and were significantly higher
among children who were treated with isoniazid only; the rates
of treatment discontinuation attributed to an AE were low and
similar in both treatment groups. Hepatotoxicity attributed to
treatmentone of the AEs of most concern in adults treated
with isoniazidwas not observed in children in this study.
Deaths and serious AEs were rare and not related to either treatment regimen.
In general, children tolerate larger doses per kilogram of
body weight and have fewer AEs when treated with anti-TB
medications.32 Drug exposure was 1.3-fold higher in children
compared with the exposures obtained with successful treatment for LTBI in adults in a pharmacokinetic substudy.33 By
nesting a case-control pharmacokinetic evaluation comparing 81 children aged 2 to 11 years with 80 matched adults en-

JAMA Pediatrics March 2015 Volume 169, Number 3 (Reprinted)

Copyright 2015 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

jamapediatrics.com

Preventing TB in Children and Adolescents

Original Investigation Research

Figure 2. Difference in Tuberculosis Disease Rates Between the 2 Treatment Regimens Over Time (MITT Population)
1.0

Difference of Event Rate, %

Noninferiority margin (0.75%)

0.5
97.5% Upper CI bound
0

1
2

0.5
3
Difference of event rate
1.0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

Days From Enrollment, No.

No. of TB Cases and Event Rates by Treatment Arm (MITT Population)

Treatment Arm
Isoniazid only

No.
434

TB
Casesa
3

TB per 100
Patient-Years
0.27

Cumulative
TB Rate, %
0.74

Combination drug therapy

471

0.00

0.00

Difference in
Cumulative TB Rates
0.74

One-sided
97.5% CIb
0.32

The figure shows how the noninferiority criterion was met when none of the 471
patients in the combination-therapy arm developed tuberculosis vs 3 of 434 in
the isoniazid-only arm (cumulative rate, 0.74%), for a difference of 0.74% and
an upper bound of the 97.5% CI of the difference of +0.32%. Per-protocol
population effectiveness analysis showed similar results. The difference in
cumulative TB disease rate is the rate in the combination-therapy arm minus the
rate in the isozanid-only arm. The noninferiority margin was 0.75% for all
analyses. Combination drug therapy indicates 3 months of directly observed,
once-weekly combination of rifapentine and isoniazid; isoniazid only, 9 months
of self-administered daily isoniazid; MITT, modified intention-to-treat;
TB, tuberculosis.

None had evidence of re-exposure to infectious TB: (1) one 14-year-old female
was diagnosed 72 days after the first dose, with 2 cultures positive for
Mycobacterium tuberculosis; (2) one 5-year-old male was clinically diagnosed
818 days after the first dose; and (3) one 2-year-old male was clinically
diagnosed 839 days after the first dose.

One-sided 97.5% CI for the difference in cumulative TB disease rates

(percentage) using a conservative adjustment for a rare binomial event.28

rolled in the PREVENT TB trial, we were able to verify that the

weight-based dosage recommendations for LTBI therapy with
rifapentine (for 10-14 kg, 300 mg; 14.1-25 kg, 450 mg; 25.1-32
kg, 600 mg; and 32.1-50 kg, 750 mg) achieved the minimum
target area under the concentration curve from time zero to
infinity in almost all children. After evaluating several approaches the study protocol allowed for crushing the rifapentine tablets and producing a slurry by mixing the crushed medication with some types of food.23 This method of medication
administration is not well standardized and adds complexity
to treating children for LTBI. There is, at present, no pediatric
formulation for rifapentine; a water-dispersible tablet for use
in children is in development (Marilyn Maroni, MD, Sanofi, oral
presentation, October 15, 2014).
The pharmacokinetic substudy confirmed that food increases rifapentine bioavailability in children by 40%.33 However, crushing the tablets to give them with food resulted in a
26% decrease in bioavailability, and between-subject variability in clearance was 40%.33 An evaluation of whether food influenced the safety or effectiveness of treatment was beyond
the scope of this study. Current recommendations do not address whether combination therapy with rifapentine and isoniazid should be given with food.21
Our study also demonstrated that, in children, directly observed, once-weekly therapy with rifapentine plus isoniazid
for 12 doses was as effective as isoniazid that was mostly self-

administered daily for 9 months. The clinical trial setting might

have increased the effect of isoniazid compared with its effect in an operational setting without the close monitoring and
motivation of a clinical trial. This difference between clinical
trial and operational settings might have less influence on a
much shorter regimen, giving the short regimen an effectiveness advantage. Furthermore, the shorter regimen might encourage more treatment starts because of the promise of a
briefer time commitment. More treatment starts and greater
completion rates might together result in a standard regimen
whereby rifapentine plus isoniazid prevent more cases of TB
than are prevented by isoniazid alone.

jamapediatrics.com

Conclusions
Latent TB infection and TB in children are sentinel events for
recent M tuberculosis transmission. Treating children with LTBI
with a well-tolerated and safe regimen that is more likely to
be completed than previous treatment regimens provides an
improved opportunity to diminish the reservoir from which
future TB cases and subsequent transmission will arise, although this effect will be smaller in high-incidence settings.
A 3-month (12-dose) regimen given by direct observation
is a new alternative regimen to isoniazid for treatment of LTBI
in children and adolescents.34
(Reprinted) JAMA Pediatrics March 2015 Volume 169, Number 3

Copyright 2015 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

253

Research Original Investigation

Preventing TB in Children and Adolescents

ARTICLE INFORMATION
Accepted for Publication: November 4, 2014.
Published Online: January 12, 2015.
doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2014.3158.
Author Affiliations: Division of Tuberculosis
Elimination, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, Georgia (Villarino, Scott,
Moro, Shang, Goldberg); CDC Foundation, Atlanta,
Georgia (Scott, Moro); Department of Medicine,
University of North Texas Health Science Center at
Ft Worth (Weis); Department of Medicine, Audie L.
Murphy San Antonio Veterans Administration
Medical Center, San Antonio, Texas (Weiner);
Department of Medicine, Federal University of Rio
de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Conde);
Department of Medicine, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles (Jones); Department of
Pediatrics, State University of New York at Stony
Brook (Nachman); Department of Pediatrics,
Pediatric Institute, Federal University of Rio de
Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Oliveira);
Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University
School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee (Sterling).
Author Contributions: Mr Scott and Dr Shang had
full access to all the data in the study and take
responsibility for the integrity of the data and the
accuracy of the data analysis.
Study concept and design: Villarino, Weis, Weiner,
Nachman, Oliveira, Shang, Sterling.
Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data:
Villarino, Scott, Weiner, Conde, Jones, Moro, Shang,
Goldberg, Sterling.
Drafting of the manuscript: Villarino, Scott, Weis,
Weiner, Nachman, Goldberg, Sterling.
Critical revision of the manuscript for important
intellectual content: Villarino, Weiner, Conde, Jones,
Nachman, Oliveira, Moro, Shang, Goldberg,
Sterling.
Statistical analysis: Villarino, Scott, Shang.
Administrative, technical, or material support:
Villarino, Weiner, Nachman, Goldberg.
Study supervision: Villarino, Goldberg, Sterling.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Mr Scott and Dr
Moro report being employed by the CDC
Foundation, which receives funds for rifapentine
research from Sanofi. Dr Weiner reports receiving a
grant to perform rifapentine pharmacokinetics
studies in children and adults for the University of
Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio from
Sanofi. Dr Sterling reports giving a 1-day
consultation for Sanofi for presentation of
PREVENT TB study data to the US Food and Drug
Administration and being on the data safety
monitoring board for a clinical trial sponsored by
Otsuka Pharmaceutical. No other disclosures were
reported.
Funding/Support: Sanofi provided the rifapentine
for this study and has donated more than $2.5
million to the CDC Foundation to supplement
available US federal funding for rifapentine
research.
Role of the Funder/Sponsor: Sanofi had no role in
the design and conduct of the study; collection,
management, analysis, and interpretation of the
data; preparation, review, or approval of the
manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript
for publication.
Group Information: A list of the International
Maternal Pediatric and Adolescents AIDS Clinical

254

Trials Group (IMPAACT) and the Tuberculosis Trials

Consortium (TBTC) members is included in
eAppendix 1 in the Supplement.
Disclaimer: The findings and conclusions in this
article are those of the authors and do not
necessarily represent the official position of the
CDC.
Previous Presentation: Preliminary results of this
study were presented at ID Week 2012, a Joint
Meeting of the Infectious Diseases Society of
America, Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of
America, HIV Medicine Association, and Pediatric
Infectious Diseases Society; October 20, 2012; San
Diego, California.
REFERENCES
1. Swaminathan S, Rekha B. Pediatric tuberculosis:
global overview and challenges. Clin Infect Dis.
2010;50(suppl 3):S184-S194.
2. World Health Organization. Global Tuberculosis
Report 2012. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health
Organization; 2012.
3. Perez-Velez CM, Marais BJ. Tuberculosis in
children. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(4):348-361.
4. Ferebee SH. An epidemiological model of
tuberculosis in the United States. Bull Nat Tubercu
Assoc. 1967;53:4-7.
5. Heymann SJ, Brewer TF, Wilson ME, Colditz GA,
Fineberg HV. Pediatric tuberculosis: what needs to
be done to decrease morbidity and mortality.
Pediatrics. 2000;106(1):1.
6. Morrison J, Pai M, Hopewell PC. Tuberculosis
and latent tuberculosis infection in close contacts
of people with pulmonary tuberculosis in
low-income and middle-income countries:
a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet
Infect Dis. 2008;8(6):359-368.
7. Rutherford ME, Hill PC, Triasih R, Sinfield R, van
Crevel R, Graham SM. Preventive therapy in
children exposed to Mycobacterium tuberculosis:
problems and solutions. Trop Med Int Health. 2012;
17(10):1264-1273.

14. Spyridis NP, Spyridis PG, Gelesme A, et al. The

effectiveness of a 9-month regimen of isoniazid
alone versus 3- and 4-month regimens of isoniazid
plus rifampin for treatment of latent tuberculosis
infection in children: results of an 11-year
randomized study. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;45(6):715722.
15. van Zyl S, Marais BJ, Hesseling AC, Gie RP,
Beyers N, Schaaf HS. Adherence to
anti-tuberculosis chemoprophylaxis and treatment
in children. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2006;10(1):13-18.
16. Pediatric Tuberculosis Collaborative Group.
Targeted tuberculin skin testing and treatment of
latent tuberculosis infection in children and
adolescents. Pediatrics. 2004;114(4):1175-1201. doi:
10.1542/peds.2004-0809.
17. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Latent tuberculosis infection: a guide for primary
health care providers. Bethesda, MD: US Dept of
Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention; 2013. http://www.cdc.gov
/tb/publications/LTBI/default.htm. Accessed
November 22, 2014.
18. Sterling TR, Villarino ME, Borisov AS, et al; TB
Trials Consortium PREVENT TB Study Team. Three
months of rifapentine and isoniazid for latent
tuberculosis infection. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(23):
2155-2166.
19. Schechter M, Zajdenverg R, Falco G, et al.
Weekly rifapentine/isoniazid or daily
rifampin/pyrazinamide for latent tuberculosis in
household contacts. Am J Respir Crit Care Med.
2006;173(8):922-926.
20. Martinson NA, Barnes GL, Moulton LH, et al.
New regimens to prevent tuberculosis in adults
with HIV infection. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(1):11-20.
21. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Recommendations for use of an
isoniazid-rifapentine regimen with direct
observation to treat latent Mycobacterium
tuberculosis infection. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep.
2011;60(48):1650-1653.

8. Lincoln EM. The effect of antimicrobial therapy

on the prognosis of primary tuberculosis in
children. Am Rev Tuberc. 1954;69(5):682-689.

22. Blake MJ, Abdel-Rahman SM, Jacobs RF,

Lowery NK, Sterling TR, Kearns GL.
Pharmacokinetics of rifapentine in children. Pediatr
Infect Dis J. 2006;25(5):405-409.

9. Lincoln EM, Vera Cruz PG. Progress in treatment

of tuberculosis: results of antimicrobial therapy in a
group of 420 children with tuberculosis. Pediatrics.
1960;25(6):1035-1042.

23. Peloquin CA, Durbin D, Childs J, Sterling TR,

Weiner M. Stability of antituberculosis drugs mixed
in food. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;45(4):521.

10. Ferebee S, Mount FW, Anastasiades A.

Prophylactic effects of isoniazid on primary
tuberculosis in children: a preliminary report. Am
Rev Tuberc. 1957;76(6):942-963.
11. Ferebee SH. Controlled chemoprophylaxis trials
in tuberculosis: a general review. Bibl Tuberc. 1970;
26:28-106.
12. International Union Against Tuberculosis
Committee on Prophylaxis. Efficacy of various
durations of isoniazid preventive therapy for
tuberculosis: five years of follow-up in the IUAT
trial. Bull World Health Organ. 1982;60(4):555-564.
13. Horsburgh CR Jr, Goldberg S, Bethel J, et al;
Tuberculosis Epidemiologic Studies Consortium.
Latent TB infection treatment acceptance and
completion in the United States and Canada. Chest.
2010;137(2):401-409.

24. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for

industry and investigators on safety reporting
requirements for investigational new drug
applications and BA/BE studies. Washington, DC:
US Dept of Health and Human Services, Food and
Drug Administration; 2012. http://www.fda.gov
/downloads/drugs
/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation
/guidances/ucm227351.pdf. Accessed November
22, 2014.
25. Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. Common
terminology criteria for adverse events. Bethesda,
MD: National Cancer Institute, US National
Institutes of Health; 1999 http://ctep.cancer.gov
/protocoldevelopment/electronic_applications
/docs/ctcv20_4-30-992.pdf. Accessed November
22, 2014.
26. American Thoracic Society; US Department of
Health and Human Services; US Public Health

JAMA Pediatrics March 2015 Volume 169, Number 3 (Reprinted)

Copyright 2015 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

jamapediatrics.com

Preventing TB in Children and Adolescents

Service; Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention. Diagnostic standards and classification
of tuberculosis in adults and children. Washington, DC:
US Dept of Health and Human Services, Public Health
Service; 2000.
27. Pickering LK, Baker CJ, Kimberlin DW, Long SS.
Red Book: 2012 Report of the Committee on
Infectious Diseases. Elk Grove Village, IL: American
Academy of Pediatrics; 2012.
28. Agresti AC, Brent A. Approximate is better than
exact for interval estimation of binomial
proportions. Am Stat. 1998;52(2):119-126. doi:
10.2307/2685469.

jamapediatrics.com

Original Investigation Research

29. Newcombe RG. Interval estimation for the

difference between independent proportions:
comparison of eleven methods. Stat Med. 1998;17
(8):873-890.
30. Brent AJ, Anderson ST, Kampmann B.
Childhood tuberculosis: out of sight, out of mind?
Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2008;102(3):217-218.
31. Burman WJ, Cotton MF, Gibb DM, Walker AS,
Vernon AA, Donald PR. Ensuring the involvement of
children in the evaluation of new tuberculosis
treatment regimens. PLoS Med. 2008;5(8):e176.

33. Weiner MS, Mac Kenzie WR, Wing D, et al.

Rifapentine pharmacokinetics and tolerability in
children and adults treated once weekly with
rifapentine and isoniazid for latent tuberculosis
infection [published online January 16, 2014]. J Ped
Infect Dis Soc. doi:10.1093/jpids/pit077.
34. World Health Organization. Guidelines on the
management of latent tuberculosis infection. Geneva,
Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2015. http:
//www.who.int/tb/publications/ltbi_document
_page/en/. Accessed November 22, 2014.

32. Starke JR. Childhood tuberculosis: treatment

strategies and recent advances. Paediatr Respir Rev.
2001;2(2):103-112.

(Reprinted) JAMA Pediatrics March 2015 Volume 169, Number 3

Copyright 2015 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

255

Copyright of JAMA Pediatrics is the property of American Medical Association and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.