Diagnostic accuracy of the Xpert ® MTB/RIF cycle threshold level to predict smear positivity: a meta-analysis

SETTING: Xpert® MTB/RIF is the most widely used molecular assay for rapid diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB). The number of polymerase chain reaction cycles after which detectable product is generated (cycle threshold value, CT) correlates with the bacillary burden.OBJECTIVE To investigate the association between Xpert CT values and smear status through a systematic review and individual-level data meta-analysis. DESIGN: Studies on the association between CT values and smear status were included in a descriptive systematic review. Authors of studies including smear, culture and Xpert results were asked for individual-level data, and receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated. RESULTS: Of 918 citations, 10 were included in the descriptive systematic review. Fifteen data sets from studies potentially relevant for individual-level data meta-analysis provided individual-level data (7511 samples from 4447 patients); 1212 patients had positive Xpert results for at least one respiratory sample (1859 samples overall). ROC analysis revealed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.85 (95%CI 0.82-0.87). Cut-off CT values of 27.7 and 31.8 yielded sensitivities of 85% (95%CI 83-87) and 95% (95%CI 94-96) and specificities of 67% (95%CI 66-77) and 35% (95%CI 30-41) for smear-positive samples. CONCLUSION: Xpert CT values and smear status were strongly associated. However, diagnostic accuracy at set cut-off CT values of 27.7 or 31.8 would not replace smear microscopy. How CT values compare with smear microscopy in predicting infectiousness remains to be seen

Long Delays and Missed Opportunities in Diagnosing Smear-Positive Pulmonary Tuberculosis in Kampala, Uganda: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND: Early detection and treatment of tuberculosis cases are the hallmark of successful tuberculosis control. We conducted a cross-sectional study at public primary health facilities in Kampala city, Uganda to quantify diagnostic delay among pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) patients, assess associated factors, and describe trajectories of patients' health care seeking. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Semi-structured interviews with new smear-positive PTB patients (≥ 15 years) registered for treatment. Between April 2007 and April 2008, 253 patients were studied. The median total delay was 8 weeks (IQR 4-12), median patient delay was 4 weeks (inter-quartile range [IQR] 1-8) and median health service delay was 4 weeks (IQR 2-8). Long total delay (>14 weeks) was observed for 61/253 (24.1%) of patients, long health service delay (>6 weeks) for 71/242 (29.3%) and long patient delay (>8 weeks) for 47/242 (19.4%). Patients who knew that TB was curable were less likely to have long total delay (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 0.28; 95%CI 0.11-0.73) and long patient delay (aOR 0.36; 95%CI 0.13-0.97). Being female (aOR 1.98; 95%CI 1.06-3.71), staying for more than 5 years at current residence (aOR 2.24 95%CI 1.18-4.27) and having been tested for HIV before (aOR 3.72; 95%CI 1.42-9.75) was associated with long health service delay. Health service delay contributed 50% of the total delay. Ninety-one percent (231) of patients had visited one or more health care providers before they were diagnosed, for an average (median) of 4 visits (range 1-30). All but four patients had systemic symptoms by the time the diagnosis of TB was made. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Diagnostic delay among tuberculosis patients in Kampala is common and long. This reflects patients waiting too long before seeking care and health services waiting until systemic symptoms are present before examining sputum smears; this results in missed opportunities for diagnosis

Ventilation rates in naturally ventilated primary schools in the UK; Contextual, Occupant and Building-related (COB) factors

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) in classrooms is assessed by CO2 levels and Ventilation Rates (VRs). Factors affecting VRs fall into Contextual, Occupant and Building (COB) related factors. This study investigates how VRs are affected by COB factors in 29 naturally-ventilated classrooms in the UK during Non-Heating and Heating seasons. Building-related factors classify classrooms with high or low potentials for natural ventilation, with 45% of classrooms having high potentials. Contextual factors including season, operative temperature (Top), outdoor temperature (Tout), ‘Top-Tout’ and air density can limit or increase VRs. Occupant-related factors classify occupant's good or poor practice of environmental adaptive behaviours. ‘Open area’ as a reflection of all COB factors is strongly correlated with ventilation rates. Results show that 12% and 19% of variations in ventilation rates are explained by open areas during non-heating and heating seasons, respectively. Findings highlight that to have VR of 8 ± 1.28 l/s.p during non-heating seasons and VR of 8 ± 1.07 l/s.p during heating seasons, average open areas of 3.8 m2 and 2 m2 are required, respectively. This difference can mostly be explained by temperature difference between inside and outside. Results show COB factors need to be considered holistically to maintain adequate VRs. Classrooms in which all COB factors are met provide average VR of 11 l/s.p and classrooms in which none of COB factors are met provide average VR is 3.1 l/s.p. This study highlights that 40% of classrooms according to EN 13779 and 80% of classrooms according to ASHRAE Standard fail to provide adequate VRs

Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra assays for screening for pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults, irrespective of signs or symptoms

Background Tuberculosis is a leading cause of infectious disease‐related death and is one of the top 10 causes of death worldwide. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the use of specific rapid molecular tests, including Xpert MTB/RIF or Xpert Ultra, as initial diagnostic tests for the detection of tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in people with signs and symptoms of tuberculosis. However, the WHO estimates that nearly one‐third of all active tuberculosis cases go undiagnosed and unreported. We were interested in whether a single test, Xpert MTB/RIF or Xpert Ultra, could be useful as a screening test to close this diagnostic gap and improve tuberculosis case detection. Objectives To estimate the accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra for screening for pulmonary tuberculosis in adults, irrespective of signs or symptoms of pulmonary tuberculosis in high‐risk groups and in the general population. Screening "irrespective of signs or symptoms" refers to screening of people who have not been assessed for the presence of tuberculosis symptoms (e.g. cough). To estimate the accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra for detecting rifampicin resistance in adults screened for tuberculosis, irrespective of signs and symptoms of pulmonary tuberculosis in high‐risk groups and in the general population. Search methods We searched 12 databases including the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE and Embase, on 19 March 2020 without language restrictions. We also reviewed reference lists of included articles and related Cochrane Reviews, and contacted researchers in the field to identify additional studies. Selection criteria Cross‐sectional and cohort studies in which adults (15 years and older) in high‐risk groups (e.g. people living with HIV, household contacts of people with tuberculosis) or in the general population were screened for pulmonary tuberculosis using Xpert MTB/RIF or Xpert Ultra. For tuberculosis detection, the reference standard was culture. For rifampicin resistance detection, the reference standards were culture‐based drug susceptibility testing and line probe assays. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently extracted data using a standardized form and assessed risk of bias and applicability using QUADAS‐2. We used a bivariate random‐effects model to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) separately for tuberculosis detection and rifampicin resistance detection. We estimated all models using a Bayesian approach. For tuberculosis detection, we first estimated screening accuracy in distinct high‐risk groups, including people living with HIV, household contacts, people residing in prisons, and miners, and then in several high‐risk groups combined. Main results We included a total of 21 studies: 18 studies (13,114 participants) evaluated Xpert MTB/RIF as a screening test for pulmonary tuberculosis and one study (571 participants) evaluated both Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra. Three studies (159 participants) evaluated Xpert MTB/RIF for rifampicin resistance. Fifteen studies (75%) were conducted in high tuberculosis burden and 16 (80%) in high TB/HIV‐burden countries. We judged most studies to have low risk of bias in all four QUADAS‐2 domains and low concern for applicability. Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra as screening tests for pulmonary tuberculosis In people living with HIV (12 studies), Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity (95% CrI) were 61.8% (53.6 to 69.9) (602 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence) and 98.8% (98.0 to 99.4) (4173 participants; high‐certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 50 have tuberculosis on culture, 40 would be Xpert MTB/RIF‐positive; of these, 9 (22%) would not have tuberculosis (false‐positives); and 960 would be Xpert MTB/RIF‐negative; of these, 19 (2%) would have tuberculosis (false‐negatives). In people living with HIV (1 study), Xpert Ultra sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) were 69% (57 to 80) (68 participants; very low‐certainty evidence) and 98% (97 to 99) (503 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 50 have tuberculosis on culture, 53 would be Xpert Ultra‐positive; of these, 19 (36%) would not have tuberculosis (false‐positives); and 947 would be Xpert Ultra‐negative; of these, 16 (2%) would have tuberculosis (false‐negatives). In non‐hospitalized people in high‐risk groups (5 studies), Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity were 69.4% (47.7 to 86.2) (337 participants, low‐certainty evidence) and 98.8% (97.2 to 99.5) (8619 participants, moderate‐certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 10 have tuberculosis on culture, 19 would be Xpert MTB/RIF‐positive; of these, 12 (63%) would not have tuberculosis (false‐positives); and 981 would be Xpert MTB/RIF‐negative; of these, 3 (0%) would have tuberculosis (false‐negatives). We did not identify any studies using Xpert MTB/RIF or Xpert Ultra for screening in the general population. Xpert MTB/RIF as a screening test for rifampicin resistance Xpert MTB/RIF sensitivity was 81% and 100% (2 studies, 20 participants; very low‐certainty evidence), and specificity was 94% to 100%, (3 studies, 139 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence). Authors' conclusions Of the high‐risks groups evaluated, Xpert MTB/RIF applied as a screening test was accurate for tuberculosis in high tuberculosis burden settings. Sensitivity and specificity were similar in people living with HIV and non‐hospitalized people in high‐risk groups. In people living with HIV, Xpert Ultra sensitivity was slightly higher than that of Xpert MTB/RIF and specificity similar. As there was only one study of Xpert Ultra in this analysis, results should be interpreted with caution. There were no studies that evaluated the tests in people with diabetes mellitus and other groups considered at high‐risk for tuberculosis, or in the general population

Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF assays for extrapulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults.

BACKGROUND: Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) and Xpert MTB/RIF are World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended rapid nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) widely used for simultaneous detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex and rifampicin resistance in sputum. To extend our previous review on extrapulmonary tuberculosis (Kohli 2018), we performed this update to inform updated WHO policy (WHO Consolidated Guidelines (Module 3) 2020). OBJECTIVES: To estimate diagnostic accuracy of Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF for extrapulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults with presumptive extrapulmonary tuberculosis. SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, Web of Science, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Registry, and ProQuest, 2 August 2019 and 28 January 2020 (Xpert Ultra studies), without language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: Cross-sectional and cohort studies using non-respiratory specimens. Forms of extrapulmonary tuberculosis: tuberculous meningitis and pleural, lymph node, bone or joint, genitourinary, peritoneal, pericardial, disseminated tuberculosis. Reference standards were culture and a study-defined composite reference standard (tuberculosis detection); phenotypic drug susceptibility testing and line probe assays (rifampicin resistance detection). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias and applicability using QUADAS-2. For tuberculosis detection, we performed separate analyses by specimen type and reference standard using the bivariate model to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). We applied a latent class meta-analysis model to three forms of extrapulmonary tuberculosis. We assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: 69 studies: 67 evaluated Xpert MTB/RIF and 11 evaluated Xpert Ultra, of which nine evaluated both tests. Most studies were conducted in China, India, South Africa, and Uganda. Overall, risk of bias was low for patient selection, index test, and flow and timing domains, and low (49%) or unclear (43%) for the reference standard domain. Applicability for the patient selection domain was unclear for most studies because we were unsure of the clinical settings. Cerebrospinal fluid Xpert Ultra (6 studies) Xpert Ultra pooled sensitivity and specificity (95% CrI) against culture were 89.4% (79.1 to 95.6) (89 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 91.2% (83.2 to 95.7) (386 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have tuberculous meningitis, 168 would be Xpert Ultra-positive: of these, 79 (47%) would not have tuberculosis (false-positives) and 832 would be Xpert Ultra-negative: of these, 11 (1%) would have tuberculosis (false-negatives). Xpert MTB/RIF (30 studies) Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity against culture were 71.1% (62.8 to 79.1) (571 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and 96.9% (95.4 to 98.0) (2824 participants; high-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have tuberculous meningitis, 99 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-positive: of these, 28 (28%) would not have tuberculosis; and 901 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-negative: of these, 29 (3%) would have tuberculosis. Pleural fluid Xpert Ultra (4 studies) Xpert Ultra pooled sensitivity and specificity against culture were 75.0% (58.0 to 86.4) (158 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and 87.0% (63.1 to 97.9) (240 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have pleural tuberculosis, 192 would be Xpert Ultra-positive: of these, 117 (61%) would not have tuberculosis; and 808 would be Xpert Ultra-negative: of these, 25 (3%) would have tuberculosis. Xpert MTB/RIF (25 studies) Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity against culture were 49.5% (39.8 to 59.9) (644 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 98.9% (97.6 to 99.7) (2421 participants; high-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have pleural tuberculosis, 60 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-positive: of these, 10 (17%) would not have tuberculosis; and 940 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-negative: of these, 50 (5%) would have tuberculosis. Lymph node aspirate Xpert Ultra (1 study) Xpert Ultra sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval) against composite reference standard were 70% (51 to 85) (30 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and 100% (92 to 100) (43 participants; low-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have lymph node tuberculosis, 70 would be Xpert Ultra-positive and 0 (0%) would not have tuberculosis; 930 would be Xpert Ultra-negative and 30 (3%) would have tuberculosis. Xpert MTB/RIF (4 studies) Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity against composite reference standard were 81.6% (61.9 to 93.3) (377 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 96.4% (91.3 to 98.6) (302 participants; low-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have lymph node tuberculosis, 118 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-positive and 37 (31%) would not have tuberculosis; 882 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-negative and 19 (2%) would have tuberculosis. In lymph node aspirate, Xpert MTB/RIF pooled specificity against culture was 86.2% (78.0 to 92.3), lower than that against a composite reference standard. Using the latent class model, Xpert MTB/RIF pooled specificity was 99.5% (99.1 to 99.7), similar to that observed with a composite reference standard. Rifampicin resistance Xpert Ultra (4 studies) Xpert Ultra pooled sensitivity and specificity were 100.0% (95.1 to 100.0), (24 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 100.0% (99.0 to 100.0) (105 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have rifampicin resistance, 100 would be Xpert Ultra-positive (resistant): of these, zero (0%) would not have rifampicin resistance; and 900 would be Xpert Ultra-negative (susceptible): of these, zero (0%) would have rifampicin resistance. Xpert MTB/RIF (19 studies) Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity were 96.5% (91.9 to 98.8) (148 participants; high-certainty evidence) and 99.1% (98.0 to 99.7) (822 participants; high-certainty evidence). Of 1000 people where 100 have rifampicin resistance, 105 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-positive (resistant): of these, 8 (8%) would not have rifampicin resistance; and 895 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-negative (susceptible): of these, 3 (0.3%) would have rifampicin resistance. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF may be helpful in diagnosing extrapulmonary tuberculosis. Sensitivity varies across different extrapulmonary specimens: while for most specimens specificity is high, the tests rarely yield a positive result for people without tuberculosis. For tuberculous meningitis, Xpert Ultra had higher sensitivity and lower specificity than Xpert MTB/RIF against culture. Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF had similar sensitivity and specificity for rifampicin resistance. Future research should acknowledge the concern associated with culture as a reference standard in paucibacillary specimens and consider ways to address this limitation

MIKROBIYOLOJI BULTENI

Pyrazinamide (PZA) is a primary antituberculous drug. BACTEC 460TB is the recommended reference method for the detection of PZA resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. This method is more expensive than the conventional susceptibility methods and therefore, it is recommended that each laboratory should establish their own protocol for the inclusion of PZA in the panel of primary drugs tested. One of the most important factors that help this decision is the prevalence of PZA resistance, particularly PZA monoresistance in the related community. The aim of the present study was to determine the extent of PZA monoresistance in M.tuberculosis complex (MTBC) isolates in our region. In this study, PZA susceptibility testing of 109 MTBC strains (susceptible to isoniazid, rifampicin, ethambutol and streptomycin) isolated from Manisa province in the Aegean region of Turkey was performed by using the BACTEC 460TB radiometric system (Becton Dickinson, MD). Two (1.8%) of the 109 isolates which were susceptible to all primary drugs revealed monoresistance against PZA. One of the PZA-monoresistant isolates has been identified as M.bovis and the other as M.tuberculosis by molecular method (Genotype MTBC, Hain Lifescience, Germany). The results of our study indicated that since the rate of PZA monoresistance was low, susceptibility testing of a panel of primary drugs without PZA may be an economical alternative in our region

TURKISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES

Aim: The emergence of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is increasing, and the standard short-course regimen used for the treatment of TB is likely to be ineffective against MDR-TB, leading to the need for second-line drugs. In such situations, drug susceptibility testing is necessary to select an appropriate treatment regimen. Unfortunately, there are few studies showing the pattern of the second-line drug resistance in Turkey. We aimed to analyze the resistance to second-line anti-tuberculosis drugs of MDR strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolated from the Aegean region of Turkey. Materials and Methods: In this study, drug susceptibility testing of 40 MDR-TB strains isolated from the Aegean region of Turkey was performed using the BACTEC 460 TB radiometric system. Capreomycin, ethionamide, kanamycin, amikacin, clofazimine and ofloxacin were tested in 1.25 mu g/ml, 1.25 mu g/ml, 5.0 mu g/ml, 1.0 mu g/ml, 0.5 mu g/ml, and 2.0 mu g/ml concentrations, respectively. Results: The results showed that 37.5% of the strains were resistant to ethionamide, 25% to capreomycin, 5% to kanamycin, amikacin and ofloxacin, and 2.5% to clofazimine. One (2.5%) of the 40 MDR-TB cases was defined as extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB). Conclusions: The results of the study indicate that the high rates of resistance to ethionamide and capreomycin may be a problem in the treatment of patients with MDR-TB; XDR-TB is not yet a serious problem in our region