Feasibility of an ingestible sensor-based system for monitoring adherence to tuberculosis therapy

Robert Belknap, Steve Weis, Andrew Brookens, Kit Yee Au-Yeung, Greg Moon, Lorenzo DiCarlo, Randall Reves, Robert Belknap, Steve Weis, Andrew Brookens, Kit Yee Au-Yeung, Greg Moon, Lorenzo DiCarlo, Randall Reves

Abstract

Poor adherence to tuberculosis (TB) treatment hinders the individual's recovery and threatens public health. Currently, directly observed therapy (DOT) is the standard of care; however, high sustaining costs limit its availability, creating a need for more practical adherence confirmation methods. Techniques such as video monitoring and devices to time-register the opening of pill bottles are unable to confirm actual medication ingestions. A novel approach developed by Proteus Digital Health, Inc. consists of an ingestible sensor and an on-body wearable sensor; together, they electronically confirm unique ingestions and record the date/time of the ingestion. A feasibility study using an early prototype was conducted in active TB patients to determine the system's accuracy and safety in confirming co-ingestion of TB medications with sensors. Thirty patients completed 10 DOT visits and 1,080 co-ingestion events; the system showed 95.0% (95% CI 93.5-96.2%) positive detection accuracy, defined as the number of detected sensors divided by the number of transmission capable sensors administered. The specificity was 99.7% [95% CI 99.2-99.9%] based on three false signals recorded by receivers. The system's identification accuracy, defined as the number of correctly identified ingestible sensors divided by the number of sensors detected, was 100%. Of 11 adverse events, four were deemed related or possibly related to the device; three mild skin rashes and one complaint of nausea. The system's positive detection accuracy was not affected by the subjects' Body Mass Index (p = 0.7309). Study results suggest the system is capable of correctly identifying ingestible sensors with high accuracy, poses a low risk to users, and may have high patient acceptance. The system has the potential to confirm medication specific treatment compliance on a dose-by-dose basis. When coupled with mobile technology, the system could allow wirelessly observed therapy (WOT) for monitoring TB treatment as a replacement for DOT.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: Proteus Digital Health which funded the study is also the employer of authors Kit Yee Au-Yeung PhD, Greg Moon M.D. and Lorenzo DiCarlo M.D. A novel RaisinTM is currently under development that electronically confirms medication ingestions using an ingestible event marker (Proteus Digital Health, Inc. Redwood City, CA). There are no further patents, products in development, or marketed products to declare. This does not alter the authors' adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Figures

Figure 1. Overview of the future, fully…
Figure 1. Overview of the future, fully developed system to support Wirelessly Observed Therapy (WOT).

References

    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2003) Treatment of Tuberculosis. MMWR: 52 (RR–11).
    1. Frieden T, Fujiwara P, Washko R, Hamburg M (1995) Tuberculosis in New York City – turning the tide. N Engl J Med 333: 229–33.
    1. Gandhi N, Nunn P, Dheda K, Schaaf H, Zignol M, et al. (2010) Multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis: a threat to global control of tuberculosis. Lancet 375: 1830–43.
    1. Chaulk C, Kazandjian V (1998) Directly observed therapy for treatment completion of pulmonary tuberculosis: Consensus Statement of the Public Health Tuberculosis Guidelines Panel. JAMA 279: 943–8.
    1. Raviglione M (2003) The TB epidemic from 1992 to 2002. Tuberculosis 83: 4–14.
    1. Frieden T, Sbarbaro J (2007) Promoting adherence to treatment for tuberculosis: the importance of direct observation. Bull World Health Organization 85: 407–9.
    1. Fallab-Stubi C, Zellweger J, Sauty A, Uldry C, Iorillo D, et al. (1998) Electronic monitoring of adherence to treatment in the preventive chemotherapy of tuberculosis. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2: 525–30.
    1. Broomhead S, Mars M (2012) Retrospective return on investment analysis of an electronic treatment adherence device piloted in the Northern Cape province. Telemed J e-Health 18: 24–31.
    1. Krueger K, Ruby D, Cooley P, Montoya B, Exarchos A, et al. (2010) Videophone utilization as an alternative to directly observed therapy for tuberculosis. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 14: 779–81.
    1. Au-Yeung K, Moon G, Robertson T, DiCarlo L, Epstein M, et al. (2011) Early clinical experience with networked system for promoting patient self-management. Am J Managed Care 17: e277–87.
    1. Dixon W, Stradling P, Wooton I (1957) Outpatient P.A.S. therapy. Lancet 273: 871–2.
    1. Moulding T, Onstad G, Sbarbaro J (1970) Supervision of outpatient drug therapy with the medication monitor. Ann Intern Med 73: 559–64.
    1. Juan G, Lloret T, Perez C, Lopez P, Navarro R, Ramon M, et al. (2006) Directly observed treatment for tuberculosis in pharmacies compared with self-administered therapy in Spain. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 10: 215–21.
    1. Haynes R, McKibbon K, Kanani R (1996) Systematic review of randomized trials of interventions to assist patients to follow prescriptions for medications. Lancet 348: 383–6.
    1. Jasmer R, Seaman C, Gonzalez L, Kawamura L, Osmond D, et al. (2004) Tuberculosis treatment outcomes: directly observed therapy compared with self-administered therapy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 170: 561–6.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2011) Reported Tuberculosis in the United States, 2010. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
    1. Au-Yeung K, DiCarlo L (2012) Cost Comparison of wirelessly vs. directly observed therapy for adherence confirmation in anti-tuberculosis treatment. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 16: 1498–1504.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonner