Since the assumption of constant hazard might not be consistent with the data, a time-independent analysis was performed. Since large-sample approximations do not hold when dealing with rare events, odds ratios with 95 percent confidence intervals were approximated and Fisher’s exact test was applied.24 Landmark analyses were performed for the major trial end factors by dividing the entire follow-up period into the initial 6 months and the next 18 months. P ideals were adjusted for multiple comparisons by using the step-up procedure, according to the approach to Benjamini and Hochberg,25 to be able to keep up with the false discovery price at the 0.05 level within each table.Tuberculosis infections is lower than the estimates utilized for the sample-size calculation. Nevertheless, we limited enrollment to subjects with latent M. Tuberculosis illness who were at the best risk for tuberculosis. Furthermore, among the 384 topics who received little or no treatment, the cumulative rate of tuberculosis was within the number of recent estimates.8 It must be remembered that there is no placebo group. The isoniazid-only regimen is estimated to end up being 90 percent efficacious,34 and our results claim that the combination regimen was similarly efficacious. The combination-therapy group was directly observed, which improves compliance in the treatment of latent tuberculosis.35 Both directly observed therapy and a shorter duration of treatment probably explain the higher treatment-completion rate in the combination-therapy group.