Retrospective assessment of adverse drug reactions linked to first-line antituberculosis drugs at a tertiary healthcare facility in Northern India

Abhinandan Kumar; Ritu Yadav; Rakesh Chandra Chaurasia

doi:10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20252572

Authors

Abhinandan Kumar Department of Pharmacology, Moti Lal Nehru Medical College, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, India
Ritu Yadav Department of Pharmacology, Moti Lal Nehru Medical College, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, India
Rakesh Chandra Chaurasia Department of Pharmacology, Moti Lal Nehru Medical College, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20252572

Keywords:

Adverse drug reactions, Anti-tubercular therapy, Hepatotoxicity, India, Pharmacovigilance, Tuberculosis

Abstract

Background: Tuberculosis (TB) continues to pose a major health challenge in India, where the burden remains among the highest globally. First-line anti-tubercular therapy (ATT), though effective, often leads to adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that may interfere with patient adherence and overall treatment success. This study aimed to assess the pattern and severity of ADRs associated with ATT in a real-world clinical setting.

Methods: This retrospective review analyzed 102 reports of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) submitted to the Pharmacovigilance Programme of India (PvPI). Data were obtained from the ADR Monitoring Centre at Motilal Nehru Medical College, Prayagraj. Although the data were collected between 2015 and 2018, the analysis was performed in 2025 to derive retrospective insights into ADR trends. Given the consistency of the standard ATT regimen over the years, the findings remain clinically relevant. The study evaluated types of ADRs, severity using the modified Hartwig and Siegel scale, and causality using WHO-UMC criteria. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 25.

Results: Drug-induced hepatitis was the most frequently observed ADR (58.8%), followed by gastrointestinal symptoms (22.5%) and skin-related reactions (8.8%). Most ADRs occurred in male patients (63.7%) and during the intensive phase of ATT (73.5%). A significant correlation was noted between the type of ADR and the treatment phase (chi-square =56.29; p<0.001).

Conclusions: ADRs with first-line ATT are not uncommon, with liver toxicity being especially prevalent during the initial months of treatment. Strengthening ADR monitoring and early intervention can help improve treatment adherence and patient safety.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

World Health Organization. Global tuberculosis report 2023. Geneva: WHO; 2023.

Dheda K, Barry CE, Maartens G. Tuberculosis. Lancet. 2016;387(10024):1211-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00151-8

Central TB Division. India TB Report 2023. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India; 2023.

Arinaminpathy N, Batra D, Khaparde S, Vualnam T, Maheshwari N, Sharma L, et al. The number of privately treated tuberculosis cases in India: an estimation from drug sales data. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16(11):1255-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30259-6

Nahid P, Dorman SE, Alipanah N, Barry PM, Brozek JL, Cattamanchi A, et al. Official American Thoracic Society/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guidelines: Treatment of Drug-Susceptible Tuberculosis. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;63(7):e147-95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciw376

Saukkonen JJ, Cohn DL, Jasmer RM, Schenker S, Jereb JA, Nolan CM, et al. An official ATS statement: hepatotoxicity of antituberculosis therapy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;174(8):935-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200510-1666ST

Sharma SK, Balamurugan A, Saha PK, Pandey RM, Mehra NK. Evaluation of clinical and immunogenetic risk factors for the development of hepatotoxicity during antituberculosis treatment. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;166(7):916-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.2108091

Sharma SK, Mohan A. Extrapulmonary tuberculosis. Indian J Med Res. 2004;120(4):316-53.

Tostmann A, Boeree MJ, Aarnoutse RE, de Lange WC, van der Ven AJ, Dekhuijzen R. Antituberculosis drug-induced hepatotoxicity: concise up-to-date review. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;23(2):192-202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1746.2007.05207.x

Gholami K, Kamali E, Hajiabdolbaghi M, Shalviri G. Adverse drug reactions induced by anti-tuberculosis drugs in hospitalized patients. Pharm Pract. 2006;4(3):134-8.

Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission. Pharmacovigilance Programme of India (PvPI): Guidance Document. Ghaziabad: IPC; 2020.

Kalaiselvan V, Thota P, Singh GN. Pharmacovigilance Programme of India: Recent developments and future perspectives. Indian J Pharmacol. 2016;48(6):624-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7613.194855

Edwards IR, Aronson JK. Adverse drug reactions: definitions, diagnosis, and management. Lancet. 2000;356(9237):1255-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02799-9

Mishra A, Pandey S, Arora V, Singh S. Pattern of adverse drug reactions reported at the ADR monitoring center in a teaching hospital in North India. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2021;10(8):923-8.

Schaberg T, Rebhan K, Lode H. Risk factors for side-effects of isoniazid, rifampin and pyrazinamide in patients hospitalized for pulmonary tuberculosis. Eur Respir J. 1996;9(10):2026-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.96.09102026

Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission. Suspected Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Form- Version 1.3. Ghaziabad: IPC; 2020.

Suke SG, Kosta P, Negi H. Role of pharmacovigilance in India: An overview. Online J Public Health Inform. 2015;7(2):e223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5210/ojphi.v7i2.5595

Uppsala Monitoring Centre. The use of the WHO-UMC system for standardized case causality assessment. WHO; 2005.

Hartwig SC, Siegel J, Schneider PJ. Preventability and severity assessment in reporting adverse drug reactions. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1992;49(9):2229-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/49.9.2229

IBM Corp. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp; 2017.

Sharma A, Kalaiselvan V, Singhal P, Gupta SK. Pharmacovigilance in India: current status and future perspectives. Indian J Pharm Sci. 2020;82(1):8-15.

Dey A, Singh K, Ghosh A, Barui A. Adverse drug reaction profile of antitubercular drugs in a tertiary care hospital of West Bengal, India. Int J Pharm Sci Res. 2020;11(5):2352-8.

Sharma SK, Singla R, Sarda P, Mohan A, Makharia G. Safety of three reintroduction regimens of ATT after hepatotoxicity. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;50(6):833-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/650576

Taneja T, Saxena S, Arora P. Hepatotoxicity due to anti-tuberculosis treatment: Mechanisms and outcomes. J Assoc Phys India. 2019;67(11):14-7.

Choudhury A, Bhatia A, Varma PP. Management of hepatotoxicity due to ATT: A review. Indian J Tuberc. 2018;65(1):9-13.

Adhikari M, Arora A, Khan A. Gastrointestinal adverse effects of ATT in a tertiary hospital. Int J Res Med Sci. 2021;9(3):834-8.

Kaur D, Sharma V, Verma S. Cutaneous adverse drug reactions in tuberculosis: a prospective study. Indian Dermatol Online J. 2018;9(2):75-80.

Sinha K, Vashisht R, Rathi A. Arthralgia during tuberculosis therapy: Frequency and predictors. J Clin Tuberc Other Mycobact Dis. 2020;19:100151.

Garg P. Ethambutol-induced optic neuropathy: Early detection and prevention. Oman J Ophthalmol. 2014;7(2):63-7.

Pakhale SS, Lokhande PD, Sontakke SD, et al. Study of adverse drug reactions in tuberculosis patients receiving DOTS therapy. Int J Pharmacol Res. 2011;1(3):151–154.

Bhuvana KB, Sarala N, Shivakumar P. Adverse drug reaction monitoring in a tertiary care hospital. J Clin Diagn Res. 2011;5(5):1134-7.

Aggarwal D, Rawat D, Kumar R. Limitations in spontaneous reporting of anti-TB drug ADRs. Int J Clin Trials. 2020;7(4):209-14.