Sir John Crofton, Pioneer in TB Cure, Dies at 97

In 1952, Sir John was appointed chairman of the department of respiratory diseases and tuberculosis at the University of Edinburgh, amid a tuberculosis epidemic in Scotland. Three years earlier, researchers in Britain reported that combining streptomycin with a newer medicine, para-aminosalicylic acid, could reduce the development of drug resistance. To this mix, Sir John added isoniazid, a new drug that became available shortly after his arrival in Edinburgh.

The third drug was the charm. Through careful monitoring, he devised a regimen that called for starting patients on all three drugs and then stopping streptomycin, which can cause hearing loss, after several months. For more than a decade, until it was replaced by a cocktail of newer and more powerful drugs, Sir John’s three-drug regimen was the standard treatment for tuberculosis.

“The treatment principles he developed are the ones we are using today,” said Dr. Mario C. Raviglione, director of the World Health Organization’s Stop TB department. “They are the model for cancer and for H.I.V. His legacy is quite significant.”

I caught this one yesterday coming up to Boston on the plane–a terrific piece which illustrates well how medical research really works. Read it all–KSH.

print

Posted in * Culture-Watch, * International News & Commentary, England / UK, Health & Medicine, History, Science & Technology, Scotland

3 comments on “Sir John Crofton, Pioneer in TB Cure, Dies at 97

  1. Brad M says:

    Strange how things come along at the right time. I am in my 4th bout of bronchitis since April and just today read over the symptoms for TB and I only miss on one of them. I see a pulmonary specialist on Wed. Of course I am probably flailing at windmills but this is a real coincidence.
    Brad M

  2. In Texas says:

    A few years back I ended up with a positive TB test – I had a rash about 4 inches in diameter, which took a week to go away. Good news, there was no signs of active TB, and x-rays came out clear. But, with a very positive test, you still need treatment in order to lessen the chance of getting active TB sometime in the future. So, nine months of the main TB drug. I now understand why a lot of people don’t follow through with the complete regimen of treatment for active TB. The class of antibiotics for TB are toxic to the liver. I had to have liver enzyme blood work done every two weeks, and as long as my number stay below 200, the doc said that was OK (normal is very low, in 5 – 14 range). I was right at 180 the whole time, but your liver gets swollen and painfull – so for nine months, you don’t feel good, and you are grumpy and not pleasant to be around.

    Plus side, doing this treatment reduced my chances of ever getting active TB (not 100%, but close). Of course, the other bad part of the treatment being hard on the liver – no 18 year Macallan scotch, and no acetominiphen, during the duration of the treatment.

    Brad, I wish you the best on Weds, and I will keep you in my prayers. Bronchitis is not fun, and neither is the prospect of TB.

  3. Brad M says:

    In Texas – Thank you for your posting. Let’s hope I don’t need the 9 month’s of treatment for this but it sounds better to me than cancer! I’ll let you know if I’m a positive if I can find the post. I was in El Paso for 30 years until ’86 so maybe I picked up something there. Prayers are appreciated – Thanks.
    Brad