Trial reportPloS one2024
Isoniazid preventive therapy during infancy does not adversely affect growth among HIV-exposed uninfected children: Secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The role of isoniazid dosage and NAT2 gene polymorphism in the treatment of tuberculous meningitis.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIsoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) decreases risk of tuberculosis (TB) disease; impact on long-term infant growth is unknown. In a recent randomized trial (RCT), we assessed IPT effects on infant growth without known TB exposure.
methodsThe infant TB Infection Prevention Study (iTIPS) trial was a non-blinded RCT among HIV-exposed uninfected (HEU) infants in Kenya. Inclusion criteria included age 6-10 weeks, birthweight ≥2.5 kg, and gestation ≥37 weeks. Infants in the IPT arm received 10 mg/kg isoniazid daily for 12 months, while the control trial received no intervention; post-trial observational follow-up continued through 24 months of age. We used intent-to-treat linear mixed-effects models to compare growth rates (weight-for-age z-score [WAZ] and height-for-age z-score [HAZ]) between trial arms.
resultsAmong 298 infants, 150 were randomized to IPT, 47.6% were females, median birthweight was 3.4 kg (interquartile range [IQR] 3.0-3.7), and 98.3% were breastfed. During the 12-month intervention period and 12-month post-RCT follow-up, WAZ and HAZ declined significantly in all children, with more HAZ decline in male infants. There were no growth differences between trial arms, including in sex-stratified analyses. In longitudinal linear analysis, mean WAZ (β = 0.04 [95% CI:-0.14, 0.22]), HAZ (β = 0.14 [95% CI:-0.06, 0.34]), and WHZ [β = -0.07 [95% CI:-0.26, 0.11]) z-scores were similar between arms as were WAZ and HAZ growth trajectories. Infants randomized to IPT had higher monthly WHZ increase (β to 24 months 0.02 [95% CI:0.01, 0.04]) than the no-IPT arm.
conclusionIPT administered to HEU infants did not significantly impact growth outcomes in the first two years of life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.