Sputum lipoarabinomannan (LAM) as a biomarker to determine sputum mycobacterial load: exploratory and model-based analyses of integrated data from four cohorts

Aksana Jones, Jay Saini, Belinda Kriel, Laura E Via, Yin Cai, Devon Allies, Debra Hanna, David Hermann, Andre G Loxton, Gerhard Walzl, Andreas H Diacon, Klaus Romero, Ryo Higashiyama, Yongge Liu, Alexander Berg, Aksana Jones, Jay Saini, Belinda Kriel, Laura E Via, Yin Cai, Devon Allies, Debra Hanna, David Hermann, Andre G Loxton, Gerhard Walzl, Andreas H Diacon, Klaus Romero, Ryo Higashiyama, Yongge Liu, Alexander Berg

Abstract

Background: Despite the high global disease burden of tuberculosis (TB), the disease caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) infection, novel treatments remain an urgent medical need. Development efforts continue to be hampered by the reliance on culture-based methods, which often take weeks to obtain due to the slow growth rate of Mtb. The availability of a "real-time" measure of treatment efficacy could accelerate TB drug development. Sputum lipoarabinomannan (LAM; an Mtb cell wall glycolipid) has promise as a pharmacodynamic biomarker of mycobacterial sputum load.

Methods: The present analysis evaluates LAM as a surrogate for Mtb burden in the sputum samples from 4 cohorts of a total of 776 participants. These include those from 2 cohorts of 558 non-TB and TB participants prior to the initiation of treatment (558 sputum samples), 1 cohort of 178 TB patients under a 14-day bactericidal activity trial with various mono- or multi-TB drug therapies, and 1 cohort of 40 TB patients with data from the first 56-day treatment of a standard 4-drug regimen.

Results: Regression analysis demonstrated that LAM was a predictor of colony-forming unit (CFU)/mL values obtained from the 14-day treatment cohort, with well-estimated model parameters (relative standard error ≤ 22.2%). Moreover, no changes in the relationship between LAM and CFU/mL were observed across the different treatments, suggesting that sputum LAM can be used to reasonably estimate the CFU/mL in the presence of treatment. The integrated analysis showed that sputum LAM also appears to be as good a predictor of time to Mycobacteria Growth Incubator Tube (MGIT) positivity as CFU/mL. As a binary readout, sputum LAM positivity is a strong predictor of solid media or MGIT culture positivity with an area-under-the-curve value of 0.979 and 0.976, respectively, from receiver-operator curve analysis.

Conclusions: Our results indicate that sputum LAM performs as a pharmacodynamic biomarker for rapid measurement of Mtb burden in sputum, and thereby may enable more efficient early phase clinical trial designs (e.g., adaptive designs) to compare candidate anti-TB regimens and streamline dose selection for use in pivotal trials. Trial registration NexGen EBA study (NCT02371681).

Keywords: Biomarker; LAM; Lipoarabinomannan; Mycobacterium; Tuberculosis.

Conflict of interest statement

AB, AGL, AHD, AJ, BK, DA, DH, DHe, JS, KR, LEV, RH, YC, and YL have no competing interests.

GW holds the following 3 patents:

Method for diagnosing tuberculosis: AP/P/2016/009427 (ARIPO), 201580023042.X (China), 15755681.2 (Europe), 201617030869 (India), F/P/2016/258 (Nigeria), 2016/06324 (South Africa).

Serum host biomarkers for tuberculosis disease: PCT/IB2017/052142, due for national filing.

TB diagnostic markers: PCT/IB2013/054377 (USA), host markers in whole blood culture supernatants.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Correlation between log10 LAM and log10 CFU concentrations in sputum samples from the same visit. Note: Dashed red, green, and blue lines represent spline for Baseline and Days 7 and 13 Visits, respectively. Solid black line represents spline fit to all data. Pearson Correlation shown in figure represents overall correlation. CFU, colony-forming units; LAM, lipoarabinomannan; log10, 10 logarithm
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Distribution comparison of log10 CFU and LAM concentrations in sputum samples by study visit. Note: Boxes are 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles, whiskers extend from the hinge to 1.5* inter-quartile range (IQR). Solid black circles are data points outside this range. CFU, colony-forming units; LAM, lipoarabinomannan; log10, 10 logarithm
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Change from baseline correlation between log10 LAM concentrations and log10 CFU concentrations in sputum samples. Note: Red solid line depicts line of unity, blue solid line represents a smoothing spline fit to the observed data, gray shaded area depicts the 95% confidence interval of the spline fit. CFB, change from baseline; CFU, colony-forming units; LAM, lipoarabinomannan; log10, 10 logarithm
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Visual predictive check of the mixed-effects model of log10 LAM concentration and log10 CFU concentration. CFU, colony-forming units; CI, confidence interval; LAM, lipoarabinomannan; log10, 10 logarithm
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Correlation between paired log10 LAM concentration (A) and CFU concentration (B) versus log10 MGIT-TTD. CFU, colony-forming units; LAM, lipoarabinomannan; log10, 10 logarithm; MGIT, Mycobacterium Growth Indicator Tube; TTD, time to detection
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Kaplan–Meier plot of MGIT positivity versus MGIT-TTD, stratified by log10 LAM concentration quartiles. Note: [or] indicates respective endpoint is included in the interval and (or) indicates respective endpoint is not included in the interval. BLQ, below the lower limit of quantitation; LAM, lipoarabinomannan; log10, 10 logarithm; MGIT, Mycobacterium Growth Indicator Tube; TTD, time to detection
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Comparison of log10 LAM concentrations by solid media culture status across samples from all cohorts. Note: Dashed line indicates the LLOQ of 1.176 log10 pg/mL for sputum LAM concentrations. CFU, colony-forming units; LAM, lipoarabinomannan; LLOQ, lower limit of quantitation; log10, base 10 logarithm
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
ROCs of LAM and/or MGIT as predictors of CFU-based (A) or MGIT-based culture positivity (B). CFU, colony-forming units; LAM, lipoarabinomannan; MGIT, Mycobacterium Growth Indicator Tube; ROC, receiver operator curve

References

    1. World Health Organization. Global tuberculosis report. 2020.
    1. Bill & Melinda Gates Medical Research Institute. News Release: First-of-Its-Kind Global Collaboration Launched to Develop Transformative Treatment Regimens for Tuberculosis. 2020. .
    1. Lienhardt C, Nahid P. Advances in clinical trial design for development of new TB treatments: a call for innovation. PLoS Med. 2019;16:e1002769. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002769.
    1. Wallis RS, Maeurer M, Mwaba P, Chakaya J, Rustomjee R, Migliori GB, et al. Tuberculosis–advances in development of new drugs, treatment regimens, host-directed therapies, and biomarkers. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16:e34–46. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(16)00070-0.
    1. United States Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry: pulmonary tuberculosis: developing drugs for treatment. 2015.
    1. Committee for Human Medicinal Products. Addendum to the guideline on the evaluation of medicinal products indicated for treatment of bacterial infections. European Medicines Agency. EMA/CHMP/351889; 2013.
    1. Pallmann P, Bedding AW, Choodari-Oskooei B, Dimairo M, Flight L, Hampson LV, et al. Adaptive designs in clinical trials: why use them, and how to run and report them. BMC Med. 2018;16:29. doi: 10.1186/s12916-018-1017-7.
    1. Phillips PPJ, Mitnick CD, Neaton JD, Nahid P, Lienhardt C, Nunn AJ. Keeping phase III tuberculosis trials relevant: adapting to a rapidly changing landscape. PLoS Med. 2019;16:e1002767. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002767.
    1. Kawasaki M, Echiverri C, Raymond L, Cadena E, Reside E, Tarcela Gler M, et al. Lipoarabinomannan in sputum to detect bacterial load and treatment response in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis: analytic validation and evaluation in two cohorts. PLoS Med. 2019;16:e1002780. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002780.
    1. Xie YL, de Jager VR, Chen RY, Dodd LE, Paripati P, Via LE, et al. Fourteen-day PET/CT imaging to monitor drug combination activity in treated individuals with tuberculosis. Sci Transl Med. 2021;13:e7618. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abd7618.
    1. Kayigire XA, Friedrich SO, Venter A, Dawson R, Gillespie SH, Boeree MJ, et al. Direct comparison of Xpert MTB/RIF assay with liquid and solid mycobacterial culture for quantification of early bactericidal activity. J Clin Microbiol. 2013;51:1894–1898. doi: 10.1128/JCM.03290-12.
    1. Bakdash JZ, Marusich LR. Repeated measures correlation. Front Psychol. 2017;8:456. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00456.
    1. Diacon AH, Dawson R, Hanekom M, Narunsky K, Venter A, Hittel N, et al. Early bactericidal activity of delamanid (OPC-67683) in smear-positive pulmonary tuberculosis patients. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2011;15:949–954. doi: 10.5588/ijtld.10.0616.
    1. Berg A. Sputum LAM as a ‘real-time’ pharmacodynamic biomarker of pulmonary TB. In: Presented at: the INTERTB symposium. 2018; London, England.
    1. Bonate PL. Effect of assay measurement error on parameter estimation in concentration-QTc interval modeling. Pharm Stat. 2013;12:156–164. doi: 10.1002/pst.1567.
    1. Bergstrand M, Hooker AC, Wallin JE, Karlsson MO. Prediction-corrected visual predictive checks for diagnosing nonlinear mixed-effects models. AAPS J. 2011;13:143–151. doi: 10.1208/s12248-011-9255-z.
    1. Holford N. The visual predictive check: superiority to standard diagnostic (Rorschach) plots. Poster presented at: Populations Approach Group in Europe (PAGE) 16–17. Spain: Pamplona; 2005.
    1. NexGen EBA Radiologic and Immunologic Biomarkers of Sterilizing Drug Activity in Tuberculosis. 2017. . Accessed 2 Aug 2017.
    1. Bowness R, Boeree MJ, Aarnoutse R, Dawson R, Diacon A, Mangu C, et al. The relationship between Mycobacterium tuberculosis MGIT time to positivity and CFU in sputum samples demonstrates changing bacterial phenotypes potentially reflecting the impact of chemotherapy on critical sub-populations. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70:448–455. doi: 10.1093/jac/dku415.
    1. Barr DA, Kamdolozi M, Nishihara Y, Ndhlovu V, Khonga M, Davies GR, et al. Serial image analysis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis colony growth reveals a persistent subpopulation in sputum during treatment of pulmonary TB. Tuberculosis (Edinb) 2016;98:110–155. doi: 10.1016/j.tube.2016.03.001.
    1. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44:837–845. doi: 10.2307/2531595.
    1. R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Vienna, Austria: Foundation for Statistical Computing: 2017. .
    1. RStudio Team. RStudio: integrated development for R. RStudio, Inc., Boston (MA). 2016.
    1. Beal SL, Sheiner LB, Boeckmann AJ, Bauer RJ (eds). NONMEM 7.3.0 Users Guides. (1989–2013). ICON Development Solutions, Hanover, MD.
    1. KIWI [computer program]. Version 4 202010. Buffalo: Cognigen, a Simulations Plus Company; 2020.
    1. Therneau T. A Package for Survival Analysis in R. R package Version 3.2–11, ; 2021.
    1. Therneau TM, Grambsch PM. Modeling survival data: extending the cox model. Springer Science+Business Media, 2000.
    1. Robin X, Turck N, Hainard A, Tiberti N, Lisacek F, Sanchez J-C, et al. pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinform. 2011;12:77. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-12-77.
    1. Giavarina D. Understanding Bland Altman analysis. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2015;25(2):141–151. doi: 10.11613/BM.2015.015.
    1. Joloba ML, Johnson JL, Feng PJI, Bozeman L, Goldberg SV, Morgan K, et al. What is the most reliable solid culture medium for tuberculosis treatment trials? Tuberculosis. 2014;94:311–316. doi: 10.1016/j.tube.2014.03.002.
    1. FDA-NIH Biomarker Working Group. BEST (Biomarkers, EndpointS, and other Tools) Resource. Silver Spring (MD): Food and Drug Administration (US); Bethesda (MD): National Institutes of Health (US); 2016.
    1. Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc. and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Study Record Detail: A Phase 1/2 Trial of Multiple Oral Doses of OPC-167832 for Uncomplicated Pulmonary Tuberculosis. United States National Institutes of Health, United States National Library of Medicine. Identifier: NCT03678688. .

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera