Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of wtpaEurope PMCEurope PMC Funders GroupSubmit a Manuscript
Lancet Infect Dis. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 January 10.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC2804035

Tuberculosis-associated immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome: case definitions for use in resource-limited settings


The immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS) has emerged as an important early complication of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in resource-limited settings, especially in patients with tuberculosis. However, there are no consensus case definitions for IRIS or tuberculosis-associated IRIS. Moreover, previously proposed case definitions are not readily applicable in settings where laboratory resources are limited. As a result, existing studies on tuberculosis-associated IRIS have used a variety of non-standardised general case definitions. To rectify this problem, around 100 researchers, including microbiologists, immunologists, clinicians, epidemiologists, clinical trialists, and public-health specialists from 16 countries met in Kampala, Uganda, in November, 2006. At this meeting, consensus case definitions for paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS, ART-associated tuberculosis, and unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS were derived, which can be used in high-income and resource-limited settings. It is envisaged that these definitions could be used by clinicians and researchers in a variety of settings to promote standardisation and comparability of data.


The immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS; also known as immune reconstitution disease, immune reconstitution syndrome, or immune restoration disease) is a widely recognised phenomenon that can complicate antiretroviral therapy (ART).1,2 The condition results from rapid restoration of pathogen-specific immune responses to opportunistic infections, causing either the deterioration of a treated infection or the new presentation of a previously subclinical infection. IRIS typically occurs during the initial months of ART and is associated with a wide spectrum of pathogens, most commonly mycobacteria, herpes-viruses, and deep fungal infections such as cryptococcal meningitis.13

In recent years, access to ART has increased rapidly in resource-limited settings, reaching over 2 million people by December, 2006, with an estimated 1 340 000 of these individuals living in sub-Saharan Africa.4 Since the burden of HIV/tuberculosis co-infection is very high in many low-income and middle-income countries,5 many of the patients who enter ART programmes in these settings have a current diagnosis of tuberculosis, or later develop tuberculosis following initiation of ART. For example, one South African study reported that 238 (25%) of 944 patients attending a community-based ART programme were receiving tuberculosis treatment at ART initiation and in the first year of ART the incidence of tuberculosis was 13·4 cases per 100 person-years (95% CI 10·4–16·9).6 Up to one-third of patients with HIV/tuberculosis co-infection who begin ART in such settings could be at risk of developing tuberculosis-associated IRIS (also known as TB-IRIS),3 and this condition is emerging as an important clinical challenge in resource-limited settings.710

Since there is no diagnostic test for IRIS, confirmation of the disease relies heavily upon case definitions incorporating clinical and laboratory data. However, clinical management and research on IRIS are hindered by the lack of consensus case definitions and definitions that are specific to particular opportunistic infections. To address this shortcoming, an international meeting of researchers working in this field was convened in Kampala, Uganda, in November, 2006, and the International Network for the Study of HIV-associated IRIS (INSHI) was formed. The specific aim of the meeting was to develop consensus case definitions for tuberculosis-associated IRIS that are appropriate for low-income settings where laboratory capacity is often limited, and that can be used by researchers working in dierent settings to permit comparability of results. We present these consensus case definitions in this paper.

Participants and consensus methods

The need for a public-health definition for tuberculosis-associated IRIS was first proposed at the WHO consultation on tuberculosis and HIV research priorities in resource-limited settings in February, 2005.11 The organisers of the meeting in Kampala contacted individuals involved in research related to tuberculosis-associated IRIS, particularly those working in resource-limited settings or collaborating with researchers in these settings. Contacting these individuals was dependent on whether they had published or presented data about tuberculosis-associated IRIS at international conferences, whether they were involved in ongoing research projects about the disease, or whether they had clinical experience of the disease. 97 researchers from 16 countries on six continents attended the meeting. Among the delegates were microbiologists, immunologists, clinicians, epidemiologists, clinical trialists, public-health specialists, and representatives from WHO.

At the meeting a subgroup was assembled to develop the case definitions. Two participants presented published IRIS case definitions (panel 1)2,7,1214 as well as eight dierent tuberculosis-associated IRIS case definitions currently being used by researchers in ongoing cohort and intervention studies. The common features among these case definitions were highlighted, and their practical use in resource-limited settings was discussed. Tuberculosis-associated IRIS case definitions were agreed and taken back to a plenary session for further discussion and consensus building. Thereafter, a writing committee of 17 members was appointed to finalise the consensus case definitions.

Panel 1

Existing case definitions for IRIS and tuberculosis-associated IRIS that have been most widely used

General IRIS case definition 1 (French et al, 2004)2

Diagnosis requires two major criteria (A+B) or major criterion (A) plus two minor criteria to be fulfilled:

Major criteria

(A) Atypical presentation of opportunistic infections or tumours in patients responding to ART

  • Localised disease
  • Exaggerated inflammatory reaction
  • Atypical inflammatory response in affected tissues
  • Progressive organ dysfunction or enlargement of pre-existing lesions after definite clinical improvement with pathogen-specific therapy before the initiation of ART and exclusion of treatment toxicity and new alternative diagnoses

(B) Decrease in plasma HIV RNA concentration by more than 1 log10 copies per mL

Minor criteria

  • Increase in blood CD4 T-cell count after starting ART
  • Increase in an immune response specific to the relevant pathogen—eg, delayed-type hypersensitivity skin test response to mycobacterial antigens
  • Spontaneous resolution of disease without specific antimicrobial therapy or tumour chemotherapy with continuation of ART

General IRIS case definition 2 (Shelburne et al, 2006)13

Criteria for IRIS diagnosis include:

  • HIV-infected patient
  • Receiving effective ART as evidenced by a decrease in HIV-1 RNA concentration from baseline or an increase in CD4+ T cells from baseline (may lag behind HIV-1 RNA decrease)
  • Clinical symptoms consistent with inflammatory process
  • Clinical course not consistent with expected course of previously diagnosed opportunistic infection, expected course of newly diagnosed opportunistic infection, or drug toxicity

Case definition specific for tuberculosis-associated IRIS (Colebunders et al, 2006)7

For patients receiving treatment for tuberculosis and starting ART:

Suspected tuberculosis-associated IRIS case

Cases must meet the following three criteria:

  • An initial clinical response to tuberculosis treatment, based on a combination of some of the following factors: cessation of fever, relief of pulmonary symptoms, decrease in lymph node size, termination of signs of meningeal irritation (depending on presenting symptoms)
  • New persistent fevers without another identifiable cause and/or one or more of the following: worsening or emergence of dyspnoea, stridor, an increase in lymph node size, development of abscesses, development of abdominal pain with ultrasound evidence of abdominal adenopathies, unexplained CNS symptoms
  • Adequate adherence to ART and tuberculosis treatment

Confirmed tuberculosis-associated IRIS case

Cases must meet the following three criteria:

  • Radiological examinations showing worsening or emergence of intrathoracic lymphadenopathy, pulmonary infiltrates, pleural effusions, abdominal lymph nodes, hepatosplenomegaly
  • A good virological response and/or increase in CD4+ lymphocyte count, and/or conversion of tuberculin skin test from negative to positive, and/or adequate adherence to ART and tuberculosis treatment
  • A clear exclusion of other conditions that could explain the clinical manifestations of the patient, such as tuberculosis treatment failure or other concomitant infections, tumours, or allergic reactions

ART=antiretroviral therapy. IRIS=immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome.

Changes to existing case definitions

General case definitions for IRIS have previously been published (panel 1).2,1214 These case definitions include the following criteria: confirmed HIV diagnosis, temporal association with initiation of ART, demonstration of response to ART (ie, plasma viral load reduction, blood CD4 cell count increase, or another marker of immune recovery such as conversion of tuberculin skin test from negative to positive for mycobacterial IRIS), clinical deterioration with an inflammatory process, and exclusion of other causes that could explain deterioration (such as antimicrobial drug resistance, drug hypersensitivity reaction, or another opportunistic infection). However, since manifestations of IRIS are infection-specific, it has been recognised that particular definitions applicable to individual diseases such as tuberculosis would be useful.7 The case definitions presented in this manuscript focus specifically on the clinical manifestations of tuberculosis-associated IRIS.

Case definitions should be readily applicable in resource-limited settings where the vast majority of patients requiring ART live and yet where facilities for diagnosis and management of the complications of ART are least well developed. In this respect, the requirement within existing definitions for documentation of changes in CD4 cell count and plasma viral load is not achievable in these settings. Viral load testing has limited availability and is very costly. In the South African public sector a viral load test costs US$39, more than the cost of 1 month’s supply of first-line ART. Even where CD4 and viral load testing are available (such as in South Africa), use of these tests under programmatic conditions is usually permitted for monitoring of ART at 6-monthly intervals only and not for individual patient diagnostic work-up.

We believe that omission of these laboratory parameters would not substantially compromise case definitions for tuberculosis-associated IRIS. First, within the initial months of ART—when most cases of tuberculosis-associated IRIS arise—most ART-naive patients adhering to treatment have substantial viral load reductions;1517 thus, inclusion of viral load changes in definitions is largely redundant in the context of a patient who adheres to therapy. Second, tuberculosis-associated IRIS frequently develops shortly after initiation of ART and before any measurable increase in peripheral blood CD4 cell count. In a series of 51 patients presenting with non-tuberculous mycobacterial IRIS, six (12%) of 51 IRIS events occurred without a substantial increase in CD4 cell count (four patients had a CD4 increase from baseline to time of IRIS diagnosis of less than 25 cells per μL and in two patients the CD4 cell count had actually fallen at the time of presentation).18 The number of CD4 T cells measured in peripheral blood does not necessarily reflect function nor how many cells are actually present at the site of an opportunistic infection. Moreover, it is very likely that CD4 T cells are not the only cellular mediators of IRIS.19,20 For these reasons we, like others,12 propose that a rise in peripheral blood CD4 cell count should not be a necessary marker for the diagnosis of tuberculosis-associated IRIS.

A further important modification to existing definitions is the inclusion of a timeframe of the first 3 months of ART. Such a timeframe is not present in the widely used case definitions to date (panel 1). Onset of the clinical manifestations of tuberculosis-associated IRIS should occur within this timeframe for a diagnosis of tuberculosis-associated IRIS to be made, since this represents the period when rapid immune recovery usually occurs.3,21

Categories of tuberculosis-associated IRIS

Tuberculosis-associated IRIS can present as one of two main syndromes: (1) a paradoxical reaction after the start of ART in patients receiving tuberculosis treatment (here termed paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS), or (2) a new presentation of tuberculosis that is “unmasked” in the weeks following initiation of ART with an exaggerated inflammatory clinical presentation or complicated by a paradoxical reaction (here termed unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS).

Paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS

In paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS, patients have been diagnosed with active tuberculosis before initiation of ART, and have typically been responding to antituberculosis treatment. Following initiation of ART, IRIS presents as the development of recurrent, new, or worsening symptoms or signs of tuberculosis, such as fever, return of cough, or lymph node enlargement, or recurrent, new, or deteriorating radiological manifestations (figure 1). These symptoms typically occur within the first few weeks and up to 3 months after ART is initiated, restarted, or changed because of treatment failure.

Figure 1
Illustrative case of paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS

Reports of the frequency of paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS using a variety of existing case definitions range from 8% to 43% (table).810,2128 Paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS has been linked with large expansions of purified protein derivative-specific T cells in peripheral blood and increased pro-inflammatory cytokine levels.29 Risk factors for the disease are shown in table 1 and include more advanced HIV disease with lower CD4 cell count, disseminated and extrapulmonary tuberculosis, a shorter delay between the start of tuberculosis treatment and initiation of ART, and a more vigorous immunological and virological response to ART. Most cases of paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS are self-limiting. The median duration of symptoms reported in the literature is 2 months,26,28 but this ranges from mild cases where symptoms resolve after a few days to isolated prolonged cases that have still been symptomatic after more than a year (figure 1).28 Mortality from tuberculosis-associated IRIS has been reported infrequently in the literature,3,9,10,26 but morbidity and the need for hospital admission and therapeutic procedures can be substantial.26 Rates of morbidity and mortality attributable to paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS may be higher in resource-limited settings where diagnostic and treatment options are restricted. Neurological tuberculosis-associated IRIS in particular can be associated with poor outcome.

Paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS: cohort studies reported in the literature*

Tuberculosis paradoxical reactions, such as enlargement of lymph nodes or cerebral tuberculomas, can also occur in HIV-uninfected individuals and HIV-infected individuals who are receiving appropriate tuberculosis treatment but who are not receiving ART;3032 however, the frequency of paradoxical reactions is much lower in these groups compared with patients receiving ART.22,23 In one study, paradoxical reactions following tuberculosis treatment occurred in one (2%) of 55 HIV-seronegative patients, two (7%) of 28 HIV-infected patients not on ART, and 12 (36%) of 33 HIV-infected patients on tuberculosis treatment and ART.22 The timing of the paradoxical reaction in the latter group was more closely related to the initiation of ART than it was to the initiation of tuberculosis treatment. Thus, the greatly increased frequency of paradoxical reactions in patients receiving ART suggests that ART-related immunological changes have an important role in their aetiology. Additionally, our clinical experience is that paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS is more severe and more frequently a multisystemic condition in ART patients than paradoxical reactions in patients not receiving ART.

ART-associated tuberculosis and unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS

Compared with paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS, there is much less clarity surrounding the second major category of tuberculosis-associated-IRIS. High rates of tuberculosis have been diagnosed during ART, especially in the initial months of treatment in ART programmes in resource-limited settings.6,3336 The mechanisms underlying the presentation of tuberculosis after the initiation of ART are likely to be heterogeneous.37 Since ART-induced immune recovery is a time-dependent process and some patients initially fail to show an increased circulating CD4 T-cell count,38,39 a proportion of cases might present as a result of persisting immunodeficiency. Diagnoses of active tuberculosis before ART initiation might be missed because of the inherent insensitivity of tuberculosis diagnostics in patients with advanced immunodeficiency and only confirmed later during ART. Other patients might have active subclinical disease at the time of ART initiation and presentation of symptomatic disease might result from ART-induced restoration of an immune response against Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigens that causes inflammation. Some patients with a missed tuberculosis diagnosis or active subclinical tuberculosis at the time of ART initiation may later present with exuberant inflammatory clinical features that are consistent with a diagnosis of unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS (figure 2).

Figure 2
Illustrative case of unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS

Paradoxical reactions in patients started on tuberculosis treatment while receiving ART have also been described,26,40 and one study reported that paradoxical reactions are more frequent in patients who are diagnosed with tuberculosis in the first 3 months of ART than in patients who start ART after tuberculosis treatment (eight [62%] of 13 patients vs nine [30%] of 30 patients, respectively, p=0·05).40 This finding suggests that ART-related immunological changes have a role in the development of paradoxical reactions in patients who present with tuberculosis while receiving ART and that these reactions are a form of tuberculosis-associated IRIS.

Only a few cases of unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS have been described in the literature to date.4043 In the absence of a diagnostic test, it is currently difficult to dierentiate the varied mechanisms underlying most cases of tuberculosis that present during early ART, especially in resource-limited settings where rates of infection are high. We therefore propose that, as elsewhere,37 the term ART-associated tuberculosis is used to refer to all patients who present with active tuberculosis while receiving ART (figure 3). We also suggest a provisional case definition for unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS and clinical scenarios where the diagnosis could be considered.

Figure 3
Schematic representation showing the different forms of tuberculosis-associated IRIS and ART-associated tuberculosis

Further research into the clinical characteristics and immunological mechanisms underlying cases of ART-associated tuberculosis will permit a more refined case definition for unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS in the future. However, in view of the heterogeneity in the natural history and clinical manifestations of tuberculosis it is unlikely that a clinical case definition that robustly separates patients with unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS from others with ART-associated tuberculosis will be derived.37

Case definitions

With the rationale described above, we have developed case definitions for “paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS” (panel 2), “ART-associated tuberculosis” (panel 3), and “unmasking tuberculosis-associated-IRIS” (panel 3). The case definitions are presented schematically in figure 3. These case definitions have been designed for use in resource-limited settings and are consensus case definitions that need validation in clinical practice.

Panel 2

Case definition for paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS

There are three components to this case definition:

(A) Antecedent requirements

Both of the two following requirements must be met:

  • Diagnosis of tuberculosis: the tuberculosis diagnosis was made before starting ART and this should fulfil WHO criteria for diagnosis of smear-positive pulmonary tuberculosis, smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis, or extrapulmonary tuberculosis44
  • Initial response to tuberculosis treatment: the patient’s condition should have stabilised or improved on appropriate tuberculosis treatment before ART initiation—eg, cessation of night sweats, fevers, cough, weight loss. (Note: this does not apply to patients starting ART within 2 weeks of starting tuberculosis treatment since insufficient time may have elapsed for a clinical response to be reported)

(B) Clinical criteria

The onset of tuberculosis-associated IRIS manifestations should be within 3 months of ART initiation, reinitiation, or regimen change because of treatment failure.

Of the following, at least one major criterion or two minor clinical criteria are required:

Major criteria

  • New or enlarging lymph nodes, cold abscesses, or other focal tissue involvement—eg, tuberculous arthritis
  • New or worsening radiological features of tuberculosis (found by chest radiography, abdominal ultrasonography, CT, or MRI)
  • New or worsening CNS tuberculosis (meningitis or focal neurological deficit—eg, caused by tuberculoma)
  • New or worsening serositis (pleural effusion, ascites, or pericardial effusion)

Minor criteria

  • New or worsening constitutional symptoms such as fever, night sweats, or weight loss
  • New or worsening respiratory symptoms such as cough, dyspnoea, or stridor
  • New or worsening abdominal pain accompanied by peritonitis, hepatomegaly, splenomegaly, or abdominal adenopathy

(C) Alternative explanations for clinical deterioration must be excluded if possible*

  • Failure of tuberculosis treatment because of tuberculosis drug resistance
  • Poor adherence to tuberculosis treatment
  • Another opportunistic infection or neoplasm (it is particularly important to exclude an alternative diagnosis in patients with smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis and extrapulmonary tuberculosis where the initial tuberculosis diagnosis has not been microbiologically confirmed)
  • Drug toxicity or reaction

ART=antiretroviral therapy. IRIS=immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome. *It might be difficult or impossible in resource-poor settings to confirm tuberculosis drug resistance and to exclude certain other infections or neoplasia. Cases where alternative diagnoses cannot be fully excluded because of limited diagnostic capacity should be regarded as “probable paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS”. In these probable cases, should resolution of clinical or radiological findings of the suspected IRIS episode occur without a change in tuberculosis treatment or ART having been made, they could then be reclassified as ”paradoxical tuberculosis-associated IRIS” cases.

Panel 3

Case definition for ART-associated tuberculosis and provisional case definition for unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS

ART-associated tuberculosis

We propose that ART-associated tuberculosis (all cases of tuberculosis that are diagnosed during ART) should be defined as follows:

  • Patient is not receiving treatment for tuberculosis when ART is initiated
  • Active tuberculosis is diagnosed after initiation of ART
  • The diagnosis of tuberculosis should fulfil WHO criteria for smear-positive pulmonary tuberculosis, smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis, or extrapulmonary tuberculosis44

Unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS (provisional)

We propose that the following could suggest a diagnosis of unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS:

  • Patient is not receiving treatment for tuberculosis when ART is initiated and then presents with active tuberculosis within 3 months of starting ART

AND one of the following criteria must be met:

  • Heightened intensity of clinical manifestations, particularly if there is evidence of a marked inflammatory component to the presentation. Examples include tuberculosis lymphadenitis or tuberculosis abscesses with prominent acute inflammatory features, presentation with pulmonary tuberculosis that is complicated by respiratory failure due to adult respiratory distress syndrome, and those who present with a marked systemic inflammatory syndrome related to tuberculosis. See example in figure 2
  • Once established on tuberculosis treatment, a clinical course that is complicated by a paradoxical reaction

ART=antiretroviral therapy. IRIS=immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome. Researchers in the field are encouraged not to regard all patients with ART-associated tuberculosis as having tuberculosis-associated IRIS, but only those that fit this provisional unmasking tuberculosis-associated-IRIS case definition. We suggest that the clinical manifestations of all patients developing ART-associated tuberculosis should be well characterised and reported in studies, which will assist with refinement of this case definition in the future. Studies of the immunological processes underlying the presentation of these cases are also likely to assist with refining this case definition.

Search strategy and selection criteria

Data for this Personal View were obtained by searching Medline for articles published from 1990 to 2008. Search terms included “immune reconstitution”, “immune restoration”, “immune recovery”, “IRIS”, “antiretroviral”, “tuberculosis”, and “paradoxical reaction”. Only English language papers were reviewed. Additionally, unpublished data and tuberculosis-associated IRIS case definitions presented by researchers at the INSHI meeting were used.


The use of standardised case definitions in different populations will help to provide greater insight into the incidence, clinical manifestations, risk factors, and impact of tuberculosis-associated IRIS, ultimately leading to better prevention and management strategies for this condition. Further clinical and immunological research on patients with ART-associated tuberculosis is needed to better dierentiate the subset of cases that have unmasking tuberculosis-associated IRIS and to further refine this case definition. It is hoped that open research networks such as INSHI will provide opportunities for researchers to engage in collaborative research into tuberculosis-associated IRIS using these case definitions.


This manuscript arose from a meeting of the International Network for the Study of HIV-associated IRIS (INSHI) hosted by the Infectious Diseases Institute, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda. This meeting was funded by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership Programme, the Belgian General Development Corporation, the Research Foundation-Flanders, and Tibotec. Graeme Meintjes, Stephen D Lawn, and Robert J Wilkinson are funded by the Wellcome Trust, UK. Martyn French is supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia. We thank Dominique J Pepper for assistance with preparing the illustrative case in figure 1 and Charles Steinberg for providing the radiographs in figure 2.

The following participants attended the INSHI meeting: Francis Adatu (National TB Control Programme, Kampala, Uganda), Rebecca Adlington (Médecins Sans Frontières, Bukavu, Democratic Republic of the Congo), Barbara Amuron (MRC/Uganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda), Per Bjorkman (Lund University, Malmoe, Sweden), Paul Bohjanen (University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA), David Boulware (University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA), Steven Callens (Catholic University Leuven, Leuven, Belgium), Mariah Carroll (University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA), Barbara Castelnuovo (Infectious Disease Institute, Kampala, Uganda), Robert Colebunders (Institute Tropical Medicine and University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium), Caroline De Schacht (Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, Maputo, Mozambique), Aggrey Dhabangi (Paediatric Infectious Disease Institute, Kampala, Uganda), Philippa Easterbrook (Kings College, London, UK), Alison Elliot (MRC/Uganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda), Julian Elliott (National Centre in HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Sydney, Australia), Joseph Emoko (WHO/NTLP, Kampala, Uganda), Martyn French (University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia), Charles Gilks (WHO, Geneva, Switzerland), Lewis Haddow (University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa), David Iglesias (Instituto de Medicina Tropical Alexander von Humboldt, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru), Edward Jano (University of Colorado, CO, USA), Laurence John (Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK), Andrew Kambugu (Infectious Disease Institute, Kampala, Uganda), Moses R Kamya (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Addy Kekitiinwa (Paediatric Infectious Disease Institute, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Luc Kestens (Institute Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium), Hannah Kibuuka (Makerere University/Walter Reed Project, Kampala, Uganda), Bruce Kirenga (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Sabrina Kitaka (Paediatric Infectious Disease Institute, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Oliver Koole (Institute Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium), David Lalloo (Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK), Stephen Lawn (University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa), Jonathan Levin (MRC/Uganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda), Nathalie Lorent (Kigali University Hospital, Kigali, Rwanda), Swaibu Lule (MRC/Uganda Virus Research Institute Entebbe, Uganda), Jim Reeves Lutagira (MRC/Uganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda), Simon Luzige (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Henry Luzze (Mulago Hospital, Kampala, Uganda), Lut Lynen (Institute Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium), Yukari Manabe (Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD, USA), Harriet Mayanja-Kizza (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Enid Mbabazi (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Keith McAdam (Infectious Disease Institute, Kampala, Uganda), David McNeeley (Tibotec, Durham, NC, USA), Graeme Meintjes (University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa), Joris Menten (Institute Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium), David Meya (Infectious Disease Institute, Kampala, Uganda), Giampaolo Mezzabotta (WHO, Kabul, Afganistan), Monica Millard (Makerere University/Walter Reed Project Kampala, Uganda), Lisa Mills (Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD, USA), Juliet Mpendo (MRC/Uganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda), Paula Munderi (MRC/Uganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda), David Murdoch (University of North Carolina, Durham, NC, USA), David Muyanja (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Sylvia Muyingo (MRC/Uganda Virus Research Institute Entebbe, Uganda), Denis Mwaka (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Doris Mwesigire (Mulago-Mbarara Hospitals Joint Aids Programme, Kampala, Uganda), Damalie Nakanjako (Infectious Disease Institute, Kampala, Uganda), Ann Nakanwagi (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Leatitia Namale (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Edith Namulema (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Francis Okidi (Gulu, Uganda), Martin Okot Nwang (Mulago Hospital, Kampala, Uganda), Alphonse Okwera (Mulago Hospital, Kampala, Uganda), Pascale Ondoa (Institute Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium), Eric Ouattara (Programme PAC-CI, Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire), Nadine Pakker (Project Interact, Kampala, Uganda), Rosalind Parkes (MRC/Uganda Virus Research Institute, Masaka, Uganda), Dylan Pillai (University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA), Molebogeng Rangaka (University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa), Peter Reiss (Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands), Steven Reynolds (SAIC Frederick, MD, USA), Fabio Scano (WHO, Geneva, Switzerland), Kinda Schepers (Free University Brussels, Brussels, Belgium), Maarten Schim van der Loe (Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands), Walter Schlech (Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada), Paul Seguya (Kampala, Uganda), Semitala Fred (Mulago Hospital, Kampala, Uganda), Ibrahim Sendagire (Kampala City Council AIDS Programme, Kampala, Uganda), Cathérine Seyler (University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France), Patrick Soentjens (Institute Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium), Sok Thim (Cambodian Health Committee, Phnom Penh, Cambodia), Fred Sewankambo (Infectious Disease Institute, Kampala, Uganda), Judy Tatwangire (Paediatric Infectious Disease Institute, Kampala, Uganda), Jim Todd (MRC/Uganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda), Estée Torok (Oxford University, Oxford, UK), Nathan Tumwesigye (Regional Centre for Quality Care, Kampala, Uganda), Lisine Tuyisinge (University Hospital, Kigali, Rwanda), Rafael Van den Bergh (Free University Brussels, Brussels, Belgium), Dimitri Van der Linden (Pietermaritzburg Metropolitan Hospitals Complex, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa), Lieve Vanderpaal (MRC/ Uganda Virus Research Institute, Masaka, Uganda), Musa Waiswa (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), Robert Wilkinson (University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa), Eric Wobudeya (Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda), William Worodria (Mulago Hospital, Kampala, Uganda), Samuel Yoo (Mulago Hospital, Kampala, Uganda), Rony Zachariah (MÉdecins Sans Frontières, Brussels, Belgium).


Conflicts of interest We declare that we have no conflicts of interest.


1. Shelburne SA, Hamill RJ. The immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome. AIDS Rev. 2003;5:67–79. [PubMed]
2. French MA, Price P, Stone SF. Immune restoration disease after antiretroviral therapy. AIDS. 2004;18:1615–27. [PubMed]
3. Lawn SD, Bekker LG, Miller RF. Immune reconstitution disease associated with mycobacterial infections in HIV-infected individuals receiving antiretrovirals. Lancet Infect Dis. 2005;5:361–73. [PubMed]
4. Katabira ET, Oelrichs RB. Scaling up antiretroviral treatment in resource-limited settings: successes and challenges. AIDS. 2007;21(suppl 4):S5–10. [PubMed]
5. Corbett EL, Watt CJ, Walker N, et al. The growing burden of tuberculosis: global trends and interactions with the HIV epidemic. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:1009–21. [PubMed]
6. Lawn SD, Myer L, Bekker LG, Wood R. Burden of tuberculosis in an antiretroviral treatment programme in sub-Saharan Africa: impact on treatment outcomes and implications for tuberculosis control. AIDS. 2006;20:1605–12. [PubMed]
7. Colebunders R, John L, Huyst V, Kambugu A, Scano F, Lynen L. Tuberculosis immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome in countries with limited resources. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2006;10:946–53. [PubMed]
8. Kumarasamy N, Chaguturu S, Mayer KH, et al. Incidence of immune reconstitution syndrome in HIV/tuberculosis-coinfected patients after initiation of generic antiretroviral therapy in India. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2004;37:1574–76. [PubMed]
9. Manosuthi W, Kiertiburanakul S, Phoorisri T, Sungkanuparph S. Immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome of tuberculosis among HIV-infected patients receiving antituberculous and antiretroviral therapy. J Infect. 2006;53:357–63. [PubMed]
10. Lawn SD, Myer L, Bekker LG, Wood R. Tuberculosis-associated immune reconstitution disease: incidence, risk factors and impact in an antiretroviral treatment service in South Africa. AIDS. 2007;21:335–41. [PubMed]
11. WHO . TB/HIV research priorities in resource-limited settings. Report of an expert consultation. World Health Organization; Geneva, Switzerland: Feb 14–15, 2005.
12. Robertson J, Meier M, Wall J, Ying J, Fichtenbaum CJ. Immune reconstitution syndrome in HIV: validating a case definition and identifying clinical predictors in persons initiating antiretroviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;42:1639–46. [PubMed]
13. Shelburne SA, Montes M, Hamill RJ. Immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome: more answers, more questions. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2006;57:167–70. [PubMed]
14. Shelburne SA, Hamill RJ, Rodriguez-Barradas MC, et al. Immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome: emergence of a unique syndrome during highly active antiretroviral therapy. Medicine (Baltimore) 2002;81:213–27. [PubMed]
15. Coetzee D, Hildebrand K, Boulle A, et al. Outcomes after two years of providing antiretroviral treatment in Khayelitsha, South Africa. AIDS. 2004;18:887–95. [PubMed]
16. Kilaru KR, Kumar A, Sippy N, Carter AO, Roach TC. Immunological and virological responses to highly active antiretroviral therapy in a non-clinical trial setting in a developing Caribbean country. HIV Med. 2006;7:99–104. [PubMed]
17. Orrell C, Harling G, Lawn SD, et al. Conservation of first-line antiretroviral treatment regimen where therapeutic options are limited. Antivir Ther. 2007;12:83–88. [PubMed]
18. Phillips P, Bonner S, Gataric N, et al. Nontuberculous mycobacterial immune reconstitution syndrome in HIV-infected patients: spectrum of disease and long-term follow-up. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;41:1483–97. [PubMed]
19. Van den Bergh R, Vanham G, Raes G, De Baetselier P, Colebunders R. Mycobacterium-associated immune reconstitution disease: macrophages running wild? Lancet Infect Dis. 2006;6:2–3. [PubMed]
20. Dhasmana DJ, Dheda K, Ravn P, Wilkinson RJ, Meintjes G. Immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome in HIV-infected patients receiving antiretroviral therapy: pathogenesis, clinical manifestations and management. Drugs. 2008;68:191–208. [PubMed]
21. Shelburne SA, Visnegarwala F, Darcourt J, et al. Incidence and risk factors for immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome during highly active antiretroviral therapy. AIDS. 2005;19:399–406. [PubMed]
22. Narita M, Ashkin D, Hollender ES, Pitchenik AE. Paradoxical worsening of tuberculosis following antiretroviral therapy in patients with AIDS. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998;158:157–61. [PubMed]
23. Breen RA, Smith CJ, Bettinson H, et al. Paradoxical reactions during tuberculosis treatment in patients with and without HIV co-infection. Thorax. 2004;59:704–07. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
24. Breton G, Duval X, Estellat C, et al. Determinants of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome in HIV type 1-infected patients with tuberculosis after initiation of antiretroviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39:1709–12. [PubMed]
25. Michailidis C, Pozniak AL, Mandalia S, Basnayake S, Nelson MR, Gazzard BG. Clinical characteristics of IRIS syndrome in patients with HIV and tuberculosis. Antivir Ther. 2005;10:417–22. [PubMed]
26. Burman W, Weis S, Vernon A, et al. Frequency, severity and duration of immune reconstitution events in HIV-related tuberculosis. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2007;11:1282–89. [PubMed]
27. McIlleron H, Meintjes G, Burman WJ, Maartens G. Complications of antiretroviral therapy in patients with tuberculosis: drug interactions, toxicity, and immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome. J Infect Dis. 2007;196(suppl 1):S63–75. [PubMed]
28. Olalla J, Pulido F, Rubio R, et al. Paradoxical responses in a cohort of HIV-1-infected patients with mycobacterial disease. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2002;6:71–75. [PubMed]
29. Bourgarit A, Carcelain G, Martinez V, et al. Explosion of tuberculinspecific Th1-responses induces immune restoration syndrome in tuberculosis and HIV co-infected patients. AIDS. 2006;20:F1–7. [PubMed]
30. Hawkey CR, Yap T, Pereira J, et al. Characterization and management of paradoxical upgrading reactions in HIV-uninfected patients with lymph node tuberculosis. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;40:1368–71. [PubMed]
31. Cheng VC, Yam WC, Woo PC, et al. Risk factors for development of paradoxical response during antituberculosis therapy in HIV-negative patients. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2003;22:597–602. [PubMed]
32. Reiser M, Fatkenheuer G, Diehl V. Paradoxical expansion of intracranial tuberculomas during chemotherapy. J Infect. 1997;35:88–90. [PubMed]
33. Bonnet MM, Pinoges LL, Varaine FF, et al. Tuberculosis after HAART initiation in HIV-positive patients from five countries with a high tuberculosis burden. AIDS. 2006;20:1275–79. [PubMed]
34. Lawn SD, Badri M, Wood R. Tuberculosis among HIV-infected patients receiving HAART: long term incidence and risk factors in a South African cohort. AIDS. 2005;19:2109–16. [PubMed]
35. Seyler C, Toure S, Messou E, Bonard D, Gabillard D, Anglaret X. Risk factors for active tuberculosis after antiretroviral treatment initiation in Abidjan. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;172:123–27. [PubMed]
36. Moore D, Liechty C, Ekwaru P, et al. Prevalence, incidence and mortality associated with tuberculosis in HIV-infected patients initiating antiretroviral therapy in rural Uganda. AIDS. 2007;21:713–19. [PubMed]
37. Lawn SD, Wilkinson RJ, Lipman MC, Wood R. Immune reconstitution and “unmasking” of tuberculosis during antiretroviral therapy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008;177:680–85. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
38. Moore DM, Hogg RS, Yip B, et al. Discordant immunologic and virologic responses to highly active antiretroviral therapy are associated with increased mortality and poor adherence to therapy. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2005;40:288–93. [PubMed]
39. Kaplan SS, Ferrari G, Wrin T, et al. Longitudinal assessment of immune response and viral characteristics in HIV-infected patients with prolonged CD4(+)/viral load discordance. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2005;21:13–16. [PubMed]
40. Breen RA, Smith CJ, Cropley I, Johnson MA, Lipman MC. Does immune reconstitution syndrome promote active tuberculosis in patients receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy? AIDS. 2005;19:1201–06. [PubMed]
41. Goldsack NR, Allen S, Lipman MC. Adult respiratory distress syndrome as a severe immune reconstitution disease following the commencement of highly active antiretroviral therapy. Sex Transm Infect. 2003;79:337–38. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
42. John L, Baalwa J, Kalimugogo P, et al. Response to “does immune reconstitution promote active tuberculosis in patients receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy?” AIDS. 2005;19:2049–50. [PubMed]
43. Dautremer J, Pacanowski J, Girard PM, Lalande V, Sivignon F, Meynard JL. A new presentation of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome followed by a severe paradoxical reaction in an HIV-1-infected patient with tuberculous meningitis. AIDS. 2007;21:381–82. [PubMed]
44. WHO . Improving the diagnosis and treatment of smear-negative pulmonary and extrapulmonary tuberculosis among adults and adolescents: recommendations for HIV-prevalent and resource-constrained settings. Stop TB Department, Department of HIV/AIDS, World Health Organization; Geneva: 2006.