SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2026
Rifapentine-isoniazid versus isoniazid-alone therapy for tuberculosis prevention among people living with HIV (PLHIV): a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTuberculosis (TB), a substantial cause of morbidity and mortality among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV), accounted for 161,000 deaths among HIV-co-infected patients in 2023. Tuberculosis preventive therapy can play a detrimental role in reducing the global burden. However, prolonged treatment duration compromises adherence and ultimately efficacy. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the treatment adherence and effectiveness of rifapentine-isoniazid prevention therapy relative to the standard isoniazid therapy.
methodsThis study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was conducted over PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov from inception till 28 October 2024. Recruited articles were screened against the predefined inclusion criteria, and relevant data was extracted into a spreadsheet. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) was used for data synthesis.
resultsThis meta-analysis included four studies containing data from 8,068 patients, with 5640 randomized to the rifapentine-isoniazid group while 2428 received isoniazid alone. Tuberculosis incidence varied from 0.39 to 2.0 and 0.67 to 1.9 per 100 person-years in the rifapentine-isoniazid arm and the isoniazid alone group, respectively. However, the pooled analysis showed a non-significant difference between the two groups (Rate Ratio = 0.849; Confidence Interval = 0.478–1.509; p = 0.578). Similarly, no significant difference was noted across deaths in each group (Odds Ratio = 0.745; Confidence Interval = 0.462–1.201; p = 0.227). While the two preventive therapies were not significantly different in terms of effectiveness, a significant improvement in treatment completion (Odds Ratio = 5.145, Confidence Interval = 2.955–8.957; p < 0.001) and discontinuation due to adverse events (Odds Ratio = 0.515; Confidence Interval = 0.363–0.731; p < 0.001) was observed with the rifapentine-isoniazid group.
conclusionThis study demonstrated no significant differences between short-term rifapentine-isoniazid and isoniazid-alone therapy in reducing active TB cases and deaths. However, an improvement in treatment completion and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was noted with the former. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.