Clinical trial NCT02153528
Conditions: Tuberculosis, Pulmonary
Keywords: Bangladesh Rimfapicin
Sponsor: Damien Foundation
Start date: 2014-11-01; Completion date: 2017-08-01
Enrollment: 701 participants; Allocation: RANDOMIZED; Intervention model: PARALLEL

Brief summary:
\- Hypothesis: Double dose rifampicin together with earlier monitoring of sputum conversion using vital staining reduces unfavorable outcome of Cat. 1 first-line TB treatment without excess serious toxicity, and allows early switch to specific treatment of MDR-TB without using Cat. 2 retreatment regimen

\- General study design: This open label, randomised clinical trial is intended as a pilot study on the efficacy and safety of high-dose rifampicin and feasibility and added value of auramine and/or FDA vital staining sputum smear after 2 weeks of intensive treatment phase. If this proof-of-concept study provides substantial indication of benefit without indication of excess toxicity, the data from the study will be used to design a larger scale, cluster-randomized study. The aim of this cluster randomised study would be to provide definite proof of the benefit of the intervention on adverse treatment outcomes and lack of excess toxicity associated with high dose rifampicin. In addition, the cluster-randomized study would provide a more precise assessment of the suppression and prevention of (acquired) resistance endpoints.

An interim analysis is thus planned at the time the last recruited patient finishes treatment, i.e. about 9 months after the end of recruitment. It will focus on assessment of drug toxicity versus suggested benefits of the intervention. This analysis will be primarily performed for the go/no-go decision and design considerations for the cluster-randomized trial. The decision on proceeding to the cluster randomized study will be based on the absence of excess toxicity, a trend toward a reduction of unfavourable outcomes (excluding relapse), and possible favourable effects on initially present low-resistance mutations / mutations acquired during treatment. It will also allow to adapt the design of the larger study particularly regarding the algorithm for resistance screening, and whether or not treatment shortening could be justified with rapid initial conversion.

Detailed description:

Arms: arm 1: Standard regimen for TB treatment according to guidelines of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease arm 2: 2HREZ/4HR Cat. 1, modified by using double dose rifampicin throughout
Interventions: intervention 1: double rimfampicin intervention 2: Standard TB treatment
Intervention descriptions: intervention 1: Compared to standard regimen dosing of rifampicin is doubled, while standard dose isoniazid, pyrazinamide and ethambutol are maintained intervention 2: Standard regimen for TB treatment according to guidelines of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease

Protocol documents:
Prot_000.pdf: 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             1/54 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Acronym: OneRIF / Clinicaltrials.Gov. NCT02153528 
 
Optimization of the TB treatment regimen cascade 
 
Clinical Trial Protocol  
Version 3.1, 15 APR 2015 
 
 
 
 
            
     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Sponsor: 
Damien Foundation 
Leopold II-laan 263B-1081 Brussels – Belgium 
 
Coordinating Investigator: 
Dr. A. Van Deun 
Mycobacteriology Unit,  
Biomedical Sciences Department, 
Institute of Tropical Medicine 
  
 
 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             2/54 
 
Study Acronym: 
OneRIF 
ClinicalTrials.Gov.: 
NCT02153528 
Title: 
Optimization of the TB treatment regimen cascade 
Version: 
3.1 
Date: 
15 Apr 2015 
Previous version: 
3.0 
Partnering institutions: 
Damien Foundation Bangladesh, Dr. Aung Kya Jai Maug, 
aung@damienfoundation-bd.com 
 
National TB Programme Bangladesh 
 
Institute of Tropical Medicine 
Department of Biomedical Sciences, Mycobacteriology Unit 
Nationalestraat 155, 2000 Antwerpen, Belgium 
Study sites:  
Eight selected clinics part of the Damien Foundation Bangladesh TB 
project in Greater Mymensingh district: Sarishabari, Madhupur, 
Bhaluka, Fulbaria, Iswarganj, Netrakona, Purbodhola, Kendua 
Study drugs: 
Standard regimen for TB treatment according to guidelines of the 
International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (control 
arm). The intervention arm will receive a double dose of rifampicin   
Funder/DF Coordinating 
Investigator: 
Damien Foundation Belgium, Dr. Etienne Declercq, 
etienne.declercq@damien-foundation.be; back-up : Dr. Tine 
Demeulenaere, tine.demeulenaere@damien-foundation.be  
Sponsor: 
Damien Foundation Belgium, Mr. Koen Van den Abeele, 
Koen.VanDenAbeele@damiaanactie.be  
ITM 
Coordinating 
Investigator: 
 
Dr. Armand Van Deun / back-up: Dr. Bouke de Jong 
Department of Biomedical Sciences 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nationalestraat 155, 2000 Antwerp, 
Belgium 
Telephone: 
+32 3 247 65 48 / +32 3 247 65 90 
Fax: 
+32 3 247 63 33   
Email: 
avandeun@theunion.org / bdejong@itg.be 
 
 
 
 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             3/54 
 
Collaborating partners: 
This research proposal will be carried out as a collaboration among the Damien Foundation (DF), the 
Institute of Tropical Medicine (ITM) and the National TB Control Program in Bangladesh. The 
respective roles and responsibilities of the Sponsor and the partners, in particular ITM to which some 
of the sponsor responsibilities are delegated, will be defined in an ad hoc Memoranda of 
Understanding.  
The Damien Foundation (http://www.damiaanactie.info/damienfoundation/) Brussels Head Office 
houses the Medical Advisor and Desk Officer for the Bangladesh project. They are involved in the 
concept stages of the study, its conduct and supervision. They will provide further support 
throughout the study, mainly by assuring the running budget to the local project where the study will 
be carried out, besides executing orders of supplies procured outside Bangladesh, both indispensable 
for the routine services on which the study will be grafted. The laboratory cost at ITM for this study 
has been accepted for funding by Damien Foundation.  
General Director: Mr. Koen Van den Abeele, tel. +32 2 4225911, 
Koen.VanDenAbeele@damiaanactie.be ; 
Medical Advisor and DF Coordinating Investigator: Dr. Etienne Declercq, tel. +32 2 4225914, 
etienne.declercq@damien-foundation.be; back-up Dr. Tine Demeulenaere, tel +32 (0)2 422 59 11, 
Tine.Demeulenaere@damien-foundation.be  
Desk Officer: Ms. Celine Van den Bergh, tel. +32 2 4225926, celine.vandenbergh@damien-
foundation.be;  
Leopold II-laan 263, 1081 Brussel 
 
The Damien Foundation Bangladesh will implement the study in its working area in Greater 
Mymensingh District, where it is responsible for TB control on behalf of the National TB control 
Programme. It will also cover all local costs for the study. Besides some 165 outpatient clinics, it runs 
also 3 dedicated hospitals with 3 reference laboratories within the study area.   
Principal Investigator: Dr. Aung Kya Jai Maug, tel. +8801714275898, aung@damienfoundation-
bd.com 
Country Director: Mr. Bart Rombaut, bart@damienfoundation-bd.com 
Laboratory Coordinator: Mr. Md. Anwar Hossain, tel. +8801714160118, dfakram@yahoo.com  
 
The NTP (National TB control Programme) of Bangladesh is responsible for all TB control activities in 
the country. It is involved in the conduct and supervision of the study.   
The Line Director in charge of the study will be the local study coordinator: Dr. Ashaque Hussain, tel 
+8801912728871; Email: directormbdc@gmail.com 
 
At ITM Antwerp, Dr Armand Van Deun will be the study coordinating Investigator. The Clinical Trials 
Unit (Céline Schurmans, Yves Claeys, Jozefien Buyze and Raffaella Ravinetto) will ensure the project 
and GCP management of the study, as well as the clinical data management and statistical aspects. 
Clinical support will be given to the study coordinating investigator by the Department of Clinical 
Sciences (Dr. Anja de Weggheleire). The laboratory quality assurance and support with advanced 
testing will be assured by the mycobacteriology staff (Prof Dr. Bouke de Jong, Head, 
Mycobacteriology Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences, +3232476590) who will also be Dr. Van 
Deun’s back-up as study coordinating investigator.  
 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             4/54 
 
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE & CONFIDENTIALITY 
 
By signing this protocol, the Investigator(s) acknowledge(s) and agree(s): 
 
This protocol contains the necessary information for conducting this clinical study. The Principal 
Investigator will conduct this study as detailed herein and will make every reasonable effort to complete 
the study within the time designated. The Principal Investigator commits to carry out the study in 
compliance with the protocol, amendments, applicable procedures and other study-related documents 
provided by the Sponsor, and in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki, Good Clinical [Laboratory] 
Practice (GC[L]P) and applicable regulatory requirements.  
The protocol and all relevant study information, which is provided by the Sponsor, will be made available 
to the physicians, nurses and other personnel who participate in conducting this study. The Investigator 
will use this material for their training so that they are fully informed regarding the drugs and the 
conduct of the study. 
This document contains information that is privileged and confidential. As such, it may not be disclosed 
to any other persons than involved research staff and the concerned Ethics Committees, unless specific 
permission is granted in writing by the Damien Foundation, Belgium, or such disclosure is required by 
federal, national or other laws or regulations. In any event, persons to whom the information is disclosed 
must be informed that the information is confidential and may not be further disclosed by them. These 
restrictions on disclosure will apply equally to all future study-related information supplied which is 
regarded as privileged or confidential. 
The Sponsor of this study – the Damien Foundation Belgium– will at any time have access to the 
source documents from which Case Report Form information may have been generated and will be 
permitted to perform trial-related monitoring and audits. All study material will be maintained according 
to regulatory requirements and until the Sponsor advises that retention is no longer necessary. 
 
 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             5/54 
 
ITM COORDINATING INVESTIGATOR: 
 
 
Title, Name: Dr. Bouke de Jong 
Date: 
 
    Signed: 
 
DF COORDINATING INVESTIGATOR: 
 
 
Title, Name: Dr. Tine Demeulenaere 
Date:   _________ 
 
  
Signed: 
 
GENERAL DIRECTOR OF THE DAMIEN FOUNDATION BELGIUM: 
 
 
Title, Name: Mr. Koen Van den Abeele 
Date: 
 
 
Signed: 
 
 
 
 
 
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: 
 
 
Title, Name: Dr. Aung Kya Jai Maug, Medical Specialist Research, 
Training and MDR-TB 
Date: 
 
 
Signed: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Signing this document, I commit to carry out the trial in accordance with the protocol, Good Clinical 
Practice and applicable ethical and regulatory requirements. I also acknowledge the paragraph 
relevant to study confidentiality and authorize the Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium 
to record my data on a computerized system containing all the data pertinent to the study. 
 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             6/54 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
COLLABORATING PARTNERS: ........................................................................................................ 3 
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................... 6 
SYNOPSIS ..................................................................................................................................... 8 
1.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 10 
INTERVENTION AND CONTROL TREATMENT REGIMENS (RH: DOUBLE DOSE RIFAMPICIN) .................................. 11 
1.2 RATIONALE ..................................................................................................................................... 12 
2. STUDY DESIGN ........................................................................................................................ 14 
2.1 GENERAL STUDY DESIGN ................................................................................................................... 14 
3. STUDY OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................. 16 
3.1 PRIMARY ENDPOINTS ....................................................................................................................... 16 
3.2 SECONDARY ENDPOINTS ................................................................................................................... 17 
4. SUBJECTS, POPULATION & SELECTION ..................................................................................... 17 
4.1 SETTINGS, SELECTION & RECRUITMENT ............................................................................................... 17 
4.2 INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA ................................................................................................. 18 
4.3 SAMPLE SIZE ................................................................................................................................... 18 
4.4 RANDOMIZATION ............................................................................................................................ 18 
4.5 WITHDRAWAL AND TERMINATION OF THE STUDY ................................................................................. 18 
5. STUDY PROCEDURES ............................................................................................................... 20 
5.1 STUDY/VISIT SCHEDULE .................................................................................................................... 20 
5.2 OBTAINING INFORMED CONSENT ....................................................................................................... 21 
5.3 SPECIFIC PROCEDURES AND ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................... 22 
5.4 LABORATORY PROCEDURES ............................................................................................................... 24 
6. STUDY INVESTIGATIONAL PRODUCT ........................................................................................ 26 
6.1 PURCHASING, PREPARATION AND ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................. 26 
6.2 SUBJECT COMPLIANCE MONITORING .................................................................................................. 27 
6.3 PRIOR AND CONCOMITANT THERAPY .................................................................................................. 27 
6.4 PACKAGING .................................................................................................................................... 27 
6.5 RECEPTION, STORAGE, DISPENSING AND RETURN ................................................................................. 27 
7. SAFETY ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................. 27 
7.1 ADVERSE EVENTS............................................................................................................................. 27 
7.2 DATA AND SAFETY MONITORING BOARD ........................................................................................... 31 
8. STATISTICAL METHODS ........................................................................................................... 31 
8.1 STUDY HYPOTHESES ......................................................................................................................... 32 
8.2 VARIABLES OF INTEREST ................................................................................................................... 32 
8.3 STATISTICAL METHODS ..................................................................................................................... 32 
8.4 SAMPLE SIZE AND POWER ................................................................................................................. 33 
9. MONITORING AND QUALITY ASSURANCE ................................................................................ 34 
10. DATA MANAGEMENT............................................................................................................ 35 
11. ETHICAL ISSUES ..................................................................................................................... 35 
11.1 ETHICAL AND REGULATORY REVIEW.................................................................................................. 35 
11.2 PROTOCOL AMENDMENTS .............................................................................................................. 35 
11.3 INFORMED CONSENT ...................................................................................................................... 36 
11.4 CONFIDENTIALITY .......................................................................................................................... 36 
11.5 RISKS AND BENEFITS ...................................................................................................................... 36 
11.6 ASSURANCE OF CLINICAL CARE ......................................................................................................... 36 
11.7 STUDY INSURANCE ........................................................................................................................ 37 
12 DISSEMINATION OF RESULTS, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ......................................................... 37 
13. ARCHIVING ........................................................................................................................... 37 
14. REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 38 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             7/54 
 
15. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................... 40 
16. ANNEXES .............................................................................................................................. 42 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             8/54 
 
SYNOPSIS 
 
HYPOTHESIS 
 
Double dose rifampicin together with earlier monitoring of 
sputum conversion using vital staining reduces unfavorable 
outcome of Cat. 1 first-line TB treatment without excess serious 
toxicity, and allows early switch to specific treatment of MDR-
TB without using Cat. 2 retreatment regimen 
DESIGN 
Open-label randomized clinical trial 
STUDY SITE & POPULATION 
 
Damien Foundation Bangladesh TB project in Greater 
Mymensingh district (8 selected clinics) 
DURATION 
2.5-3 years 
OBJECTIVES AND ENDPOINTS 
 
Primary objective:  
To compare a high-dose rifampicin standard TB regimen of 6 
months duration with standard TB regimen in respect to adverse 
treatment outcome (relapse, failure, death and default) and 
toxicity, in smear-positive pulmonary TB cases 
Secondary objectives:  
1. To assess whether the study regimen also cures low-level 
rifampicin resistant TB 
2. To assess the effectiveness of FDA vital staining screening at 
two weeks of treatment for early switch of non-responding 
rifampicin resistant TB to MDR-TB treatment, compared to a 
clinical evaluation based on fever resolution 
3. To assess the negative predictive value of conversion at 2 
weeks for relapse 
4. To estimate the proportion of acquired rifampicin resistance 
among failures and relapses 
5. To compare the predictive value of auramine with FDA staining 
at 2 weeks to predict unfavourable outcomes 
 
The primary efficacy endpoint is the incidence of adverse treatment 
outcomes.  
The primary safety endpoint will be the occurrence of Serious 
Adverse Events and 
Grade 3-4 liver toxicity 
INCLUSION & EXCLUSION 
CRITERIA 
 
Inclusion criteria: 
- 
smear-positive pulmonary TB  
- 
15 years or older 
- 
able and willing to provide written informed consent 
Exclusion criteria: 
- 
MDR-TB diagnosed with resistance on rapid DST for 
rifampicin prior to start of treatment 
- 
extra-pulmonary TB, smear-negative pulmonary TB 
- 
patients in need of hospitalization because of very bad 
general condition or complications at screening 
- 
patients with clinically active liver disease at screening 
- 
known HIV-positives 
- 
known hepatitis B or C infected patients 
- 
pregnant women 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             9/54 
 
SCREENING, RECRUITMENT & 
RANDOMIZATION 
 
Screening by sputum smear microscopy for acid-fast bacilli and 
chest X-ray if required; referral for rapid rifampicin DST as per 
TB programme guidelines. 
1000 eligible pulmonary TB cases consenting to participate will 
be block randomized to the intervention or control arm, 
separately for new and retreatment cases. 
TREATMENT 
 
Intervention: 2HREZ/4HR Cat. 1, modified by using double dose 
rifampicin throughout. This will apply to new as well as 
retreatment cases  
Controls: the standard program treatment. This consists for new 
cases of 6 months of rifampicin and isoniazid, complemented by 
ethambutol and pyrazinamide during the first 2 months (Cat. 1, 
2HREZ/4HR); for retreatment cases, streptomycin is added 
during the first two months, pyrazinamide is added during the 
first three, and ethambutol throughout, prolonging to a total of 
8 months (Cat. 2, 2SHREZ/1HREZ/5HRE) 
FOLLOW-UP 
 
Sputum smears for acid-fast bacilli at 2-3, 5 and 6 months (3-4, 
5 and 8 for Cat. 2). Referral of positives for rapid rifampicin DST 
from 2nd or 3rd month onwards.  
Additional routine plus vital staining smears after 1 and 2 weeks 
for the intervention only, with referral for rapid DST if the 
number of bacilli has not declined by at least one log by 2 
weeks; referral for rapid DST in the control arm based on fever 
still present at 2 weeks. Prompt switch to specific MDR regimen 
if resistance is detected. 
ANALYTICAL METHODS 
 
Analyses are planned at the end of the primary treatment 
period (interim analysis) and after  1 year post-treatment 
follow-up (final analysis). 
Primary Analysis: Counts and proportions (and 95% confidence 
intervals) of patients with any adverse treatment outcome, and 
by adverse treatment outcome category, will be presented. 
Odds ratio's (ORs) and 95% CIs will be estimated from a logistic 
regression model with effects for arm (intervention vs control), 
clinic, and stratum (new/re-treatment case). Similar analyses 
will be performed for the primary safety endpoint. 
SAFETY 
 
Clinical monitoring at each follow-up visit, with referral to 
Medical Officers or project hospitals as per standard guidelines. 
Additionally, both arms will be screened for liver toxicity 
biochemically at 0, 2, 4 and 8 weeks of treatment. Treatments 
will be interrupted if transaminase increase to >5 ULN, with 
referral for hospitalization. 
 
 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             10/54 
 
1.  INTRODUCTION 
1.1 Background 
Bangladesh is a country located in South East Asia, of about 144,000 km². With a population 
estimated at 155 million, it is one of the most densely populated countries in the world. It is among 
the high-burden countries for tuberculosis (TB) as well as multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB), mainly 
because of the large population. Total TB incidence was estimated at 225/100,000 population in 
2011, MDR-TB at 1.4% among new and 29% among retreatment cases.1 TB mortality is 45/100,000. 
There is virtually no HIV (0.4/100,000 general population). TB case detection is lagging behind at 45% 
(all types), and even more for MDR-TB. Of estimated 4000 annual cases only 500 were detected in 
2011. This is partly explained by still recent organization of MDR-TB services, but also because of 
under-detection of suspects, i.e. retreatment cases of whom only 7366 were reported among about 
100,000 smear-positives in 2011. In the Damien Foundation (DF) area proposed for this study, the TB 
and MDR-TB situation and detection look more favorable, possibly because of their more remote, 
rural character. Detection of TB reaches 60-70%, and MDR-TB was at 0.7%, 0.4%, 0.5% and 2% 
among new cases as determined by systematic random surveys in 1995, 2001, 2005 and 2010 (the 
two last ones using molecular methods, which may explain part of the increase). 
TB detection in Bangladesh relies mainly on a very well developed and in principle easily accessible 
network of sputum smear-microscopy laboratories for detection of acid-fast bacilli (AFB, =TB). 
Culture for detection of the disease is not available and also no longer recommended by the World 
Health Organization (WHO). Chest radiography is widely available and used for the smear-negative 
pulmonary and some extra-pulmonary cases. Culture followed by slow drug susceptibility testing 
(DST) is available for drug resistance surveillance and MDR-TB diagnosis in the Dhaka National TB 
Reference Laboratory besides a few regional laboratories. The reference laboratories in the study 
area use also rapid DST on slides to facilitate MDR-TB diagnosis since 2008, followed by slow 
confirmatory DST. Since 2011 the NTP and partners have started using also automated genetic 
amplification tests, in principle only for MDR-TB diagnosis. This network of Xpert MTB/RIF is being 
expanded gradually, and the increased detection of MDR-TB has become visible recently. 
    
Effective TB control is through detection and treatment of active cases. Treatment requires a 
combination of drugs and long duration (regimens of at least 6 months). The main first-line drugs are 
rifampicin and isoniazid, and resistance to both defines MDR-TB which proves impossible to cure 
with these and other first-line drugs (pyrazinamide, ethambutol, streptomycin). MDR-TB treatment is 
far more difficult and needs second-line drugs. Among the greater variety of these drugs only a few 
are sufficiently active, i.e the later generation fluoroquinolones (mainly gati- and moxifloxacin) and 
the 2nd-line injectables (2LI). If MDR-TB develops resistance to these two groups as well, an ultra-
resistant form develops called XDR-TB; with only one of both groups resistant this is called pre-XDR-
TB. MDR-TB treatments are difficult, toxic, expensive and yield highly unsatisfactory results in almost 
all NTPs. In the DF area, a short and highly effective MDR-TB treatment was developed and has been 
used with very good results for already 10 years (see further).  
The International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (Union) and the WHO recommend a 
cascade of TB treatment regimens each aiming at very high but not 100% effectiveness, while 
allowing a small percentage of failure and relapse cases to start the next regimen in the cascade. The 
switch to the next higher [sequentially used and “higher” in complexity] regimen is meant to be 
made as early as possible. In practice this switch is often made too late, since it depends on careful 
microscopy to identify suspects in need of rapid drug susceptibility testing, and their efficient 
referral. Particularly patients with MDR-TB may die, default or acquire resistance to more drugs 
before being recognized as having MDR-TB and put on an appropriate treatment regimen. For some 
patients with extensive disease and patients with HIV infection, 6 months of the standard primo-
treatment (Cat. 1) is too short, leading more frequently to relapse. The current standard first-line 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             11/54 
 
drug retreatment regimen (Cat. 2) is more toxic but not more effective for MDR-TB than the current 
Cat. 1, and it has only a marginal advantage for other types of drug-resistant TB at the risk of 
amplification of resistance. 
Most ongoing studies on novel TB regimens focus on the new TB drugs, designing regimens for MDR-
TB and even primo-treatment composed mostly or entirely of new drugs. Additional studies focus on 
moxifloxacin, the core drug to treat MDR-TB, replacing isoniazid or ethambutol in Cat. 1 with the aim 
to shorten treatment or to prevent relapse and failure due to drug resistance to the current core 
drugs isoniazid and rifampicin. We favor further optimization of the conventional regimens without 
new drugs, since we still know very little about the potency of the individual new drugs and their 
adverse events, and even less about the most effective combinations. Defining effective regimens 
based on several new drugs will be very costly and cannot be expected to be completed within the 
coming 10 years.  Moreover, since complete coverage by rapid and accurate screening for rifampicin 
resistance is presently not feasible, large-scale use of moxifloxacin for primo-treatment will 
unavoidably accelerate the emergence of pre-XDR.  As a result we are left with a one-chance-only 
treatment. Harnessing and optimizing the activity of the well-known most potent TB drugs would 
therefore appear to be a better and safer approach for the near future.  
We expect that the standard pulmonary TB treatment regimens recommended by the Union2 can be 
optimized by using daily high dose rifampicin during Cat. 1 primo-treatment. For the here proposed 
pilot study, dosing of rifampicin would be doubled, while standard dose isoniazid, pyrazinamide and 
ethambutol would be maintained. Management decisions would be made after 2 weeks of intensive 
phase, based on remaining numbers and decline of TB bacilli on microscopy for AFB [auramine and 
fluorescein diacetate (FDA) vital staining]. Those with min. 1 log decline in the number of AFB by FDA 
smear, or already negative, would continue the unaltered regimen. Those not meeting these criteria 
would be referred for rapid DST by slide DST and/or Xpert MTB/RIF, depending on ease of referral. In 
case no rifampicin resistance is detected they would continue the optimized Cat. 1 treatment, with 
further monitoring by smear and rapid DST as per National TB Programme (NTP) indications, i.e.  
rapid DST in case a smear is positive at 3, 5 or 6 months; those diagnosed with rifampicin resistance 
at any time and by any technique would be switched immediately to the standard short 
“Bangladesh” MDR-TB treatment regimen. In the control arm, referral for rapid DST would be based 
on non-remittance of fever at the end of the second week, otherwise treatment management 
remains the same. Failures, relapses and other recurrences of the first-line regimen would all 
undergo rapid DST, and if not found to be rifampicin resistant they would be re-started on the same 
6-month Cat. 1. The current Cat. 2 first-line retreatment regimen would no longer be used in the 
intervention arm. 
 
Intervention and control treatment regimens (Rh: double dose rifampicin) 
 
 
 
 
New cases 
- intervention:  
 
2 HRhZE / 4 HRh 
- control: 
 
2 HRZE / 4 HR (Cat. 1 regimen) 
Retreatment cases 
- intervention:  
 
2 HRhZE / 4 HRh 
- control: 
 
2 SHRZE / 1HRZE / 5 HRE (Cat. 2 regimen) 
MDR patients detected at any time 
 
 
 
4 KHPtoGCEZ / 5 GCEZ (MDR regimen) 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             12/54 
 
The expected benefits from this optimized treatment regimen cascade are: 
1. Reduced occurrence of relapse with susceptible bacilli in patients with extensive disease, due 
to better sterilizing activity while maintaining the same treatment duration.  Total absence of 
relapse with AFB smear at 2 weeks negative or scanty would suggest that shortening of the 
regimen to 4 months could be tried for fast converters. 
2. Prevention of development of MDR- TB and cure of low-level rifampicin-resistant TB (MDR or 
monoresistant) with this more bactericidal Cat. 1. 
3. Very early start of the MDR regimen for high-level rifampicin-resistant disease (MDR or 
monoresistant), reducing the risk of death and default and preventing accumulation of 
further or higher-level drug resistance to H, Z or E.  This approach better preserves the 
efficacy of the latter drugs which are all used in the MDR regimen. 
4. Reduction of toxicity from injectable drugs and ethambutol during the MDR regimen, by 
abolishing the Cat. 2 regimen (no streptomycin used prior to kanamycin in the MDR regimen, 
thus avoiding cumulative vestibular-, renal- and ototoxicity; also ethambutol ocular toxicity is 
cumulative across courses of treatment). Amplification of first-line drug resistance (S, H, Z 
and E) will be further avoided by dropping Cat. 2. As streptomycin resistance disappears in 
the population, streptomycin might eventually remain available as a key drug for MDR 
(re)treatment, alternative to second-line injectables. 
5. Concordance between geno- and phenotypic rifampicin DST would improve if the low-
resistance mutations have no impact on high-dose rifampicin treatment. Moreover, new 
molecular DST formats omitting these now irrelevant mutations could then be simplified and 
made fully specific for rifampicin resistance. Such tests would identify only mutations highly 
predictive of bacteriologically poor outcome even with the high-dose regimen.  This would at 
the same time avoid errors of current molecular tests with resistance detection based on the 
absence of, or poor binding to, wildtype DNA probes: silent mutations, poor reactions and 
reading errors would no longer interfere with genotypic resistance testing. 
Other groups are also studying high-dose rifampicin, yet their aim is to shorten Cat. 1 treatment 
without increasing relapse. These clinical trials would thus provide complementary information and 
might show further gains that are possible with increased dosing, e.g. in paucibacillary disease. 
 
1.2 Rationale 
Low-level resistance to rifampicin is not rare, and is easily missed by conventional DST. About 15% of 
all rifampicin resistance in retreatment cases is low level.3, 4 However, an as yet unpublished survey 
among our target study population suggests that this proportion may even reach 50% in new cases. 
Each of these mutations is rare, but a large variety exists. They are detected by absent or reduced 
signals with wildtype probes by molecular test formats, such as lineprobe assays and the Xpert 
MTB/RIF assay.  This can cause substantial confusion in the interpretation and decision making when 
conventional DST suggests (false) rifampicin susceptibility.  This is particularly problematic in the 
MGIT system, in which the standard 12 day read-out misses rifampicin resistance in strains with 
those mutations, while the control tube already meets acceptance criteria for growth. For the same 
reason the significance of these low-level resistance mutations remains disputed.  There is 
nevertheless evidence that cases caused by such strains can cause outbreaks of MDR and even XDR-
TB.  Such strains also lead to a high frequency of adverse outcomes in individual cases, comparable to 
those of the high-level resistance mutations (63% failure/relapse of standard primo-treatment in our 
reference 2). The MIC of most low-level mutations is around the peak level in serum and tissues 
achieved with the standard dose of rifampicin.  This could explain why more MDR with these 
mutations seem to be curable with the unmodified Cat. 1 or 2, but often resulting in subsequent 
relapse.  


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             13/54 
 
Historical trials on rifampicin in the 1970’s used relatively low doses due to high drug cost and 
concerns due to raised transaminase, in spite of the recognised proportional increase of activity with 
higher doses (L. Verbist, personal communication).5 Increasing the rifampicin dose increases serum 
concentrations at least proportionally, and a ceiling remains as yet undetermined.6 According to 
studies by the group of Gumbo, it is the peak drug serum concentration (Cmax) compared to the 
bacterial minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) which determines effectiveness of killing as well as 
resistant mutant suppression and also determines the duration of the post-antibiotic effect. If the 
free Cmax/MIC ratio exceeds 175, then no resistance to rifampicin emerges even by high-resistance 
mutations, and without assistance by companion drugs.7 Starting from a Cmax/MIC ratio above 17, 
the resistant population declines. A normal 600 mg rifampicin dose produces a Cmax around 10 
mg/L. About 80% of the serum concentration is protein-bound, but the low protein content of 
epithelial lining fluid and even higher affinity of the lipophilic TB bacteria makes this irrelevant, so 
that the peak reaches about 20 times the MIC of wildtype strains. This doubles after a 1200 mg dose, 
or triples after a 1800 mg dose, potentially resulting in permanent cure of tuberculosis caused by a 
wide range of low-level resistance mutations with MICs 2-8 times above normal.8, 9 The most 
frequently described rifampicin resistance rpoB mutations, however, have too high MICs to be 
overcome by higher dosing. 7, 10 
 
The standard dose 6-month regimen has an overall relapse frequency of about 2% among sputum 
smear-positive cases with a fully susceptible strain and normal daily dosing.  This increases to 6% 
among patients with extensive disease or HIV co-infection.  Relapses increase moderately with 
intermittent dosing, inversely to dosing frequency and mainly during intensive phase, i.e. from 1.9% 
(C.I. 1.4-2.7%) with daily to 3.2% (C.I. 2.5-4.1%) with fully thrice-weekly regimens. A thrice-weekly 
continuation phase following a daily intensive phase does not appreciably increase relapse 
frequency. Intermittency increases the risk for acquired drug resistance, particularly among HIV-
positive patients, but not after the intensive phase.11, 12 High rifampicin dosing has been shown to 
produce much faster sterilization of M. tuberculosis in mice.13 In humans, a randomized clinical trial 
in culture positive patients of a 3-month alternate day regimen with 1200 mg rifampicin and 900 mg 
isoniazid, supplemented by a normal dose of streptomycin, found culture conversion to be faster by 
one month. There were only 15% relapses, none of whom had acquired resistance, concentrated 
among those with radiographically extensive disease. This regimen did not include pyrazinamide, 
known to allow a reduction of treatment duration. Adverse drug events were not reported.14 
 
With daily dosing, only toxic hepatitis occurs at appreciable frequency as a serious rifampicin adverse 
event. However, with Cat. 1 treatment liver toxicity is more often attributable to pyrazinamide, and is 
rare except in elderly people with co-morbidities.15 Only pyrazinamide liver toxicity is clearly dose-
related.13, 16 Isoniazid can very rarely cause rapidly fatal hepatic necrosis, also at normal dosage. Liver 
toxicity due to rifampicin is usually mild and readily resolved by temporary treatment interruption, 
without recurrence even at the same dosage. Older published trials do not mention increased risk of 
liver toxicity with high dose rifampicin.9, 13 This issue has recently been studied prospectively by three 
groups, using up to triple rifampicin dosing with intensive toxicity monitoring. Preliminary reports 
and personal communications on these PanACEA, RAFA and RIFATOX trials indicate that no increased 
incidence of liver toxicity was seen (Annex 1). The PanACEA study also found that doubling the 
rifampicin dose to 20 mg/kg led to 3-4 times higher peak- and AUC rifampicin concentrations.  
Studies of early bactericidal activity under HRZE extended over 2 weeks, with viable counts of TB 
bacilli from sputum by culture every few days, have shown that isoniazid produces about 1 log kill 
over the first 2 days; then rifampicin takes over till the end of the second week, producing a kill of 
another 1-1.5 log; after that the main kill seems to be due to pyrazinamide, of which the action starts 
late.17 This means that susceptibility to isoniazid and/or rifampicin is reflected in the decline of viable 
bacilli over the first two weeks of treatment, irrespective of the action of other drugs (starting late, 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             14/54 
 
i.e. pyrazinamide, or very low kill, i.e. ethambutol). We have limited data from a study using standard 
auramine as well as FDA vital staining on serial sputa over the first 2 weeks, showing that in 
susceptible cases the AFB counts usually decrease by 1 log after 1 week, and by 2 logs after 2 weeks. 
However, there were exceptions, and the quantification of AFB in direct smears is not that 
reproducible, so that the exact cut-off or algorithm to screen patients for DST referral needs to be 
better defined. The challenge will be to balance good sensitivity of screening for serious initial drug 
resistance and/or extensive disease, versus excessive numbers of patients to be referred for in-depth 
investigations. To apply earlier screening for drug resistance also to the control group, absence of 
fever resolution at two weeks (as lead symptom of unsatisfactory clinical improvement) will be used 
as an alternative referral criterion for rapid DST. This would be the simplest possible screening tool, 
and may even be more appropriate considering the highly  unsatisfactory results of treatment follow-
up by means of microscopy in many TB control programmes. 
The WHO recommended Xpert MTB/RIF assay as well as lineprobe assays for molecular detection of 
resistance cover a large variety of mutations in the responsible genes by incorporation of probes 
covering the relevant stretch of wildtype DNA, plus- in the case of the  lineprobe assay- a few 
‘mutant’ probes that confirm the most frequent mutations. A positive signal from the mutant probes 
will always correctly indicate that this mutation is present. For the wildtype probes a negative signal 
(absent or low-intensity bands; delayed amplification) is interpreted as resistance. However, this is 
not satisfactory since poor reactions occur regularly with poor specimens or technique, and a false 
negative signal (falsely indicating resistance) is possible with “silent mutations”, i.e. a change in 
nucleotide that still codes for the same amino-acid.  
Serious confusion regarding the Xpert MTB/RIF assay exists in relation to its use in low rifampicin 
resistance prevalence settings and for follow-up samples. Doubts regarding false resistant results are 
widely spread, also because of the earlier WHO recommendation not to trust such results but to 
confirm with a different test format. This severely reduces the usefulness of this molecular diagnostic 
tool, that is otherwise the most appropriate rapid DST method for decentralised use and thus early 
diagnosis. Our studies on the low-level rifampicin resistant strains (reference 3) strongly suggest that 
the problem lies in reduced sensitivity of the gold standard, conventional DST, and that the “false 
resistance” detected by molecular methods is significant on the individual and population level. Non-
specific reactions or test failures are believed to occur due to the presence of DNA from dead bacilli 
during treatment. However, the first 6 months of parallel use of Xpert MTB/RIF and the highly 
accurate slide DST in the Bangladesh project have shown an almost perfect concordance for 
rifampicin resistance, also for specimens taken at 2-3 months of Cat. 1 treatment. None of the Xpert 
resistant were found susceptible by slide DST, but slide DST had an incremental yield of about 10% 
resistant cases. It is very likely that Xpert MTB/RIF assay results at 2 weeks of treatment will be at 
least as reliable.  
 
2. STUDY DESIGN 
2.1 General study design 
This study is a randomised clinical trial. Consecutively diagnosed smear-positive pulmonary TB 
patients, which conform to all of the inclusion and none of the exclusion criteria and provide 
informed consent, will be randomized to the intervention or control arm.  
The control arm will receive the standard pulmonary TB treatment regimens recommended by the 
International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (The Union). This consists of:   
 
Treatment: 
New cases: 2HRZE/4HR, i.e. 2 months of isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide and 
ethambutol intensive phase, followed by 4 months continuation phase isoniazid plus 
rifampicin) (Cat. 1 regimen, 6 months)  


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             15/54 
 
Retreatment cases: 2 months of SHRZE (S= streptomycin) followed by 1 month of 
HRZE and 5 months HRE (Cat. 2 regimen, 8 months) 
Any patients with MDR TB detected at any time will be switched to 
4KHPtoGCEZ/5GCEZ, i.e. 4 months of kanamycin, isoniazid, prothionamide, 
gatifloxacin high-dose, clofazimine, ethambutol and pyrazinamide, followed by 5 
months of gatifloxacin high-dose, clofazimine, ethambutol and pyrazinamide (MDR 
regimen, 9 months) 
 
 
Testing: 
Monitoring by smear and rapid DST as per National TB Programme (NTP) indications: 
 
Smears for AFB [by Ziehl-Neelsen brightfield (ZN) or auramine fluorescence 
(FM) technique] at diagnosis, after 2, 5 and 6 months (Cat. 1) or after 3, 5 
and 8 months (Cat. 2); repeat after month 3, respectively 4, if AFB were seen 
at month 2 or 3 
 
Vital staining fluorescein diacetate (FDA) smears for AFB to confirm a 
positive ZN or FM result during Cat. 1 
 
rapid DST if fever is still present after 2 weeks, or in case an AFB smear 
(auramine and/or FDA) is positive during Cat. 1, or from the 3rd month of Cat. 
2 onwards. Rapid DST is performed also from any retreatment case (relapse, 
return after default and other previously treated for at least 1 month), and 
from previously untreated contacts of MDR-TB 
Additionally, patients enrolled in the study (control as well as intervention arm) will 
be followed-up for relapse 12 months after the end of treatment by clinical 
examination, sputum smear and slow solid culture. 
The intervention consists of the standard care as provided to the control arm with the following 
modifications: 
 
Treatment: 
New cases: Compared to standard regimen dosing of rifampicin is doubled, while 
standard dose isoniazid, pyrazinamide and ethambutol are maintained, i.e. 2 months 
of HRhZE followed by 4 months of HRh (6 months)  
Retreatment cases: retreatment cases randomized to the intervention arm receive 
the same care as new cases in the same arm. 
Any patients with MDR TB detected at any time will be switched to 4 months of 
KHPtoGCEZ followed by 5 months of GCEZ (MDR regimen) 
 
 
Testing  
In addition to standard monitoring (as described above for the control arm), patients 
in the intervention arm will have sputum tested by auramine and FDA smear after 
the first and again after the second week of intensive phase treatment. Management 
decisions will be made after 2 weeks of intensive phase, based on remaining 
numbers and decline of AFB on FDA staining, but not based on continuing fever. 
Those with min. 1 log decline in the number of AFB, or who are already negative, 
would continue the unaltered regimen. Those not meeting these criteria would be 
referred for rapid DST by slide DST and/or Xpert MTB/RIF, depending on ease of 
referral. 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             16/54 
 
This open label, randomised clinical trial is intended as a pilot study on the efficacy and safety of 
high-dose rifampicin and feasibility and added value of auramine and/or FDA vital staining sputum 
smear after 2 weeks of intensive treatment phase. If this proof-of-concept study provides substantial 
indication of benefit without indication of excess toxicity, the data from the study will be used to 
design a larger scale, cluster-randomized study. The aim of this cluster randomised study would be to 
provide definite proof of the benefit of the intervention on adverse treatment outcomes and lack of 
excess toxicity associated with high dose rifampicin. In addition, the cluster-randomized study would 
provide a more precise assessment of the suppression and prevention of (acquired) resistance 
endpoints. 
An interim analysis is thus planned at the time the last recruited patient finishes treatment, i.e. about 
9 months after the end of recruitment. It will focus on assessment of drug toxicity versus suggested 
benefits of the intervention. This analysis will be primarily performed for the go/no-go decision and 
design considerations for the cluster-randomized trial. The decision on proceeding to the cluster 
randomized study will be based on the absence of excess toxicity, a trend toward a reduction of 
unfavourable outcomes (excluding relapse), and possible favourable effects on initially present low-
resistance mutations / mutations acquired during treatment. It will also allow to adapt the design of 
the larger study particularly regarding the algorithm for resistance screening, and whether or not 
treatment shortening could be justified with rapid initial conversion. 
 
3. STUDY OBJECTIVES 
Primary objective:  
To compare a high-dose rifampicin standard TB regimen of 6 months duration with standard 
TB regimen with respect to adverse treatment outcome (relapse, failure, death and default) 
and toxicity, in TB cases (new or retreatment, pooled) not shown to have initial rifampicin 
resistance before one of the standard treatment outcomes applies. 
Secondary objectives:  
1. 
To assess whether the study regimen also cures low-level rifampicin resistant TB: 
by comparing and describing adverse treatment outcomes by initial rifampicin mutations 
(none, low-level, high) 
2. 
To assess the effectiveness of  FDA vital staining screening at two weeks of treatment for 
early switch of non-responding rifampicin resistant TB to MDR-TB treatment, versus 
clinical evaluation based on fever resolution. The proportions of rifampicin resistant 
cases started on MDR treatment within the first 2 months of primo-treatment as well as 
the proportion of initially present resistance never switched to the MDR regimen and not 
cured will be compared between the two arms. 
3. 
To assess the negative predictive value of conversion at 2 weeks for relapse 
4. 
To estimate the proportion of acquired rifampicin resistance among failures and relapses 
5. 
To compare the predictive value of auramine with FDA staining at 2 weeks to predict 
unfavourable outcomes 
 
3.1 Primary endpoints 
The primary efficacy endpoint is the incidence of adverse treatment outcomes. Following the WHO 
guidelines from 201018, as currently in use in the NTP in Bangladesh, outcomes are defined as 
follows: 
 
Cured: A patient whose smear or culture was positive at the beginning of treatment but who 
was smear- or culture-negative in the last month of treatment and on at least one previous 
occasion. 
 
Completed: A patient who completed treatment but who does not have a negative sputum 
smear or culture result in the last month of treatment and on at least one previous occasion. 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             17/54 
 
 
Relapse: Cured previously from TB or completed treatment for TB and now having 
bacteriologically positive sputum for TB (at 12 months follow-up or at an earlier time point)  
 
Default: The patient whose treatment was interrupted for ≥ 2 consecutive months or more. 
 
Failure: Sputum positive for TB at 5 months or later during treatment. In line with current 
WHO recommendations, patients detected with MDR-TB or rifampicin resistance before this 
or another outcome applies and switched to the MDR-TB regimen will be excluded from the 
outcome analysis.18 Failure will also be declared if the regimen has to be changed for at least 
2 drugs due to adverse events. 
 
Death: All-cause mortality between case registration and end of TB treatment (related or not 
to TB or TB treatment) 
 
Transfer out: A TB patient who transferred out to another recording and reporting unit and 
whose treatment outcome is unknown. 
Analyses will be performed using the NTP smear-based recurrence (failure, relapse) definitions, but 
as a secondary approach culture-based definitions will be used.  
 
Safety: 
The primary safety endpoint will be the occurrence of any of the following: 
 
Serious Adverse Events  
 
Grade 3-4 Liver Toxicity following NIH common toxicity criteria (CTC), including transaminase 
increases to >5-20 ULN (grade 3), or > 20 ULN (grade 4) 
3.2 Secondary endpoints 
Secondary objectives are assessed with the adverse treatment outcomes defined above (relapse, 
default, failure and death). 
Genetic and laboratory predictors of TB treatment outcome are described in section 5.4, while 
secondary and tertiary analyses are defined in 8.3.4. 
 
4. SUBJECTS, POPULATION & SELECTION 
4.1 Settings, selection & recruitment 
The study will take place in eight DF Bangladesh outpatient clinics with an LED TB fluorescence 
microscopy laboratory (Sarishabari, Madhupur, Bhaluka, Fulbaria, Iswarganj, Netrakona, Purbodhola, 
Kendua), shown on the map in Annex III. These clinics are located in the Greater Mymensingh district 
and have been selected because of their proximity to the three DF hospitals with a reference 
laboratory capable of doing rapid DST and toxicity monitoring. Five of them are also the oldest 
project clinics, where drug resistance surveillance was started already in 1995. The proposed study 
would have the additional benefit of adding a fifth drug resistance monitoring data point without 
extra cost, since rpoB sequencing on preserved sputum from all enrolled cases will be performed to 
provide the denominators for some study endpoints and to define cases with acquired resistance.  
Together, these clinics register about 2000 TB cases per year. They have in general advanced disease, 
but there is practically no HIV and also MDR prevalence is low (1-2%  of new cases).  
 
Patients presenting with symptoms suspect for TB as defined by the NTP (mainly cough for at least 3 
weeks) will be tested as per standard guidelines, i.e. 2 sputum smears for AFB, which can be 
repeated at 2 weeks intervals in case the suspicion remains and previous tests are negative. 
Additionally chest X-Ray is used to diagnose smear-negative pulmonary TB. Other suspects (extra-
pulmonary) are referred to Medical Officers for appropriate investigations. Standard AFB-smears will 
in principle be done using FM technique, which can be temporarily replaced by ZN in case of 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             18/54 
 
equipment breakdown. One sputum smear with at least one AFB detected is sufficient to register a 
case, or a decision by a Medical Officer based on clinical and other examinations.  
 
Once patients are registered and comply with the exclusion / inclusion criteria that are checked per 
routine, written informed consent will be asked. Consenting patients will be further assessed for 
eligibility, and if all in- and exclusion criteria are fulfilled, they will be enrolled and randomized over 
the 2 treatment arms. Patients refusing will all be put on the standard regimens.  
 
4.2 Inclusion and exclusion criteria 
In order to be eligible, study participants must meet the following criteria: 
- 
Diagnosed with smear-positive pulmonary TB  
- 
15 years or older 
- 
Able and willing to provide written informed consent 
 
Potential participants meeting any of the following criteria will not be enrolled in the study: 
- 
contacts of MDR-TB patients and other MDR-TB suspects diagnosed with resistance on rapid 
DST for rifampicin performed prior to start of treatment according to NTP guidelines 
- 
smear-negative pulmonary and extra-pulmonary TB cases 
- 
patients in need of hospitalization because of very bad general condition or complications 
- 
patients with clinically active liver disease, for the study defined as jaundice confirmed by a 
local Medical Officer (Government) 
- 
any known HIV-positive patient (although none are expected) 
- 
any patient with known hepatitis B or C infection  
- 
pregnant women; in addition, patients in the intervention arm who become pregnant during 
treatment will be switched to the control arm 
 
4.3 Sample size 
The sample size selected is 1000 patients (500 randomized to intervention, 500 to control). The study 
will be conducted in eight DF Bangladesh outpatient clinics with an LED TB fluorescence microscopy 
laboratory that register about 2000 TB cases per year of which 65% are smear-positive pulmonary TB 
(new or retreatment). Enrolment will target 1000 randomised smear-positive pulmonary TB patients. 
Given an expected 5% refusal rate, it is expected that recruitment will require 9-10 months. 
 
4.4 Randomization 
Two randomization lists will be prepared at ITM prior to study start: one for new cases, one for 
retreatment cases. To ensure (approximate) treatment balance within study sites, the randomization 
list will be blocked. Treatment allocation will be concealed until the completion of the screening 
procedures and the final recruitment of the patient using sealed envelopes labelled with the 
randomization number and containing the treatment group allocation.  
 
4.5 Withdrawal and termination of the study 
Reasons for Withdrawal 
Subjects may be withdrawn from the study if: 
 
The subject or legally acceptable representative withdraws the consent 
 
The Investigator judges that further participation would have negative effects on the 
subject’s health. In this case, the study team will follow the patient up to resolution of such 
negative event.  
 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             19/54 
 
Handling of Withdrawals 
Patients withdrawn from study participation will continue to receive standard care, as required by 
their condition. This includes continuation of the best possible TB treatment as long as needed, and 
also care of any adverse events or complications that may or may not be due to the study 
procedures. The principal investigator will be responsible to assure that this care is provided, either 
at DF clinics or hospitals, either by referral to specialists at nearby Medical Colleges or other 
providers. 
 
Loss to follow-up during treatment is defined by the default outcome definition, i.e. 2 months 
treatment interruption. As per standard NTP guidelines patients will be contacted by phone or have a 
home visit performed if they are late for an appointment.  
Loss to follow-up for relapse assessment will be considered separately. These patients will be invited 
to attend 12 months after cure or default, also complemented by phone convocations and home 
visits as required.  
 
Termination of Study  
If the study is prematurely terminated or suspended, the Sponsor will promptly inform the 
investigators/institutions, and the regulatory authority(ies) of the termination or suspension and the 
reason(s) for the termination or suspension. The EC’s will also be informed promptly and provided 
the reason(s) for the termination or suspension by the Sponsor or by the investigator/institution, as 
specified by the applicable regulatory requirement(s). 
 


Confidential 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
 
 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             20/54 
 
 
5. STUDY PROCEDURES 
5.1 Study/visit schedule 
SCHEDULE OF ASSESSMENTS 
 
Screening  
Enrollment 
(V0) 
Week 1 
(V1) 
Week 2 
(V2) 
Week 4 
(V3) 
Month 2 
(V4) 
Month 3 
(V5) 
Month 4 
(V6) 
Month 5 
(V7) 
Month 6 
or 8 
(V8) 
Month 
+124 
(V9) 
Medical history 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Informed Consent 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Clinical examination 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Weight 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Temperature 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Sputum sample for AFB 
smear (ZN or FM) 
X 
X² 
X² 
X² 
 
X 
X 
(if 2M+) 
 
X 
X 
X5 
Sputum sample for FDA 
vital staining 
 
X² 
X² 
X² 
 
 
X3 
 
X3 
X3 
 
DST referral 
X1 
 
 
X² 
 
 
X3 
 
X3 
X3 
 
Treatment 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Pregnancy test (urine) 
 
X6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Biochemistry (liver tests) 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
Adverse Event collection 
 
 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
 
Outcome assessment 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
X 
X 
1 Contacts of MDR-TB or retreatment cases only, if smear-positive  
²  -  Intervention arm:  DST referral only if responding to the 2-weeks screening criteria described in the protocol 
   - Control arm: DST referral if still fever (temperature >=38°C) 
³ If smear-positive at this time = standard indication of the NTP, controls as well as intervention arm 
4 This is the follow-up visit 12 months after end of treatment 
5 And for culture: this is the only time the specimens will always be used for microscopy and culture 
6 Women of childbearing age only


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT 
 
 
Version 3.0, dated 18-MAY-2014   
 
 
 
 
 
             21/54 
 
Controls will be treated as per NTP guidelines, but will additionally be monitored for transaminase 
increase and toxic hepatitis, as will be those of the intervention arm (see further).  
Patients in the intervention arm will receive high-dose rifampicin Cat. 1 regimen and will also be 
screened earlier for delayed conversion of sputum smears for TB bacilli and rifampicin resistance, as 
shown in the algorithm in Annex 2. If retreatment is needed for the intervention arm, they will be 
started or re-started on the high-dose Cat. 1 regimen as long as they are not shown to be rifampicin 
resistant.  
Once rifampicin resistance is detected, patients (intervention, controls or non-consenting) will be put 
on the MDR regimen.  
All surviving patients who can be retrieved will be checked for relapse by smear and culture for TB 12 
months after the end of treatment.  
The outcome of pregnancy occurring during treatment and the baby’s health will be recorded for 
both treatment arms.  
 
5.2 Obtaining informed consent 
The informed consent procedure will describe the purpose of the study, the procedures to be 
followed, the risks and benefits of participation, etc. If a subject (or parent or guardian) is unable to 
read or write, a signature from a witness to the informed consent discussion will be obtained. 
Subjects (or parents or guardians) will be informed that participation in the study is completely 
voluntary and that the participant can withdraw from the study at any time without any negative 
consequences. 
All patients will be asked to give their informed consent to participate in the study, before 
undergoing any study-specific procedures. The Informed Consent Form (ICF) as well as the informed 
consent interview will describe the purpose of the study, the procedures to be followed, the risks 
and benefits of participation, the voluntary nature etc., as described in the E6 ICH GCP Guidelines.  
The interviews will be conducted in the native language of the patients by a qualified person formally 
identified by the Investigator. Written information and consent forms in the local language will be 
provided to the patients or legally authorized representatives for their review. The written 
information and consent form is currently written in English, but it will be further translated in 
Bengali, and back to English for the accuracy of proper translation, with certification after verifying 
the original and back-translated copy. 
Individuals potentially eligible for the study (i.e. individuals diagnosed with smear-positive pulmonary 
TB) will be informed on the modalities of TB treatment and on the possibility to participate in the 
study by the clinic’s TB/Leprosy Control Assistants (TLCA) routinely in charge of diagnosis and 
treatment. Additional information on the eligibility criteria will be obtained (e.g. age) if missing in the 
patient file. Once eligibility has been confirmed, TLCAs will ask if the potential participant is ready to 
decide whether or not to join the trial. Patients must be given enough time to ask questions and to 
take a free decision (including a time frame of a few days to discuss their participation with family 
members). If the individual is willing to participate, he/she will be given the ICF and the content will 
be read by the TLCA. Once checked the ICF is understood, the TLCA will invite the participant to sign 
the form, add his/her name (or thumb-printing whenever they are illiterate) and countersign it.  
If the patient is minor of age/not emancipated, the consent must be given by a parent or legal 
guardian according to national law; however, in this case, the investigator is responsible to check 
that the patient him/herself is also freely willing to take part in the study by means of giving 
informed and written assent.  
If a patient (or guardian, if applicable) is unable to read or write, an independent witness must be 
present during the informed consent interview and the signature of the independent witness will be 
obtained, in addition to the patients’ thumbprint. For adult individuals incapable of providing 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             22/54 
 
informed consent for other reasons (e.g. mentally disabled), consent is obtained from a legally 
authorized representative in accordance with applicable law.  
 
5.3 Specific procedures and activities 
 
- 
Screening visit: 
o Clinical symptoms and signs of TB to select suspects for AFB-smear; refer to Medical 
Officer if not a suspect 
o Spot sputum collected for AFB if responding to TB suspect criteria; request for a 
second early-morning sputum next day 
 
If AFB positive and patient does not respond to MDR suspect criteria: 
proceed with V0 procedures (same day if possible) 
 
If positive and patient responds to MDR suspect criteria (MDR contact or 
retreatment case): referral for DST, treatment depending on rapid result 
 
MDR regimen if rifampicin resistant; not eligible for the study 
 
if susceptible or no result: eligible, continue with V0 
- 
Enrolment visit V0: 
o Always clinical symptoms and signs, medical history, weight, temperature, patient 
information on standard TB treatment and DOT arrangements 
 
Medical history: previous TB treatment; concomitant disease such as 
diabetes and HIV 
o Signs and symptoms: check for vital signs, severe anemia, dyspnea, chest pain, 
suspect of TB complications: refer if severely ill or complications suspected. 
Responding to exclusion criteria: register as non-study and start standard TB 
treatment or refer (active liver disease, patients to be hospitalized…) 
o No exclusion: explain study, ask informed consent 
 
Refused: register as non-study and start standard TB treatment 
 
Accepted: perform study specific procedures 
Perform urinary pregnancy test for all women of childbearing age not aware 
that they are pregnant.  If the test is positive, do not include in the study but 
register as non-study patient and start on standard TB treatment. 
Pregnancy excluded: liver test, register as study patient and randomise to 
intervention or control arm 
 
Intervention only: quantified auramine and FDA smears; start high-
dose Cat. 1 
 
Control arm: start Cat. 1 or Cat. 2 depending on history 
- 
Visit after one week V1: intervention patients only 
o Give treatment, record attendance 
o Sputum for quantified AFB smears (auramine and FDA) 
o Stop all drugs and refer in case of hepatitis suspicion (feeling sick, anorexia, vomiting, 
jaundice) 
- 
Visit after two weeks V2: Intervention + control arm 
o Clinical check, weight, temperature: improving signs and symptoms of TB? 
o Give treatment, record attendance 
o Liver test 
o Intervention arm only: Sputum for quantified AFB smears (auramine and FDA), apply 
algorithm 
 
refer for rapid DST if indicated by algorithm; switch to MDR if rifampicin 
resistant 
 
otherwise continue high-dose treatment 
o Control arm only:  


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             23/54 
 
 
refer for rapid DST if still fever (temperature >=38°C); switch to MDR if 
rifampicin resistant 
o Enquire, register adverse effects. Stop all drugs and refer in case of hepatitis 
suspicion (feeling sick, anorexia, vomiting, jaundice) 
- 
Visit after four weeks V3: intervention + control arm 
o Clinical check, weight, temperature: improved signs and symptoms of TB? 
o Give treatment, record attendance 
o Liver test 
o Enquire, register adverse effects. Stop all drugs and refer in case of hepatitis 
suspicion (feeling sick, anorexia, vomiting, jaundice) 
- 
Visit after 2 months V4: intervention + control arm 
o Clinical check, weight, temperature: signs and symptoms of TB absent? 
o Give treatment, record attendance 
o Cat. 1: sputum smear for AFB 
 
Refer for rapid DST if AFB-positive (auramine and FDA) and clinically poor 
evolution; switch to MDR treatment if rifampicin resistant 
o Liver test 
o Enquire, register adverse effects. Stop all drugs and refer in case of hepatitis 
suspicion (feeling sick, anorexia, vomiting, jaundice) 
- 
Visit after 3 months V5: intervention + control arm 
o Clinical check, weight, temperature: signs and symptoms of TB absent? 
o Give treatment, record attendance 
o Sputum smear for AFB: all Cat. 2 and Cat. 1 patients positive at month 2 
 
Refer for rapid DST if AFB-positive (auramine and FDA); switch to MDR 
treatment if rifampicin resistant 
o Enquire, register adverse effects. Stop all drugs and refer in case of hepatitis 
suspicion (feeling sick, anorexia, vomiting, jaundice) 
- 
Visit after 4 months V6: intervention + control arm 
o Clinical check, weight, temperature: signs and symptoms of TB absent? 
o Give treatment, record attendance 
o Sputum smear for AFB: Cat. 2 positive at month 3 only 
 
Refer for rapid DST if AFB-positive; switch to MDR treatment if rifampicin 
resistant 
o Enquire, register adverse effects. Stop all drugs and refer in case of hepatitis 
suspicion (feeling sick, anorexia, vomiting, jaundice) 
- 
Visit after 5 months V7: intervention + control arm 
o Clinical check, weight, temperature: signs and symptoms of TB absent? 
o Give treatment, record attendance 
o Sputum smear for AFB: all patients 
 
Declare failure if positive and refer for rapid DST if AFB-positive 
 
Switch to MDR treatment if rifampicin resistant 
 
Rifampicin sensitive: 
 
Control arm: start Cat. 2 
 
Intervention: re-start Cat. 1 
o Enquire, register adverse effects. Stop all drugs and refer in case of hepatitis 
suspicion (feeling sick, anorexia, vomiting, jaundice) 
- 
Visit after 6 months (or 8 months for Cat. 2) V8: intervention + control arm 
o Clinical check, weight, temperature: signs and symptoms of TB absent? 
o Stop treatment, record attendance 
o Sputum smear for AFB: all patients 
 
Declare cured if negative and inform about signs of relapse 
 
Declare failure if positive and refer for rapid DST if AFB-positive 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             24/54 
 
 
Switch to MDR treatment if rifampicin resistant 
 
Rifampicin sensitive: 
o Control arm: re-register, start Cat. 2 
o Intervention: re-register, re-start Cat. 1 
o Enquire, register adverse effects 
o Make appointment for check-up after 12 months 
- 
Visit 12 months after end of treatment V9 (intervention + control arm cured or defaulted) 
o Reminders, home visit if not attending 
o History from relatives / neighbours if not met (retreated or died of TB?) 
o Clinical check: signs and symptoms of TB absent?  
o If attending at the clinic only: weight, temperature 
o Sputum smear and culture for AFB 
 
If negative: further passive follow-up 
 
If positive: declare relapse and refer for rapid DST 
 
Switch to MDR treatment if rifampicin resistant 
 
Rifampicin sensitive: 
o Control arm: re-register, start Cat. 2 
o Intervention: re-register, re-start Cat. 1 
 
All enrolled patients will be monitored intensively for drug toxicity (clinical; liver enzymes during the 
first 2 months). Treatment will be interrupted in case of a serious adverse event, possibly due to the 
TB drugs, and patients referred to the nearest project hospital. In case of toxic hepatitis, after full 
recovery drugs will be re-introduced in hospital one by one, aiming at re-starting the same regimen 
since this toxicity is often transient and probably not rifampicin dose-related.  
 
Unscheduled visits can take place at any time during the patients participation in the study. During 
these visits, all study procedures will be performed if needed, and data will be collected. 
 
5.4 Laboratory procedures 
All analysis of clinical trial samples will be carried out in compliance with Good Clinical Laboratory 
Practice (GCLP). A Lab Analytical Plan will be available, in line with WHO-GCLP 
 
FDA vital staining at 1 and 2 weeks will be used as part of the screening to identify intervention arm 
patients to be referred for rapid DST, and promptly switched to the MDR regimen if rifampicin 
resistant. Also an auramine AFB smear will be performed for comparison with FDA screening. Further 
follow-up will be standard and the same in the study and control cohort, by auramine AFB-smear at 
2/3 months, 5 months and at end of treatment, when patients may again be referred for DST. 
Patients found positive on smear will be declared failure as per NTP definitions and registered for 
retreatment. Also relapse will be declared based on smears, as per NTP definitions. All failure and 
relapse cases will have sputum referred for conventional culture and DST, besides the rapid 
screening for rifampicin resistance. If not found resistant to this drug, such recurrence patients 
belonging to the intervention arm will not be re-started on the standard Cat. 2 but on the study 
regimen.  
 
The initial, ethanol preserved pre-treatment specimen from all enrolled cases will be forwarded to 
ITM, Antwerp, for DNA sequencing of the rpoB gene. The katG and inhA genes will only be sequenced 
if an rpoB mutation is detected. All strains from cases diagnosed with rifampicin resistance at any 
time (2 weeks; failure; relapse or default), and all failure or relapse recurrence strains will also be 
forwarded to ITM, Antwerp. ITM will perform full DST and species identification, besides DNA 
sequencing of the rpoB genes. This will allow to compare the distribution of resistance-conferring 
mutations in the two study arms, and to identify possible acquired rifampicin resistance comparing 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             25/54 
 
with the pre-treatment sequence. Spoligotyping on both pre-treatment sputum and recurrence 
isolate will be performed for confirmation of strain identity of all recurrences, to avoid confusion 
with re-infection, and to confirm presumed acquired resistance.  
Cured patients will be informed about the possibility and symptoms of relapse, the need to report if 
symptoms recur, and given an appointment for a follow-up check after 12 months. All patients still in 
the area (cured or defaulted) will have evaluation of clinical condition and sputum for AFB smear and 
TB culture once, 12 months after treatment was stopped, performing a home visit if required. 
Further follow-up for relapse will be passive.  
 
Preservation of all smear-positive diagnostic- and recurrence sputa and referral for rpoB sequencing 
at ITM will continue for patients registered after study enrolment has stopped, to provide a better 
estimate for the prevalence of low-resistance mutations, and how these strains are affected by 
standard treatment. Additionally, the clinics will check reduction of bacillary load by auramine and 
FDA smears after 1 and 2 weeks also for these patients, not belonging to the study population and 
otherwise treated following routine programme guidelines, including normal dose rifampicin. This 
will provide further information needed for better understanding of the intervention benefits. 
 
Sputum AFB smears will be performed at the 8 participating centres, which have already a long 
experience with auramine smears; continuous external quality assessment has been standard 
practice since many years.  
The FDA technique will be introduced three months prior to the start of the study, and reliability will 
be assured before the results are used for the study.  
Serum transaminase will be performed at the DF Bangladesh reference laboratory using a 
biochemistry automate and kits, according to Good Clinical Laboratory Practice. 
All molecular bacteriology will be done at the accredited ITM Antwerp lab on forwarded ethanol-
preserved specimens or strains. Primary culture will be performed at the DF Bangladesh Netrakona 
reference laboratory with continuous quality monitoring. All isolates found rifampicin-resistant on 
rapid DST (Xpert, slide DST), and all failure and relapse isolates, will be periodically sent to ITM lab for 
DST on LJ for confirmation, completion of resistance profile and strain identification in case of 
recurrence.  
 
Serum transaminase 
Only ALT will be performed for screening, as the more sensitive test; AST will be performed 
additionally in case a rise of ALT is found. 
Serum collected in the clinics will be kept refrigerated for maximum 3 days with batched transport by 
courier to one of the DF hospital laboratories, where it will be tested the day of arrival.  
The test will be performed on an ERBA Chem V5.3 analyser using IFCC (International Federation of 
Clinical Chemistry) standard kinetic technique kits with internal quality controls. The local SOP 
followed is part of the study technical manual. 
Test reports will be collected weekly by the field supervisors and transferred to the clinics for 
registration. An abnormal result will be promptly communicated by the lab to the clinic staff by 
phone. 
 
Microscopy 
Two sputum samples will be collected from suspects: one spot and one morning sputum (unless the 
first is already positive), and one morning sputum for treatment monitoring at each occasion. For 
positive suspects, the morning sputum will be examined by repeat auramine and FDA staining after 
standing overnight with spontaneous liquefaction and homogenization. Patients of the intervention 
arm will be told to expectorate the 1 and 2 week follow-up morning specimen the day before coming 
to the clinic, so that it is already homogenised.  


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             26/54 
 
Auramine and FDA techniques will be applied according to the respective SOPs, which are part of the 
study technical manual. All positive results will be expressed as number of AFB per field (eventually a 
decimal). 
Decontamination and culture 
Standard procedures will be used: decontamination by the Petroff method, centrifugation at 3000g 
and inoculation of 2 tubes LJ, with incubation for 8 weeks before declaring negative. Any number of 
colonies will be registered as a positive result, counting on strain differentiation to avoid errors due 
to cross-contamination or misidentification of samples. 
The local SOP followed is part of the study technical manual. 
 
DST and species identification 
After sub-culture at ITM, LJ DST will be performed using the proportion method on LJ, for H (0.2, 1.0 
and 5.0 µg/ml), R (40µg/ml), E (2 µg/ml), S (4 µg/ml), and para-nitrobenzoic acid (PNB, 500 µg/ml).19 
PNB-resistant strains will be further identified by means of 16S sequence analysis. If confirmed non-
TB, they will be excluded from analysis.  
The ITM SOPs followed are part of the study technical manual. 
Rapid DST (Xpert and/or slide DST) will be performed at the Netrakona and other DF regional 
reference labs according to the respective SOPs, which are part of the study technical manual. 
Xpert MTB/RIF testing will be performed as per manufacturer’s instructions. A rifampicin resistant 
result will prompt to more extensive rapid DST using the slide technique. 
A rifampicin resistant result by any test will be considered as correct and used to start MDR 
treatment promptly; only if there is serious doubt regarding correct patient identification the same 
test will be repeated on another sample for confirmation. However, for analysis the ITM result will 
override local results if different. 
 
Sequencing of the rpoB, katG and inhA genes 
DNA from the alcohol-preserved sputa or strains is extracted using the Boom method; amplification 
by PCR of the rpoB gene primarily will target all known resistance conferring sequences using 
extended primers, with a repeat PCR targeting only the shorter fragment of core region I in case the 
large-fragment PCR fails.20 The genes conferring most resistance to isoniazid, i.e. katG and inhA will 
be sequenced only for sputa with an rpoB mutation already detected. DNA sequencing (ABI 3700 
DNA capillary system) and comparison with the wildtype (H37Rv) sequence (ClustalX) will be 
performed for all amplified products. 
The ITM SOPs followed are part of the study technical manual. 
 
Fingerprinting techniques 
DNA fingerprinting from sputum is best done by spoligotyping according to standard techniques, in 
view of the limited amount of material available.21 We have a large experience in comparing paired 
samples and isolates from the same patients, showing that spoligotyping is equally discriminating as 
15-loci MIRU-VNTR for this application. 
The ITM SOP followed is part of the study technical manual. 
 
6. STUDY INVESTIGATIONAL PRODUCT 
6.1 Purchasing, preparation and administration 
Rifampicin is part of the national treatment protocol in Bangladesh. The ITM’s SOP CTUPRO217 will 
be followed in the purchase, to ensure the quality -including bio-equivalence- of the investigational 
product.  
 
Rifampicin has been selected from the following WHO Prequalified manufacturer: Rifampicine - 
Eremfat® from Fatol Arzneimittel (registered in Germany). 
 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             27/54 
 
The routine treatment will be purchased by the National TB Programme, in collaboration with and 
according to the principles of the WHO/GDF. Also these products will be prequalified by WHO, or 
registered in a country with stringent regulatory authorities. 
 
6.2 Subject compliance monitoring 
All TB treatment will be delivered directly observed (DOT). The DF project assures DOT already 
routinely for all patients, using all possible means: hospitalization for the very weak / complicated / 
severely drug resistant cases; daily attendance at the DF clinic if living nearby; a treatment supervisor 
from among Ministry of Health field staff or other responsible person. Many patients are supervised 
near their home by a network of Village Doctors which have been specifically trained and are 
regularly supervised for this task by the DF staff.22 
In all cases any dose taken under supervision will be appropriately marked on the routine treatment 
card, these marks are different from those used for exceptional unsupervised intake (i.e. on request 
by a traveling patient, …). 
 
6.3 Prior and concomitant therapy 
Rifampicin activates cytochrome P450 liver enzymes, accelerating the metabolism of many common 
drugs also at normal dosage (corticosteroids, warfarin, oral contraceptives..). This may need a dose 
adjustment of these drugs or other precautions (i.e. change to other contraceptive methods). Anti-
retroviral drugs need to be changed when rifampicin is started, but no patient on ARV is expected in 
this population. Patients taking concomitant drugs that need dose re-adjustment or other 
adaptations will be referred to a Medical Officer.  
Conversely the metabolism or activity of rifampicin is not known to be affected by concomitant 
drugs. 
All the concomitant medications will be recorded in the study CRF.  
 
6.4 Packaging 
The commercial formulation of rifampicin procured for the study will be used.  
 
6.5 Reception, storage, dispensing and return 
All TB drugs are stored at the air-conditioned DF hospital pharmacies under appropriate conditions. 
Quarterly supplies are sent to the study clinics, where they are kept at ambient temperature in 
closed cupboards.   
7. SAFETY ASSESSMENT 
7.1 Adverse events 
Safety and tolerability of the treatments will be evaluated by recording Adverse Events (AE’s) and 
grading laboratory and vital signs evaluations. 
 
Definition of an Adverse Event 
An Adverse Event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a subject or clinical investigation 
subject administered a pharmaceutical product and that does not necessarily have a causal 
relationship with this treatment. An AE can therefore be any unfavourable and unintended sign 
(including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use 
of a medicinal (investigational) product, whether or not related to the medicinal (investigational) 
product. 
At each visit, the staff will ascertain the occurrence of any adverse events since the last visit. Once 
treatment has started and for its entire duration, clinic staff will enquire about the more common 
possible TB drug side effects: vomiting and anorexia, headache, tingling sensation in the extremities, 
insomnia, joint pain, rashes; in case streptomycin is administered also ringing in the ears, ataxia, 
hearing loss. Clinical examination for drug side effects will include checking the colour of the sclerae 
to detect jaundice (toxic hepatitis or hemolytic anemia); or joint swelling, muscle weakness etc. as 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             28/54 
 
indicated by the reported symptoms. Patients will be referred to a Medical Officer or hospital in case 
of more severe symptoms or signs or for further investigations. In mild cases symptomatic treatment 
will be given.  
Clinic staff will promptly record any AE on the patient file treatment follow-up sheet; for hospitalised 
patients this will be done by the Medical Officer on the hospitalization sheets. Liver test results will 
be systematically added to these documents. 
In case of a SAE the clinic staff will refer the patient to the DF hospital; if jaundice is apparent or liver 
damage is suspected in any other way (including transaminase rise >5 ULN) all treatment will be 
stopped immediately and the patient referred for hospitalization. It is standard management to 
restart drugs one by one, and almost always there is no recurrence. In case of recurrence, these 
patients will not be withdrawn but one or more drugs need to be replaced. If 2 drugs are replaced, 
the outcome of treatment will be considered as adverse. This will be described in detail in the 
technical guide. 
The AEs and related treatments will be recorded in the patient file.  An event is defined as an SAE 
when it meets one of the pre-defined outcomes. 
 
Examples of an AE include:  
1. Exacerbation of a chronic or intermittent pre-existing condition including either an increase in 
frequency and/or intensity of the condition.  
2. New conditions detected or diagnosed after investigational product administration even though 
it may have been present prior to the start of the study.  
3. Signs, symptoms, or the clinical sequelae of a suspected interaction.  
4. Signs, symptoms, or the clinical sequelae of a suspected overdose of either investigational 
product or a concurrent medication (overdose per se should not be reported as an AE/SAE).  
Examples of an AE do NOT include a/an:  
1. Situations where an untoward medical occurrence did not occur (social and/or convenience 
admission to a hospital).  
2. Anticipated day-to-day fluctuations of pre-existing chronic disease(s) or condition(s) present or 
detected at the start of the study that do not worsen.  
3. Hospital admission for DOT (e.g. intensive phase of MDR treatment) or rapid DST 
4. Pregnancy occurring during treatment, in absence of pregnancy complications  
 
Serious Adverse Events 
A Serious Adverse Event (SAE) is any adverse event/experience occurring at any study drug dose that 
results in any of the following outcomes: 
 
Death; 
 
Life threatening (subject at immediate risk of death); 
 
Requires in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; 
 
Results in congenital anomaly/birth defect; 
 
Results in a persistent or significant disability or incapacity; 
 
An important medical event that may not result in death, be life threatening, or require 
hospitalization may be considered an SAE when, based upon appropriate medical judgment, the 
event may jeopardize the subject and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent 
one of the outcomes listed in this definition. 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             29/54 
 
 
NOTE (1): In general, hospitalization signifies that the subject has been detained (usually 
involving at least an overnight stay) at the hospital or emergency ward for observation 
and/or treatment that would not have been appropriate in the physician’s office or out-
patient setting. Complications that occur during hospitalization are AEs. If a complication 
prolongs hospitalization or fulfils any other serious criteria, the event is an SAE. When in 
doubt as to whether “hospitalization” occurred or was necessary, the event should be 
considered an SAE. Hospitalization for elective treatment of a pre-existing condition that did 
not worsen from baseline is not considered an AE, nor hospitalization for non-medical reasons 
(e.g., the patient stays at the hospital overnight because (s)he lives too far and/or there is not 
transport).  
NOTE (2): All hospitalisations for treatment of TB will not be considered an SAE, unless if due 
to complications arisen after giving the TB treatment. 
NOTE (3): The term disability means a substantial disruption of a person’s ability to conduct 
normal life functions. This definition is not intended to include experiences of relatively minor 
medical significance such as uncomplicated headache, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, influenza, 
and accidental trauma (e.g. sprained ankle) which may interfere or prevent everyday life 
functions but do not constitute a substantial disruption. 
NOTE (4): The term 'life-threatening' in the definition of 'serious' refers to an event in which 
the subject was at risk of death at the time of the event. It does not refer to an event, which 
hypothetically might have caused death, if it were more severe. 
 
Severity, relationship of event to study drug and outcome 
All SAE’s will be assessed by the clinic’s trained TLCA (or visiting supervisor or Medical Officer) using a 
protocol defined grading system. For events not included in the protocol defined grading system, the 
following guidelines will be used to quantify intensity:  
1. Mild: events require minimal or no treatment and do not interfere with the subject’s daily 
activities. 
2. Moderate: events result in a low level of inconvenience or concern with the therapeutic 
measures. Moderate events may cause some interference with functioning. 
3. Severe: events interrupt a subject’s usual daily activity and may require systemic drug 
therapy or other treatment. Severe events are usually incapacitating. 
4. Life-threatening: Subject at risk for death at the time of the event 
 
Assessment of causality  
The investigator is obliged to assess the relationship between investigational product and the 
occurrence of each SAE. The investigator will use clinical judgement to determine the relationship. 
Alternative causes, such as natural history of the underlying diseases, concomitant therapy, other 
risk factors, and the temporal relationship of the event to the IMP will be considered and 
investigated. The investigator will also consult the drug information and the DSMB as needed in the 
determination of his/her assessment. 
 
The relationship of an adverse event to study drug is to be assessed according to the following 
definitions and can only be done by the study physician:  
1. Definitely unrelated: Reserved for those events which cannot be even remotely related to 
study participation (e.g. injury caused by a third party). 
  


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             30/54 
 
2. Unlikely: There is no reasonable temporal association between the study drug and the AE 
and the event could have been produced by the subject's clinical state or other modes of 
therapy administered to the subject.  
 
3. Possible: The suspected AE may or may not follow a reasonable temporal sequence from 
study drug administration but seems to be the type of reaction that cannot be dismissed as 
unlikely. The event could have been produced or mimicked by the subject's clinical state or 
by other modes of therapy concomitantly administered to the subject. 
  
4. Likely: The suspected adverse event follows a reasonable temporal sequence from study 
drug administration, abates upon discontinuation of the drug, and cannot be reasonably 
explained by the known characteristics of the subject's clinical state.  
 
5. Definitely related: Reserved for those events which have no uncertainty in their relationship 
to test drug administration: this means that a re-challenge was positive. 
The outcome of each SAE must be assessed according to the following classification: 
Completely recovered :  
The patient has fully recovered with no observable 
residual effects  
Not yet completely recovered :  
Improvement in the patient’s condition has 
occurred, but the patient still has some residual 
effects  
Deterioration :  
The patient’s overall condition has worsened  
Permanent damage :  
The AE has resulted in a permanent impairment  
Death :  
The patient died due to the AE  
Ongoing :  
The AE has not resolved and remains the same as 
at onset  
Unknown :  
The outcome of the AE is not known because the 
patient did not return for follow-up (lost to follow-
up)  
 
All SAEs will be compiled by the clinic supervisor on the paper report form for the corresponding 
visit, and completed by the Medical Officer in charge of the hospitalization as appropriate. The 
Investigator will systematically check and validate the paper records on SAE and other points during 
his supervision visits to clinics and hospitals, and correct / complete as required before entering the 
data in the electronic CRF. SAE will be registered as soon as treatment has started and up to its end.  
There may be situations when an SAE has occurred and the investigator has minimal information to 
include in the initial report to the pharmacovigilance. However, it is very important that the 
investigator always makes an assessment of causality for every event prior to transmission of the 
report to the pharmacovigilance. The investigator may change his/her opinion of causality in light of 
follow-up information, amending the SAE-report form accordingly. 
 
All SAE’s whether or not deemed drug related or expected must be reported immediately or within 
24 hours (one working day) using the SAE Notification Form by telefax or email to: 
 
Clinical Trials Unit 
 
Institute of Tropical Medicine 
 
Nationalestraat 155 
 
B-2000 Antwerp – Belgium 
 
Fax: +32 3 247 66 47 
 
Email: pharmacovigilance@itg.be 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             31/54 
 
 
The title of the e-mail/fax should mention the name of the study code, the patient code and the 
wording “SAE – Initial/follow up report”.  
 
Line listings of all reported SAE’s will be sent at least quarterly to the DSMB, and on a yearly basis to 
the IRB of the Union, ITM and the EC of UZA. They will also be sent yearly to the study coordinator in 
Bangladesh to submit these to the respective Authorities and/or ECs. 
The Principal Investigator is responsible to report the SAE to the relevant Institutional Ethics 
Committees and the Bangladesh Regulatory Authorities immediately or according to the deadline 
established by each Ethics Committee. 
 
7.2 Data and Safety Monitoring Board 
A Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) with at least 3 independent members will be 
established for the purpose of providing independent advice on the quality of the data produced 
and the safety of the treatment tested, so contributing to safeguarding the interests of the trial 
subjects. Based on the review of the (safety) data, the DSMB can advise the sponsor to modify, halt, 
discontinue, or continue the trial. 
Two types of interim analyses are performed during the trial. The DSMB will meet quarterly after the 
start of enrolment of the first patients and assess toxicity data to safeguard the study participants 
safety. The formal interim analysis of the toxicity and efficacy to aid the design of a follow-up study 
will only be performed when treatment has completed for all patients as full information is needed 
for the complete treatment period.  
 
A DSMB charter, where the relevant terms of reference including any stopping rules if deemed 
appropriate are clearly defined, as well as the composition and independency of the Board, will be 
approved and signed for approval by each member of the DSMB.  
 
8. STATISTICAL METHODS 
Statistical analysis of the study will be performed by the biostatistician at the CTU according to a 
statistical analysis plan (SAP) prepared before the initial data analysis. Analyses will be performed at 
the following time-points (in addition to safety analyses performed by the independent DSMB): 
1) Assessment of referral for rapid DST plus its outcome based on the auramine and/or FDA decline 
for the patients randomized in the intervention arm versus persisting fever, for the patients 
randomized in the control arm, 2 weeks after the first 500 patients (intervention + controls) are 
enrolled.  With this analysis we want to assess whether any of those can really  be used as an early 
indicator of serious rifampicin resistance, and  also assess the impact of improvement of staining 
techniques that were made after the first ITM monitoring visits. The results in terms of resistance 
missed / correctly suspected will be analysed based on the initial genetic rifampicin resistance data 
which will by that time also be available for part of these patients. 
In addition we would like to add the stratification as additional variable.  Firstly, we will compare the 
recruitment at start (end of 2014) against the recruitment in 2015 to assess whether improvement 
has been made.  Secondly we will compare the recruitment of new versus retreatment cases. 
2) Assessment of drug toxicity and initial treatment response will be performed at the time the last 
recruited patient finishes treatment. The data will be compiled at 9 months after the end of 
recruitment to ensure all treatment related data, including 8 months of treatment for retreatment 
cases in the control arm, are available. This analysis will be primarily performed for the go/no-go 
decision and design considerations for the cluster-randomized trial. The decision on proceeding to 
the cluster randomized study will be based on the absence of excess toxicity, a trend toward a 
reduction of unfavourable outcomes (excluding relapse), possible favourable effects on low-
resistance mutations. 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             32/54 
 
3) A final analysis of the study endpoints will be performed one year after end of treatment of the 
last enrolled patients, i.e. about 2.5 years after enrolment start. 
 
8.1 Study hypotheses 
This study is a pilot study to estimate the differences in the incidences in adverse treatment 
outcomes and excess toxicity. Consequently, the focus will be in describing event rates in each study 
arm and estimating the differences in event rates using odds-ratio's together with 95% confidence 
intervals (CIs) and not on formal hypothesis testing. P-values for comparisons of event rates (adverse 
treatment outcomes and safety endpoints) between intervention and control arms will be provided, 
but will need to be interpreted with care.  
 
8.2 Variables of interest 
All variables of interests are event rates as defined in Section 3.1. In each analysis, if a patient has 
two events for the analysis of interest (e.g. relapse followed by death), the first endpoint will be 
taken into account.  
 
8.3 Statistical methods 
8.3.1 Analysis populations 
We will analyse the efficacy data both using Intention-to-Treat and Per-Protocol approaches, with 
Intention-to-Treat as primary approach. In the Intention-to-Treat analysis, all patients will be 
analysed according to their randomized allocation, even in case they receive another treatment 
regimen, show protocol violations prior to or during the study, or are lost-to follow. Patients lost-to-
follow-up before the 12 month post treatment follow-up or who do not provide a sputum smear are 
considered to be failures in this analysis, unless they are known to have moved out of the study 
region. In the per-protocol analysis only patients who receive study drug as planned, have complete 
follow-up (till 2.5 years or development of a study endpoint) or have reached a study endpoint at an 
earlier time-point, and follow the protocol as planned are included.  
Safety analysis will be performed using an all-patients-treated approach, including all patients who 
received at least a single dose, and according to the treatment regimen actually received. 
 
8.3.2 Baseline characteristics 
Patients in each treatment group, and in each hospital, will be described with respect to baseline 
characteristics. The clinical importance of any imbalance will be noted though statistical tests of 
significance will not be undertaken. 
 
8.3.3 Primary analysis 
Counts and proportions (end 95% CI) of patients with any adverse treatment outcome, and by 
adverse treatment outcome category, will be presented. The confidence intervals for incidences will 
be estimated using Wilson's score method. Odds ratio's (ORs) and 95% CIs for the OR will be 
estimated from a logistic regression model with effects for arm (intervention vs control), hospital, 
and stratum (new/re-treatment case). The p-value for the test of no difference among arms will be 
presented. If the number of events is low a logistic regression model with an effect for hospital may 
be used instead of the full model proposed.  
Similar analysis will be performed for the primary safety endpoint.  
 
8.3.4 Secondary and tertiary analysis 
Secondary Objectives 
1. 
To assess whether the study regimen also cures low-level rifampicin resistant TB 
Adverse treatment outcomes will be described and compared among treatment groups 
in subgroups defined by initial rifampicin resistance mutations (performed in all 
patients) detected: 
 
none 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             33/54 
 
 
low-level 
 
high 
 
2. 
To assess the effectiveness of standard auramine versus FDA vital staining screening at 
two weeks of treatment for early switch of non-responding rifampicin resistant TB to 
MDR-TB treatment  
 
The proportion of initial rifampicin resistant case detected by FDA (i.e. the sensitivity of 
FDA) will be estimated together with 95% CI. The same analysis will be performed for 
auramine or ZN AFB smears and compared with FDA. Also the number of referrals 
needed with both techniques will be compared. 
 
3. 
To assess the negative predictive value of conversion at 2 weeks for relapse 
 
The Negative Predictive value (and 95% CI) of conversion in the intervention arm will be 
estimated as the % of relapses among those with a minimum 1 log decline in the number 
of AFB, or who are already negative or only scanty positive on AFB smear (auramine or 
FDA) at week 2. 
4. 
To estimate the proportion of acquired rifampicin resistance among failures and relapses 
 
Proportions will be estimated together with 95% confidence intervals, using the number 
of failure / relapse cases without mutation detected at diagnosis as the denominator and 
comparing intervention and control arms. 
 
8.3.5 Subgroup analyses 
In addition to the main results, pooling new and retreatment cases, all data will be described for new 
and retreatment TB cases separately. 
8.3.6 Multiplicity and Missing Data 
As this is a pilot estimation study with a single primary efficacy and safety endpoint, no multiplicity 
adjustments are needed. An interim analysis will be performed on the end-of treatment data, but 
this analysis will be done after recruitment is completed and will not influence for continuation of the 
study. The DSMB will only review safety data and will not stop the study for efficacy advantages. 
The handling of missing data will be specified in the SAP. In the intention-to-treat analysis, patients 
who are lost-to-follow-up will be counted as treatment failures, unless they are known to have 
moved outside of the area. 
 
8.4 Sample size and power 
The sample size of two times 500 patients is a trade-off between precision and exposing an 
excessively high number of patients to potentially more toxic treatment. Power has not been taken 
into account, but if the results are favourable large scale cluster-randomized study will be designed 
to bring definitive proof. 
The registered incidence of clinically apparent hepatitis from any cause during TB treatment is 1.5% 
for the study population. With the proposed sample size, an increase by at least 2% compared to the 
control arm will attain statistical significance (p=0.047).  
With the standard (=control) regimens and definitions, about 2% failures and 2% relapses are 
currently notified by the DF project, but only 50% of those are culture-positive, and about half of the 
culture positive failures and relapses are rifampicin-resistant. Overall cure rate (new and retreatment 
cases together) is close to 90%, with 4% default and 4% deaths. Based on the data from 2010 about 
20 cases with rifampicin resistance may be enrolled, 10 in each arm. We estimate that the more 
effective study regimen plus early detection of serious drug resistance rolled over to MDR-TB 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             34/54 
 
treatment will prevent drug resistant failure and relapse, reduce rifampicin susceptible relapse to an 
estimated two third, and reduce death and default because of unrecognized rifampicin resistance to 
80% of the control arm. This total estimated reduction of unfavourable outcome from 10% to 7% 
remains non-significant with the targeted enrolment of two times 500 cases. With 80% power and 
95% confidence level, 2 x 1421 patients would have to be enrolled, which is not feasible and also 
difficult to justify. However, a slightly larger reduction of unfavourable outcome from 10% to 6.5% 
comparing two arms of 500 cases each would already result in a significant p-value. Additional 
evidence will be obtained studying rpoB mutations, initially (all smear-positives) and at time of failure 
or relapse (only in the few such cases expected). Absence of low-level resistance mutations only 
among patients with unfavourable outcome on the high-dose arm, while they were present among 
new cases in both arms, will be interpreted as additional evidence of effectiveness of the increased 
dosing.  
 
9. MONITORING AND QUALITY ASSURANCE 
This study will be monitored in accordance with regulations applicable to clinical trials, including 
ICH-GCP and WHO-GCLP, and sponsor-specific SOPs. The PI and involved site research staff will 
allocate adequate time and resources for such monitoring activities. The investigator will also ensure 
that the monitor or QA reviewer is given access to all the above noted study-related documents and 
study-related facilities (e.g. pharmacy, diagnostic laboratory, etc.) and has adequate space and 
resources to conduct monitoring and source data verification. 
 
The task of the Monitor, who is appointed by the sponsor, is to verify the conduct of the study 
through frequent contacts by phone and in person with the Principal Investigator and site staff, in 
accordance with applicable regulations, Good Clinical Practice requirements and study-specific 
Standard Operating Procedures. The objectives and specific tasks of the Monitor are described in the 
ICH Guidelines E6. The monitoring visits will enable the Monitor to maintain current, personal 
knowledge of the study through review of the records, comparison with source documents, 
observation and discussion of the conduct of the study with the Investigator.  
The monitoring and Source Data Verification will be detailed in a specific monitoring plan. Each site 
will be visited by the clinical monitor before the study is started (“pre-study visit”), to assess the site 
suitability for the study. In addition, it will be visited at the beginning of the study (“site initiation 
visit”) and at least 3 times during the conduct of the trial, plus a “close-out visit” (or “end of trial 
visit”) after the last patient has completed the follow up and the database has been locked. 
The remote support (by e-mail, Skype) to the Investigator in-between site visits will be an important 
part of the monitor’s work, as well as the coordination of the TMG meetings.  
 
After completion of the trial, a final study report will be prepared, signed and dated by the 
coordinating investigators. The report will be submitted to the relevant EC bodies, the DSMB and 
regulatory authorities before any publication. 
The Principal Investigator must ensure that source documents are maintained for each patient in the 
study, consisting in case and visit notes (hospital or clinic medical records) containing the 
Investigator’s copy of the signed informed consent, demographic and medical information, 
laboratory data, and the results of any other tests or assessments, according to applicable GCP 
requirements. All information in the CRF must be traceable to these source documents in the 
patient’s file. The investigator must give the monitor, who is bound by a confidentiality agreement to 
protect patients’ confidentiality, access to all relevant source documents to confirm their consistency 
with the CRF entries. We refer to the relevant SOP for further details. Further adaptations to the 
specific context can be made after the pre-study visit. 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             35/54 
 
The Principal Investigators - by signing this protocol - declare that he/she will permit trial-related 
monitoring, external audits, Independent Ethic Committee review, and regulatory inspections, 
providing direct access to source data/documents as well as any other trial related documentation. 
The Principal Investigators agree to conduct the present study in full agreement with the principles of 
the “Declaration of Helsinki” as amended in Fortaleza, Brazil in 2013 (see Appendix 3) and any 
subsequent versions. 
 
10. DATA MANAGEMENT 
The DF labs and clinics participating in the study will maintain the routine NTP and DF treatment 
records and register, and will follow routine NTP and DF reporting formats and frequency. These 
records already include a unique TB treatment identifier for each patient and patient treatment 
episode, which will also be used for the study-specific records and reports. The patient’s name will 
not appear on any document communicated to researchers outside the DF project. A standard CRF 
will be created and given to sites to complete study relevant data. 
Choice of laptops, clinical trial specific software and enforcing internet capacity falls under the 
responsibility of the CTU Data Manager and Coordinating Investigator to ensure a validated and GCP 
compliant data flow (with audit trail, data cleaning system and source document verification). In case 
internet capacity and data management on the field allows it, the MACRO (Infermed©) is the first 
choice software, a CFR21Part11 in built query system, audit trail, electronic signature and thus these 
data can be considered to be trustworthy, reliable and equivalent to paper records. This system will 
be validated. Alternatively validation will be done on paper CRF. 
The CRF will be sent to the ITM on regular basis. This will be described in detail in the data 
management plan by the CTU Data Manager. The electronic data will be protected with password 
control. 
The Data Management SOP of the CTU will be used to follow the general Data Management Process. 
The Data Management Plan will be made by CTU Data Manager and contains all details on the study 
specific data flow, timelines and roles and responsibilities which will vary if the first choice of an 
electronic CRF (MACRO) can be used, and whether or not offline or online.  
The participants will be identified by a study specific participant number and/or code in any 
database. The name and any other identifying detail will not be included in any study data electronic 
file.  
The data collection and data cleaning process will refer to the source document used in routine. An 
audit trail will track any changes made to the study data (CRF), queries raised during the data review 
process will be stored in the patient file. All details on data collection, -entry, -review, -transfer and 
achieving will be documented in detail in the data management plan before the start of the study. 
 
11. ETHICAL ISSUES 
 
11.1 Ethical and regulatory review 
This study will be submitted for formal review and approval to the Institutional Review Board of the 
ITM, the EC of the University Hospital in Antwerp, the Ethical Advisory Group (EAG) of the 
International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, and the National Research Ethics 
Committee of the Bangladesh Medical Research Council. No participants will be enrolled or subject 
related activities performed before written approval from these bodies is obtained.  
The study will be carried out according to the principles stated in the Declaration of Helsinki, all 
applicable regulations and according to the most recent GCP guidelines. 
 
11.2 Protocol amendments 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             36/54 
 
Once the final clinical study protocol has been issued and signed by the authorized signatories, it 
cannot be informally altered. Protocol amendments have the same legal status and must pass 
through the appropriate steps before being implemented. Any substantial change must be approved 
by all the bodies and EC’s that have approved the initial protocol, prior to being implemented, unless 
it is due to participant’s safety concerns (in which case the immediate implementation can be 
necessary for the sake of subject’s protection). In case modifications to the protocol or amendment 
are requested by any local EC/CA during the review process, these must be discussed and agreed 
upon with the Sponsor prior to any resubmission incorporating those changes. 
 
11.3 Informed consent 
No subject may be admitted into the study until the Investigator or designee has obtained the 
written informed consent form.  
All patients will be asked to give their informed consent to participate in the study, before 
undergoing any study-specific procedures. The Informed Consent Form (ICF) as well as the informed 
consent interview will describe the purpose of the study, the procedures to be followed, the risks 
and benefits of participation, the voluntary nature etc., as described in the E6 ICH GCP Guidelines. 
The informed consent procedure is further described in paragraph 5.2. 
Additional to the study-consent, specific consent for the long-term storage of sputum samples is also 
requested from the potential participants. 
 
11.4 Confidentiality 
All patients’ data will be coded in the CRF and database by means of a unique subject assigned 
patient study number. The documents which can identify the patients, e.g. the ICF’s, laboratory print-
outs and medical record, will only be accessible to the relevant study staff and to study monitors, 
auditors and inspectors only under confidentiality agreements.  
Patient integrity and safety are safeguarded by on-site monitoring and by an independent data safety 
monitoring board, which can steer the study as it deems necessary or strongly suggest the sponsor to 
prematurely terminate the trial if necessary.  
 
11.5 Risks and benefits 
We believe that all patients who receive the intervention will benefit: by reduced risk of relapse for 
those with more extensive disease; and/or by reduced adverse outcome due to initial or acquired 
resistance to rifampicin, lessening the need for a more toxic 2nd line regimen. Also patients switched 
to MDR-treatment will fare better, with less risk of hearing loss, due to removal of Cat. 2 regimen 
with reduced cumulative injectable exposure, as well as reduced failure/relapse due to pre-existing 
pyrazinamide, ethambutol and higher level isoniazid resistance.  
 
There is no reason why the study would hold an increased risk for the DF staff. To the contrary, faster 
conversion of all smear-positives and earlier detection and treatment of MDR cases will reduce their 
occupational risk of contracting TB, whether drug susceptible or resistant.  
 
11.6 Assurance of clinical care 
Patients who decline participation will be treated and followed according to standard NTP guidelines. 
 
Clinical staff of the participating DF TB centers will receive refresher training regarding early 
symptoms and signs of hepatitis; since these clinics are located within Government peripheral 
hospitals with extensive staffing, including nine medical doctors, wards and an emergency 
department, urgent referrals will always be possible. However, Damien Foundation Bangladesh will 
assure proper care of patients experiencing adverse drug events, in its own hospitals and with its 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             37/54 
 
own Medical Officers, or if needed by referral to the Medical Colleges in its project area. Such 
referrals will be paid by the project.  
The DF project has a long tradition of accurate recording and reporting, with strict implementation of 
guidelines, and its past mass treatment studies have been successfully completed and published. For 
this study the project will be prepared and monitored for compliance with Good Clinical Practice and 
Good Clinical Laboratory Practice. The ITM Clinical Trial Unit will also set up a dedicated database 
with audit trail, and assure proper record keeping. Patient confidentiality will be guaranteed by the 
use of anonymous unique patient identifiers on study specific clinical record forms, reports and 
laboratory database listings that will be used by the researchers. The TB Supra-National Reference 
Laboratory at ITM, Antwerp, has closely collaborated with the DF project for 20 years already. It will 
assure proper training and supervision of the local bacteriology, and perform the more advanced 
tests such as DNA sequencing, MICs and spoligotyping.  
 
11.7 Study Insurance 
The Sponsor will obtain a study-specific no-fault insurance to cover harm/damage patients might 
incur as a result of participation in the study. A copy of the insurance certificate or contract will also 
be submitted to the applicable EC’s for formal review and approval. 
 
12 DISSEMINATION OF RESULTS, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 
The protocol, CRF, SOPs and other related study documents are developed together by the study 
partners, approved by the Sponsor and provided to the Investigators and his/her appointed staff in 
confidence. None of this material may be disclosed to any party not directly involved with the study, 
without written permission from the Sponsor.  
 
Communication and publication of the study results will be carried out jointly by the Sponsor and 
the study partners, with a key-role played by the Coordinating Investigator(s), the CTU biostatistician 
and the DF Principal Investigator, with involvement also of DF Brussels. A more detailed publication 
plan will be agreed before completion of the study.  
 
13. ARCHIVING 
The sponsor and Investigator must maintain adequate and accurate records to enable the conduct 
of the study to be fully documented and the study data to be verified. The relevant essential 
documents are those documents which individually and collectively permit to assess the conduct of 
the trial, the quality of the data produced and the compliance with GCP standards and applicable 
regulatory requirements. The Investigator’s File (IF) should at least contain all the (essential) 
documents as listed in the ITM’s procedure “Set up and maintenance of the Investigator File”. A 
copy of all source data and Case Report Forms must remain on site at all times. 
 
After completion of the study, the IF and any study source data or databases not contained in the IF 
will remain available at the Damien Foundation Dhaka central office for at least 20 years for internal 
audits and/or inspections of regulatory authorities, unless differently requested by national 
authorities. 
The Sponsor should be informed prior to destruction of the files. 
Sputum samples preserved in alcohol will be stored at ITM Mycobacteriology Laboratory and may be 
used for future studies, as stated in the ICF. 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             38/54 
 
14. REFERENCES 
 
1.  World Health Organization. Global tuberculosis report 2012. World Health Organization 
Document 2012;WHO/HTM/TB/2012.6:1-272. 
 
2.  Aït-Khaled N, Alarcón E, Armengol R, Bissell K, Boillot F, Caminero J A, Chiang C Y, 
Clevenbergh P, Dlodlo R, Enarson D A, Enarson P, Fujiwara P I, Harries A D, Heldal E, 
Hinderaker S G, Monedero I, Rieder H L, Rusen I D, Trébucq A, Van Deun A, Wilson N. 
Management of tuberculosis. A guide to the essentials of good practice. (Sixth edition). Paris: 
International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 2010. 
 
3.  Van Deun A, Aung K J M, Bola V, Lebeke R, Hossain M A, De Rijk W B, et al. Rifampin drug 
resistance tests for tuberculosis: challenging the gold standard. J.Clin.Microbiol. 51, 2633-
2640. 2013.  
 
4.  Rigouts L, Gumusboga M, De Rijk W B, Nduwamahoro E, Uwizeye C B, de Jong B, et al. 
Rifampin resistance missed in automated liquid culture system for Mycobacterium 
tuberculosis isolates with specific rpoB mutations. J.Clin.Microbiol. 51, 2641-2645. 2013.  
 
5.  Mitchison D A. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters and the choice of high-
dosage rifamycins. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2012;16:1186-9. 
 
6.  Verbist L. European Symposium - rifampicin, 10-11 March 1969. Rifampicin activity "in vitro" 
and in established tuberculosis in mice. Acta Tuberc Pneumol Belgica 1969;60:397-412. 
 
7.  Gumbo T, Louie A, Deziel M R, Liu W, Parsons L M, Salfinger M, et al. Concentration-
dependent Mycobacterium tuberculosis killing and prevention of resistance by rifampicin. 
Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007;51:3781-8. 
 
8.  Pasipanodya J, Gumbo T. An oracle: antituberculosis pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics, 
clinical correlation, and clinical trial simulations to predict the future. Antimicrob Agents 
Chemother 2011;55:24-34. 
 
9.  Peloquin C. What is the 'right' dose of rifampin? (Editorial). Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2003;7:3-5. 
 
10.  Ohno H, Koga H, Kohno S, Tashiro T, Hara K. Relationship between rifampin MICs and rpoB 
mutations of Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains isolated in Japan. Antimicrob Agents 
Chemother 1996;40:1053-6. 
 
11.  Chang K C, Leung C C, Yew W W, Chan S L, Tam C M. Dosing schedules of 6-month regimens 
and relapse for pulmonary tuberculosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006;174:1153-8. 
 
12.  Li J, Munsiff S S, Driver C R, Sackoff J. Relapse and acquired rifampin resistance in HIV-
infected patients with tuberculosis treated with rifampin- or rifabutin-based regimens in New 
York City, 1997-2000. Clin Infect Dis 2005;41:83-91. 
 
13.  Steingart K R, Jotblad S, Robsky K, Deck D, Hopewell P C, Huang D, et al. Higher-dose rifampin 
for the treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis: a systematic review. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 
2011;15:305-16. 
 
14.  Kreis B, Pretet S, Birenbaum J, Guibout P, Hazeman J J, Orin E, et al. Two three-month 
treatment regimens for pulmonary tuberculosis. Bull Int Union Tuberc 1976;51:71-5. 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             39/54 
 
 
15.  Shu C C, Lee C H, Lee M C, Wang J Y, Yu C J, Lee L N. Hepatotoxicity due to first-line anti-
tuberculosis drugs: a five-year experience in a Taiwan medical centre. Int.J.Tuberc.Lung Dis. 
17, 934-939. 2013.  
 
16.  Tostmann A, Boeree M J, Aarnoutse R E, de Lange W C M, van der Ven A J A M, Dekhuijzen R. 
Antituberculosis drug-induced hepatotoxicity: concise up-to-date review. J Gastroenterol 
Hepatol 2008;23:192-202. 
 
17.  Brindle R, Odhiambo J, Mitchison D. Serial counts of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in sputum 
as surrogate markers of the sterilising activity of rifampicin and pyrazinamide in treating 
pulmonary tuberculosis. BMC Pulm Med 2001;1471-2466/1/2. 
 
18.  World Health Organization. Treatment of Tuberculosis Guidelines, Fourth Edition. World 
Health Organization Document 2010;WHO/HTM/TB/2009.420. 
 
19.  Canetti G, Fox W, Khomenko A, Mitchison D A, Rist N, Smelev N A. Advances in techniques of 
testing mycobacterial drug sensitivity, and the use of sensitivity tests in tuberculosis control 
programmes. Bull World Health Organ 1969;41:21-43. 
 
20.  Rigouts L, Nolasco O, de Rijk P, Nduwamahoro E, Van Deun A, Ramsay A, et al. Newly 
developed primers for comprehensive amplification of the rpoB gene and detection of 
rifampin resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J Clin Microbiol 2007;45:252-4. 
 
21.  Kamerbeek J, Schouls L, Kolik A, van Agterveld M, van Soolingen D, Kuijper S, et al. 
Simultaneous detection and strain differentiation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis for 
diagnosis and epidemiology. J Clin Microbiol 1997;35:907-14. 
 
22.  Hamid Salim M A, Uplekar M, Daru P, Aung M, Declerq E, Lönnroth K. Turning liabilities into 
resources: informal village doctors and tuberculosis control in Bangladesh. Bull World Health 
Organ 2006;84:479-84. 
 
 
 
 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             40/54 
 
15. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 
 
AFB 
acid-fast bacilli 
AUC 
area under the curve 
C 
clofazimine 
C.I. 
confidence interval 
C max 
peak drug serum concentration 
CA 
competent authorities 
Cat. 1 
first-line standard regimen for new cases 
Cat. 2 
first-line standard regimen for previously treated cases 
(e-)CRF 
(electronic) case record form 
CTU 
clinical trial unit 
DF 
Damien Foundation 
DNA 
desoxyribonucleic acid 
DSMB 
data safety and monitoring board 
DST 
drug susceptibility testing 
E 
ethambutol 
EC 
ethics committee 
FDA 
fluorescein diacetate 
G 
gatifloxacin 
GCP 
good clinical practice 
GCLP 
good clinical laboratory practice 
H 
isoniazid 
HIV 
human immune-deficiency virus 
(I)CF 
(informed) consent form 
IF  
Investigator file  
IRB 
institutional review board 
ITM 
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp 
FM 
fluorescence microscopy 
K 
Kanamycin 
LED 
light-emitting diode 
LJ 
Löwenstein-Jensen medium 
MDR-TB 
multidrug-resistant TB 
MGIT 
Mycobacterium growth indicator tube 
MIC 
minimum inhibitory concentration 
NTP 
national TB control programme 
PCR 
polymerase chain reaction 
PI 
principal investigator 
PNB 
para-nitro benzoic acid 
Pto 
Prothionamide 
QA 
quality assurance 
QC 
quality control 
R 
Rifampicin 
S 
Streptomycin 
(S)AE 
(serious) adverse event 
SOP 
standard operating procedure 
TB 
Tuberculosis 
UZA 
University Hospital Antwerp 
WHO 
World Health Organization 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             41/54 
 
XDR-TB 
extensively drug resistant TB 
Z 
Pyrazinamide 
ZN 
Ziehl-Neelsen 
 
 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             42/54 
 
16. ANNEXES 
 
Annex I 
Statements regarding lack of excessive toxicity high-dose rifampicin 
 
1. PanACEA Consortium Study  
 
Primary source: Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections 
Source reference: 
Boeree M, et al "Paper #148LB: What Is the "right" dose of rifampin?" 20th conference on 
retroviruses and opportunistic infections" CROI 2013: Abstract 128. 
Paper #148LB 
What Is the “Right” Dose of Rifampin? 
Martin Boeree*1, A Diacon2, R Dawson3, A Venter2, J du Bois2, K Narunsky3, M Hoelscher4, S Gillespie5, 
P Phillips6, R Aarnoutse1, and PanACEA Consortium 
1Radboud Univ Nijmegen Med Ctr, The Netherlands; 2Univ of Stellenbosch, Cape Town, South Africa; 
3Univ of Cape Town, South Africa; 4Med Ctr of the Univ of Munich, Germany; 5Univ of St Andrews, 
UK; and 6MRC Clin Trial Unit, London, UK  
Background: In 1971 the dose of 10 mg/kg rifampin (RIF) was arbitrarily chosen without a maximum 
tolerated dose (MTD) study. Current murine and human data show that an increase in dose of 
rifampin may significantly shorten treatment duration. The primary aim of this study was to assess 
the MTD of RIF. 
Methods: We performed a 14-day study in adult smear-positive TB patients. Consecutive groups of 8 
and 15 patients received 10 and 20, 25, 30, and 35 mg/kg RIF (days 1-7), complemented with 
standard doses of isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (8-14). RIF plasma levels were sampled at 
days 7 and 14. Colony forming units (CFU) of Mycobacterium tuberculosis on solid medium and time 
to culture positivity (TTP) in liquid medium were assessed at baseline and days 1 to 7, 12, and 14. 
After each dose increase, adverse events were reviewed by a committee and dose increments were 
approved. 
Results: In the 5 dose groups (N = 68) we recorded 163 adverse events, 110 were possibly related 
(102) or related (8) to RIF: 88 grade 1, 19 grade 2, and 3 grade 3. All 8 events related to RIF were 
grade 1.Grade 3 events included a case of transient hyperkalaemia (20 mg/kg) and 2 cases of 
elevated liver enzymes (30 and 35 mg/kg; onset days 21 and 17). The fall of log CFU over 14 days was 
dose-related and bi-phasic with a slightly steeper fall over the first than the second week in some 
groups (0.18, 0.15, 0.16, 0.25 log CFU/mL/day in the 10, 20, 25, and 30 mg/kg groups). The highest 
fall was seen with 35 mg/kg: 0.25 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31 - 0.18). The increase in log TTP 
was similarly dose-related (0.02, 0.03, 0.03, 0.04 log TTP/day in the 10, 20, 25, and 30 mg/kg groups). 
The maximum increase over 14 days was seen with 35 mg/kg: 0.04 (95%CI 0.04 - 0.05). Mean RIF 
AUC 0-24 at day 7 was 26.3, 112.6, 134.5, and 189.4 h*mg/L in the 10, 20, 25, and 30 mg/kg arms, 
showing an initial non-linear increase followed by a more proportional increase in exposure. Mean 
Cmax values were 7.4, 21.6, 25.1, and 33.1 mg/L in the 10, 20, 25, and 30 mg/kg groups.  
Conclusions: RIF up to 35 mg/kg was safe and well tolerated with the highest activity seen with 35 
mg/kg indicating that the current accepted treatment dose of RIF may be too low. RIF exposure 
increases with dose without an apparent ceiling effect. Based on the result of this trial we will 
evaluate 35 mg RIF/kg administered for 12 weeks in a multiple arm, multiple stage design within the 
PanACEA consortium.  


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             43/54 
 
2. RIFATOX Study 
 
The results were first reported at a late breaker session at the 2013 World Conference of the IUATLD 
in Paris. The abstract of this communication is inserted below. 
 
A multicentre randomised controlled clinical trial to evaluate the toxicity of high dose rifampicin in 
the treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis (RIFATOX) 
Authors: A Jindani1, B Shrestha2, I Westermann de Patiño3, R Alvarez de Fernandes3, T Gonzales3, 
D Atwine4, M Bonnet5, N Patel1, 
G Borgulya1 and D Mitchison1. 1Infection and Immunity Research Centre, Division of Clinical 
Sciences, St George’s, University of London. 2German 
Nepal Tuberculosis Project, Kathmandu, Nepal. 3Centers Broncopulmonares, Cruz Roja, Santa Cruz, 
Bolivia. 4 Epicentre, c/o MSFCH Geneve, Switzerland, 
5MSF‐Epicentre, Mbarara, Uganda 
Background 
In vitro and animal studies suggest that higher doses of rifampicin result in increased bactericidal 
activity against M.tuberculosis. The aim of this trial is to assess whether an increase in the daily dose 
of rifampicin from 10 mg/Kg to 15 and 20 mg/Kg, for the first four months of the standard six month 
regimen, will result in an increase in severe (grade 3 or 4) adverse events. 
Methods 
HIV negative patients with newly diagnosed, microscopy positive pulmonary tuberculosis in 
Kathmandu, Nepal, Santa Cruz, Bolivia and Mbarara, Uganda, were invited to participate provided 
they fulfilled all the inclusion criteria. All received the WHO recommended 6 month regimen. They 
were randomly allocated to either the standard treatment (Control Regimen, CR) or a higher dose of 
rifampicin, of either 15mg/kg (Regimen 1, R1), or 20mg/kg (Regimen 2, R2) for the first 4 months. 
Liver function tests were carried out 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16 weeks. Sputum was cultured for 
M.tuberculosis pretreatment and after 8 weeks of treatment. 
Results 
A total of 300 patients were enrolled. Results from 250, who have completed 4 months of treatment, 
are presented with 84 in the CR, 84 in R1 and 82 in R2. The baseline gender distribution is 68% male 
and median age 29 years. There were 34 reported adverse events of which only 1 was hepatic (R1) 
and was classified as severe. There were 38 late screening failures and withdrawals. Of 220 patients 
for whom pretreatment and 8 week culture results are available, culture negativity rates at 8 weeks 
are 80.5% (CR), 85% (R1) and 85.5% (R2) respectively. 
Conclusion 
Rifampicin at 15mg/kg and 20mg/kg did not result in any increase in adverse events. A linear 
regression shows a trend for higher ALT levels with increasing doses of rifampicin suggesting caution 
with further dose increases. 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             44/54 
 
3. RAFA Study 
 
There are no preliminary reports on RAFA study as yet. However, I was assured by researchers 
implicated that no excess toxicity over the controls has been documented: email Dr. Corinne Merle, 
London School, here below 
 
From: Corinne Merle [mailto:Corinne.Merle@lshtm.ac.uk]  
Sent: donderdag 29 augustus 2013 20:33 
To: Armand Van Deun 
Subject: Re: high RIF 
 
Dear Armand,  
Yes I confirm that we don't have any hepatic issue so far in the RAFA project (i.e. we have some ALAT 
grade 1 increase but it is balanced when compared to the standard treatment). I am not in London 
currently but will be back the 10th of September and can give you a more detailed figure (i.e. exact 
number of patients in the high dose arm and % of ALAT increase events with corresponding grading) 
if it can be useful.  
In this study the population of patients are TB/HIV patients ARV naive with CD4 count>50 CD4. The 
dose we are using in the high dose rifampicin arm is 15mg/Kg for the 2 months initiation phase only 
(because ARV are initiated at week 8 and it would get too complex for the dosage of Efavirenz.).  
I hope it can help,  
Kind regards  
Corinne 
 
 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             45/54 
 
Annex II 
Algorithm for treatment monitoring, switch to the MDR-regimen and follow-up, for 
first-line control and intervention regimens 
 
 
 
Pos. / 
FDA+
Pos. / 
FDA+
Pos. / 
FDA+
Positive
smear
RMP-susceptible
(Xpert and slide DST)
Continue or re-start
Neg.
Neg.
Continue
treatment
Smear at 2/3 M
Declare cured
Follow-up 12M post
Smear at end treatment
Continue
Smear at 5M
Neg.
 (Xpert or slide DST)
Control
Smear-positive Pulmonary TB
newly registered & enrolled
Rapid DST
AFB <1 log lower
AFB >=1 log lower
Continue treatment
Smear at 2 weeks
first-line regimen
Intervention
Bdesh MDR 
regimen
first-line regimen
RMP-resistant


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             46/54 
 
 Annex III 
Map of Bangladesh with the DF project areas and study sites 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
DF Dhaka Head Office 
DF Hospital and reference lab 
Study clinics 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT 
 
 
Version 3.0, dated 18-MAY-2014   
 
 
 
 
 
             47/54 
 
Annex IV 
Study timeline 
 
 
TB_cascade study timeline: both the pilot and the larger add-on study are shown, although this proposal only concerns the pilot
Quarter
jan/14
apr/14
jul/14
okt/14
jan/15
apr/15
jul/15
okt/15
jan/16
apr/16
jul/16
okt/16
jan/17
apr/17
jul/17
okt/17
jan/18
apr/18
jul/18
Preparations &
enrolment pilot
purchases pilot study
treatment pilot
preliminary analysis pilot
Quarter
jan/14
apr/14
jul/14
okt/14
jan/15
apr/15
jul/15
okt/15
jan/16
apr/16
jul/16
okt/16
jan/17
apr/17
jul/17
okt/17
jan/18
apr/18
jul/18
Insurance
Purchase
Rifampicin
Purchase
Database
Install
enter
enter
enter
enter
enter
enter
enter
enter
enter
enter
enter
enter
enter
enter
enter
Training GCP/GCLP
do
do
do
CTU visits
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
Sequencing at ITM
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
Lab visits
do
do
do
do
do
12 M. post-treatment follow-up pilot
12 M. post-treatment follow-up add-on
final analysis pilot
final analysis add-on
treatment large add-on
enrolment large add-on


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT 
 
 
Version 3.0, dated 18-MAY-2014   
 
 
 
 
 
             48/54 
 
Annex V 
Helsinki Declaration 
 
Adopted by the 18th WMA General Assembly, Helsinki, Finland, June 1964 
and amended by the: 
29th WMA General Assembly, Tokyo, Japan, October 1975 
35th WMA General Assembly, Venice, Italy, October 1983 
41st WMA General Assembly, Hong Kong, September 1989 
48th WMA General Assembly, Somerset West, Republic of South Africa, October 1996 
52nd WMA General Assembly, Edinburgh, Scotland, October 2000  
53rd WMA General Assembly, Washington DC, USA, October 2002 (Note of Clarification added) 
55th WMA General Assembly, Tokyo, Japan, October 2004 (Note of Clarification added) 
59th WMA General Assembly, Seoul, Republic of Korea, October 2008 
64th WMA General Assembly, Fortaleza, Brazil, October 2013 
 
Preamble 
1.         The World Medical Association (WMA) has developed the Declaration of Helsinki as a 
statement of ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects, including research on 
identifiable human material and data. 
            The Declaration is intended to be read as a whole and each of its constituent paragraphs 
should be applied with consideration of all other relevant paragraphs. 
2.         Consistent with the mandate of the WMA, the Declaration is addressed primarily to 
physicians. The WMA encourages others who are involved in medical research involving human 
subjects to adopt these principles.  
General Principles 
3.         The Declaration of Geneva of the WMA binds the physician with the words, “The health of my 
patient will be my first consideration,” and the International Code of Medical Ethics declares that, “A 
physician shall act in the patient's best interest when providing medical care.” 
4.         It is the duty of the physician to promote and safeguard the health, well-being and rights of 
patients, including those who are involved in medical research. The physician's knowledge and 
conscience are dedicated to the fulfilment of this duty. 
5.         Medical progress is based on research that ultimately must include studies involving human 
subjects. 
6.         The primary purpose of medical research involving human subjects is to understand the 
causes, development and effects of diseases and improve preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic 
interventions (methods, procedures and treatments). Even the best proven interventions must be 
evaluated continually through research for their safety, effectiveness, efficiency, accessibility and 
quality. 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             49/54 
 
7.         Medical research is subject to ethical standards that promote and ensure respect for all 
human subjects and protect their health and rights. 
8.         While the primary purpose of medical research is to generate new knowledge, this goal can 
never take precedence over the rights and interests of individual research subjects. 
9.         It is the duty of physicians who are involved in medical research to protect the life, health, 
dignity, integrity, right to self-determination, privacy, and confidentiality of personal information of 
research subjects. The responsibility for the protection of research subjects must always rest with the 
physician or other health care professionals and never with the research subjects, even though they 
have given consent. 
10.       Physicians must consider the ethical, legal and regulatory norms and standards for research 
involving human subjects in their own countries as well as applicable international norms and 
standards. No national or international ethical, legal or regulatory requirement should reduce or 
eliminate any of the protections for research subjects set forth in this Declaration. 
11.       Medical research should be conducted in a manner that minimises possible harm to the 
environment. 
12.       Medical research involving human subjects must be conducted only by individuals with the 
appropriate ethics and scientific education, training and qualifications. Research on patients or 
healthy volunteers requires the supervision of a competent and appropriately qualified physician or 
other health care professional. 
13.       Groups that are underrepresented in medical research should be provided appropriate access 
to participation in research. 
14.       Physicians who combine medical research with medical care should involve their patients in 
research only to the extent that this is justified by its potential preventive, diagnostic or therapeutic 
value and if the physician has good reason to believe that participation in the research study will not 
adversely affect the health of the patients who serve as research subjects. 
15.       Appropriate compensation and treatment for subjects who are harmed as a result of 
participating in research must be ensured. 
Risks, Burdens and Benefits  
16.       In medical practice and in medical research, most interventions involve risks and burdens. 
           Medical research involving human subjects may only be conducted if the importance of the 
objective outweighs the risks and burdens to the research subjects. 
17.       All medical research involving human subjects must be preceded by careful assessment of 
predictable risks and burdens to the individuals and groups involved in the research in comparison 
with foreseeable benefits to them and to other individuals or groups affected by the condition under 
investigation. 
           Measures to minimise the risks must be implemented. The risks must be continuously 
monitored, assessed and documented by the researcher.  


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             50/54 
 
18.       Physicians may not be involved in a research study involving human subjects unless they are 
confident that the risks have been adequately assessed and can be satisfactorily managed. 
           When the risks are found to outweigh the potential benefits or when there is conclusive proof 
of definitive outcomes, physicians must assess whether to continue, modify or immediately stop the 
study.            
Vulnerable Groups and Individuals 
19.       Some groups and individuals are particularly vulnerable and may have an increased likelihood 
of being wronged or of incurring additional harm. 
           All vulnerable groups and individuals should receive specifically considered protection. 
20.       Medical research with a vulnerable group is only justified if the research is responsive to the 
health needs or priorities of this group and the research cannot be carried out in a non-vulnerable 
group. In addition, this group should stand to benefit from the knowledge, practices or interventions 
that result from the research. 
Scientific Requirements and Research Protocols  
21.       Medical research involving human subjects must conform to generally accepted scientific 
principles, be based on a thorough knowledge of the scientific literature, other relevant sources of 
information, and adequate laboratory and, as appropriate, animal experimentation. The welfare of 
animals used for research must be respected. 
22.       The design and performance of each research study involving human subjects must be clearly 
described and justified in a research protocol. 
           The protocol should contain a statement of the ethical considerations involved and should 
indicate how the principles in this Declaration have been addressed. The protocol should include 
information regarding funding, sponsors, institutional affiliations, potential conflicts of interest, 
incentives for subjects and information regarding provisions for treating and/or compensating 
subjects who are harmed as a consequence of participation in the research study. 
           In clinical trials, the protocol must also describe appropriate arrangements for post-trial 
provisions. 
Research Ethics Committees 
23.       The research protocol must be submitted for consideration, comment, guidance and approval 
to the concerned research ethics committee before the study begins. This committee must be 
transparent in its functioning, must be independent of the researcher, the sponsor and any other 
undue influence and must be duly qualified. It must take into consideration the laws and regulations 
of the country or countries in which the research is to be performed as well as applicable 
international norms and standards but these must not be allowed to reduce or eliminate any of the 
protections for research subjects set forth in this Declaration.  
           The committee must have the right to monitor ongoing studies. The researcher must provide 
monitoring information to the committee, especially information about any serious adverse events. 
No amendment to the protocol may be made without consideration and approval by the committee. 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             51/54 
 
After the end of the study, the researchers must submit a final report to the committee containing a 
summary of the study’s findings and conclusions.  
Privacy and Confidentiality  
24.       Every precaution must be taken to protect the privacy of research subjects and the 
confidentiality of their personal information. 
Informed Consent  
25.       Participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent as subjects in medical research 
must be voluntary. Although it may be appropriate to consult family members or community leaders, 
no individual capable of giving informed consent may be enrolled in a research study unless he or she 
freely agrees. 
26.       In medical research involving human subjects capable of giving informed consent, each 
potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any 
possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and 
potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, post-study provisions and any other 
relevant aspects of the study. The potential subject must be informed of the right to refuse to 
participate in the study or to withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. Special 
attention should be given to the specific information needs of individual potential subjects as well as 
to the methods used to deliver the information. 
           After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or 
another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential subject’s freely-given 
informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be expressed in writing, the non-
written consent must be formally documented and witnessed.       
           All medical research subjects should be given the option of being informed about the general 
outcome and results of the study. 
27.       When seeking informed consent for participation in a research study the physician must be 
particularly cautious if the potential subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may 
consent under duress. In such situations the informed consent must be sought by an appropriately 
qualified individual who is completely independent of this relationship. 
28.       For a potential research subject who is incapable of giving informed consent, the physician 
must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. These individuals must not 
be included in a research study that has no likelihood of benefit for them unless it is intended to 
promote the health of the group represented by the potential subject, the research cannot instead 
be performed with persons capable of providing informed consent, and the research entails only 
minimal risk and minimal burden. 
29.       When a potential research subject who is deemed incapable of giving informed consent is 
able to give assent to decisions about participation in research, the physician must seek that assent 
in addition to the consent of the legally authorised representative. The potential subject’s dissent 
should be respected. 
30.       Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally incapable of giving consent, for 
example, unconscious patients, may be done only if the physical or mental condition that prevents 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             52/54 
 
giving informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research  group. In such circumstances 
the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. If no such 
representative is available and if the research cannot be delayed, the study may proceed without 
informed consent provided that the specific reasons for involving subjects with a condition that 
renders them unable to give informed consent have been stated in the research protocol and the 
study has been approved by a research ethics committee. Consent to remain in the research must be 
obtained as soon as possible from the subject or a legally authorised representative. 
31.       The physician must fully inform the patient which aspects of their care are related to the 
research. The refusal of a patient to participate in a study or the patient’s decision to withdraw from 
the study must never adversely affect the patient-physician relationship. 
32.       For medical research using identifiable human material or data, such as research on material 
or data contained in biobanks or similar repositories, physicians must seek informed consent for its 
collection, storage and/or reuse. There may be exceptional situations where consent would be 
impossible or impracticable to obtain for such research. In such situations the research may be done 
only after consideration and approval of a research ethics committee. 
Use of Placebo 
33.       The benefits, risks, burdens and effectiveness of a new intervention must be tested against 
those of the best proven intervention(s), except in the following circumstances: 
           Where no proven intervention exists, the use of placebo, or no intervention, is acceptable; or 
           Where for compelling and scientifically sound methodological reasons the use of any 
intervention less effective than the best proven one, the use of placebo, or no intervention is 
necessary to determine the efficacy or safety of an intervention  
           and the patients who receive any intervention less effective than the best proven one, placebo, 
or no intervention will not be subject to additional risks of serious or irreversible harm as a result of 
not receiving the best proven intervention.  
           Extreme care must be taken to avoid abuse of this option. 
Post-Trial Provisions 
34.       In advance of a clinical trial, sponsors, researchers and host country governments should 
make provisions for post-trial access for all participants who still need an intervention identified as 
beneficial in the trial. This information must also be disclosed to participants during the informed 
consent process. 
Research Registration and Publication and Dissemination of Results 
35.       Every research study involving human subjects must be registered in a publicly accessible 
database before recruitment of the first subject. 
36.       Researchers, authors, sponsors, editors and publishers all have ethical obligations with regard 
to the publication and dissemination of the results of research. Researchers have a duty to make 
publicly available the results of their research on human subjects and are accountable for the 
completeness and accuracy of their reports. All parties should adhere to accepted guidelines for 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             53/54 
 
ethical reporting. Negative and inconclusive as well as positive results must be published or 
otherwise made publicly available. Sources of funding, institutional affiliations and conflicts of 
interest must be declared in the publication. Reports of research not in accordance with the 
principles of this Declaration should not be accepted for publication. 
Unproven Interventions in Clinical Practice 
37.       In the treatment of an individual patient, where proven interventions do not exist or other 
known interventions have been ineffective, the physician, after seeking expert advice, with informed 
consent from the patient or a legally authorised representative, may use an unproven intervention if 
in the physician's judgement it offers hope of saving life, re-establishing health or alleviating 
suffering. This intervention should subsequently be made the object of research, designed to 
evaluate its safety and efficacy. In all cases, new information must be recorded and, where 
appropriate, made publicly available. 
Disclaimer: © 2013 World Medical Association, Inc. All Rights Reserved. All intellectual property 
rights in the Declaration of Helsinki are vested in the World Medical Association.  Previous 
permissions granted to publish or reproduce otherwise WMA policy don’t apply to this version of 
the Declaration of Helsinki until January 1st, 2014. For further questions, please contact the WMA 
secretariat at secretariat@wma.net. 
 
 


Confidential 
Damien Foundation, Belgium 
 
 
        
 
 
OneRIF - NCT02153528 
Version 3.1, dated 15-APR-2015  
 
 
 
 
 
 
             54/54 
 
Annex VI 
Summary of amendments to OneRIF Protocol version 3.0 
 
- Throughout the protocol the NCT code is added and the protocol version number and date 
were adapted. 
- On pages 2, 3 and 5 Dr. Bouke de Jong is added as back-up of the ITM study coordinating 
investigator Dr. Armand Van Deun. 
- On pages 2, 3 and 5 Dr. Tine Demeulenaere is added as back-up of the DF study coordinating 
investigator Dr. Etienne Declercq. 
- On page 3 the list of CTU members involved in the study is updated. 
- On page 8 the instructions on how to write the synopsis are deleted. 
- On pages 16 and 17, section 3.1 primary endpoints, the outcome definitions are updated  
- On page 17 the section 3.2 secondary endpoints is updated. 
- At the top of page 23 a sentence is deleted. 
- On pages 25 and26 the sections of microscopy and DST and species identification are updated. 
- On page 31 an interim statistical analysis is added. 
- Reference 18 is updated on page 39. 

SAP_001.pdf: