Four-month rifapentine regimens with or without moxifloxacin for tuberculosis

Susan E. Dorman, Payam Nahid, Ekaterina V. Kurbatova, Patrick P.J. Phillips, Kia Bryant, Kelly E. Dooley, Melissa Engle, Stefan V. Goldberg, Ha T.T. Phan, James Hakim, John L. Johnson, Madeleine Lourens, Neil A. Martinson, Grace Muzanyi, Kim Narunsky, Sandy Nerette, Nhung V. Nguyen, Thuong H. Pham, Samuel Pierre, Anne E. PurfieldWadzanai Samaneka, Radojka M. Savic, Ian Sanne, Nigel A. Scott, Justin Shenje, Erin Sizemore, Andrew Vernon, Ziyaad Waja, Marc Weiner, Susan Swindells, Richard E. Chaisson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


BACKGROUND Rifapentine-based regimens have potent antimycobacterial activity that may allow for a shorter course in patients with drug-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis. METHODS In an open-label, phase 3, randomized, controlled trial involving persons with newly diagnosed pulmonary tuberculosis from 13 countries, we compared two 4-month rifapentine-based regimens with a standard 6-month regimen consisting of rifampin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (control) using a noninferiority margin of 6.6 percentage points. In one 4-month regimen, rifampin was replaced with rifapentine; in the other, rifampin was replaced with rifapentine and ethambutol with moxifloxacin. The primary efficacy outcome was survival free of tuberculosis at 12 months. RESULTS Among 2516 participants who had undergone randomization, 2343 had a culture positive for Mycobacteriumtuberculosis that was not resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, or fluoroquinolones (microbiologically eligible population; 768 in the control group, 791 in the rifapentine–moxifloxacin group, and 784 in the rifapentine group), of whom 194 were coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus and 1703 had cavitation on chest radiography. A total of 2234 participants could be assessed for the primary outcome (assessable population; 726 in the control group, 756 in the rifapentine–moxifloxacin group, and 752 in the rifapentine group). Rifapentine with moxifloxacin was noninferior to the control in the microbiologically eligible population (15.5% vs. 14.6% had an unfavorable outcome; difference, 1.0 percentage point; 95% confidence interval [CI], −2.6 to 4.5) and in the assessable population (11.6% vs. 9.6%; difference, 2.0 percentage points; 95% CI, −1.1 to 5.1). Noninferiority was shown in the secondary and sensitivity analyses. Rifapentine without moxifloxacin was not shown to be noninferior to the control in either population (17.7% vs. 14.6% with an unfavorable outcome in the microbiologically eligible population; difference, 3.0 percentage points [95% CI, −0.6 to 6.6]; and 14.2% vs. 9.6% in the assessable population; difference, 4.4 percentage points [95% CI, 1.2 to 7.7]). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred during the on-treatment period in 19.3% of participants in the control group, 18.8% in the rifapentine–moxifloxacin group, and 14.3% in the rifapentine group. CONCLUSIONS The efficacy of a 4-month rifapentine-based regimen containing moxifloxacin was noninferior to the standard 6-month regimen in the treatment of tuberculosis.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1705-1718
Number of pages14
JournalNew England Journal of Medicine
Issue number18
StatePublished - May 6 2021

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Medicine


Dive into the research topics of 'Four-month rifapentine regimens with or without moxifloxacin for tuberculosis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this