Blood transcriptomic profiling may reflect host responses to tuberculosis (TB) treatment, yet the transcriptional effects of linezolid-containing regimens in drug-susceptible pulmonary TB remain poorly characterized. We aimed to compare early whole-blood transcriptional responses between standard regimen and linezolid-containing regimens, and to identify candidate biomarkers of early treatment effect. In this prospective sub-study of a randomized phase 2 trial, adults with drug-susceptible pulmonary TB received either standard regimen or regimens in which ethambutol was substituted with linezolid for 2 or 4 weeks. Whole-blood RNA was collected at baseline and week 4 for transcriptome analysis, including RNA sequencing, differential expression, and pathway enrichment. Selected transcripts were validated by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR), and associations with clinical outcomes were assessed. Paired samples were obtained from 48 participants (12 standard; 18 linezolid 2-week; 18 linezolid 4-week). Transcriptomic analysis identified distinct sets of genes that were up- or down-regulated early in treatment. Linezolid-containing regimens were associated with distinct early transcriptional changes compared with the standard regimen, with exploratory enrichment analyses implicating antigen processing and presentation, T-cell activation, and immune signaling pathways. Differences between 2-week and 4-week linezolid exposure were minimal. In qRT-PCR validation, higher baseline FOXP3 and UBE2D4 levels were independently associated with radiographic improvement at 4 weeks, although no transcript predicted time to negative culture conversion. Transcriptomic analysis demonstrated distinct early, regimen-specific gene expression differences in linezolid-containing regimens compared with the standard regimen, and several candidate genes showed clinically relevant associations, supporting their potential as biomarkers for predicting treatment outcomes in pulmonary TB.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: