Clinical utility of C-reactive protein-based triage for presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis in South African adults.

BACKGROUND: Identification of an accurate, low-cost triage test for pulmonary TB among people presenting to healthcare facilities is an urgent global research priority. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of C-reactive protein (CRP) for TB triage among symptomatic adult outpatients, irrespective of HIV status. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled adults reporting at least one (for people with HIV) or two (for people without HIV) symptoms of cough, fever, night sweats, or weight loss at two TB clinics in Cape Town, South Africa. Participants provided sputum for culture and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of CRP (measured using a laboratory-based assay) against a TB-culture reference standard as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and sensitivity and specificity at pre-specified thresholds. We assessed clinical utility using decision curve analysis and benchmarked against WHO recommendations. RESULTS: Of 932 included individuals, 255 (27%) had culture-confirmed pulmonary TB and 389 (42%) were living with HIV. CRP demonstrated an AUROC of 0·80 (95% confidence interval 0·77-0·83), with sensitivity 93% (89-95%) and specificity 54% (50-58%) using a primary cut-off of ≥10 mg/L. Performance was similar among people with HIV to those without. In decision curve analysis, CRP-based triage offered greater clinical utility than confirmatory testing for all up to a number willing to test threshold of 20 confirmatory tests per true positive pulmonary TB case diagnosed (threshold probability 5%). If it is possible to perform more confirmatory tests than this, a 'confirmatory test for all' strategy performed better. CONCLUSIONS: CRP achieved the WHO-defined sensitivity, but not specificity, targets for a triage test for pulmonary TB and showed evidence of clinical utility among symptomatic outpatients, irrespective of HIV status. FUNDING: South African Medical Research Council, EDCTP2, Royal Society Newton Advanced Fellowship, Wellcome Trust, National Institute of Health Research, Royal College of Physicians

Diagnostic yield of urine lipoarabinomannan and sputum tuberculosis tests in people living with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND: Sputum is the most widely used sample to diagnose active tuberculosis, but many people living with HIV are unable to produce sputum. Urine, in contrast, is readily available. We hypothesised that sample availability influences the diagnostic yield of various tuberculosis tests. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data, we compared the diagnostic yield of point-of-care urine-based lipoarabinomannan tests with that of sputum-based nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) and sputum smear microscopy (SSM). We used microbiologically confirmed tuberculosis based on positive culture or NAAT from any body site as the denominator and accounted for sample provision. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, African Journals Online, and clinicaltrials.gov from database inception to Feb 24, 2022 for randomised controlled trials, cross-sectional studies, and cohort studies that assessed urine lipoarabinomannan point-of-care tests and sputum NAATs for active tuberculosis detection in participants irrespective of tuberculosis symptoms, HIV status, CD4 cell count, or study setting. We excluded studies in which recruitment was not consecutive, systematic, or random; provision of sputum or urine was an inclusion criterion; less than 30 participants were diagnosed with tuberculosis; early research assays without clearly defined cutoffs were tested; and humans were not studied. We extracted study-level data, and authors of eligible studies were invited to contribute deidentified individual participant data. The main outcomes were the tuberculosis diagnostic yields of urine lipoarabinomannan tests, sputum NAATs, and SSM. Diagnostic yields were predicted using Bayesian random-effects and mixed-effects meta-analyses. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021230337. FINDINGS: We identified 844 records, from which 20 datasets and 10 202 participants (4561 [45%] male participants and 5641 [55%] female participants) were included in the meta-analysis. All studies assessed sputum Xpert (MTB/RIF or Ultra, Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) and urine Alere Determine TB LAM (AlereLAM, Abbott, Chicago, IL, USA) in people living with HIV aged 15 years or older. Nearly all (9957 [98%] of 10 202) participants provided urine, and 82% (8360 of 10 202) provided sputum within 2 days. In studies that enrolled unselected inpatients irrespective of tuberculosis symptoms, only 54% (1084 of 1993) of participants provided sputum, whereas 99% (1966 of 1993) provided urine. Diagnostic yield was 41% (95% credible interval [CrI] 15-66) for AlereLAM, 61% (95% Crl 25-88) for Xpert, and 32% (95% Crl 10-55) for SSM. Heterogeneity existed across studies in the diagnostic yield, influenced by CD4 cell count, tuberculosis symptoms, and clinical setting. In predefined subgroup analyses, all tests had higher yields in symptomatic participants, and AlereLAM yield was higher in those with low CD4 counts and inpatients. AlereLAM and Xpert yields were similar among inpatients in studies enrolling unselected participants who were not assessed for tuberculosis symptoms (51% vs 47%). AlereLAM and Xpert together had a yield of 71% in unselected inpatients, supporting the implementation of combined testing strategies. INTERPRETATION: AlereLAM, with its rapid turnaround time and simplicity, should be prioritised to inform tuberculosis therapy among inpatients who are HIV-positive, regardless of symptoms or CD4 cell count. The yield of sputum-based tuberculosis tests is undermined by people living with HIV who cannot produce sputum, whereas nearly all participants are able to provide urine. The strengths of this meta-analysis are its large size, the carefully harmonised denominator, and the use of Bayesian random-effects and mixed-effects models to predict yields; however, data were geographically restricted, clinically diagnosed tuberculosis was not considered in the denominator, and little information exists on strategies for obtaining sputum samples. FUNDING: FIND, the Global Alliance for Diagnostics

Tuberculosis screening among ambulatory people living with HIV: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

BackgroundThe WHO-recommended tuberculosis screening and diagnostic algorithm in ambulatory people living with HIV is a four-symptom screen (known as the WHO-recommended four symptom screen [W4SS]) followed by a WHO-recommended molecular rapid diagnostic test (eg Xpert MTB/RIF [hereafter referred to as Xpert]) if W4SS is positive. To inform updated WHO guidelines, we aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of alternative screening tests and strategies for tuberculosis in this population.MethodsIn this systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, we updated a search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, the Cochrane Library, and conference abstracts for publications from Jan 1, 2011, to March 12, 2018, done in a previous systematic review to include the period up to Aug 2, 2019. We screened the reference lists of identified pieces and contacted experts in the field. We included prospective cross-sectional, observational studies and randomised trials among adult and adolescent (age ≥10 years) ambulatory people living with HIV, irrespective of signs and symptoms of tuberculosis. We extracted study-level data using a standardised data extraction form, and we requested individual participant data from study authors. We aimed to compare the W4SS with alternative screening tests and strategies and the WHO-recommended algorithm (ie, W4SS followed by Xpert) with Xpert for all in terms of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity), overall and in key subgroups (eg, by antiretroviral therapy [ART] status). The reference standard was culture. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020155895.FindingsWe identified 25 studies, and obtained data from 22 studies (including 15 666 participants; 4347 [27·7%] of 15 663 participants with data were on ART). W4SS sensitivity was 82% (95% CI 72-89) and specificity was 42% (29-57). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) had similar sensitivity to (77% [61-88]), but higher specificity (74% [61-83]; n=3571) than, W4SS. Cough (lasting ≥2 weeks), haemoglobin (2), and lymphadenopathy had high specificities (80-90%) but low sensitivities (29-43%). The WHO-recommended algorithm had a sensitivity of 58% (50-66) and a specificity of 99% (98-100); Xpert for all had a sensitivity of 68% (57-76) and a specificity of 99% (98-99). In the one study that assessed both, the sensitivity of sputum Xpert Ultra was higher than sputum Xpert (73% [62-81] vs 57% [47-67]) and specificities were similar (98% [96-98] vs 99% [98-100]). Among outpatients on ART (4309 [99·1%] of 4347 people on ART), W4SS sensitivity was 53% (35-71) and specificity was 71% (51-85). In this population, a parallel strategy (two tests done at the same time) of W4SS with any chest x-ray abnormality had higher sensitivity (89% [70-97]) and lower specificity (33% [17-54]; n=2670) than W4SS alone; at a tuberculosis prevalence of 5%, this strategy would require 379 more rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but detect 18 more tuberculosis cases. Among outpatients not on ART (11 160 [71·8%] of 15 541 outpatients), W4SS sensitivity was 85% (76-91) and specificity was 37% (25-51). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) alone had a similar sensitivity to (83% [79-86]), but higher specificity (67% [60-73]; n=3187) than, W4SS and a sequential strategy (both test positive) of W4SS then C-reactive protein (≥5 mg/L) had a similar sensitivity to (84% [75-90]), but higher specificity than (64% [57-71]; n=3187), W4SS alone; at 10% tuberculosis prevalence, these strategies would require 272 and 244 fewer rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but miss two and one more tuberculosis cases, respectively.InterpretationC-reactive protein reduces the need for further rapid diagnostic tests without compromising sensitivity and has been included in the updated WHO tuberculosis screening guidelines. However, C-reactive protein data were scarce for outpatients on ART, necessitating future research regarding the utility of C-reactive protein in this group. Chest x-ray can be useful in outpatients on ART when combined with W4SS. The WHO-recommended algorithm has suboptimal sensitivity; Xpert for all offers slight sensitivity gains and would have major resource implications.FundingWorld Health Organization

Clinical utility of C-reactive protein-based triage for presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis in South African adults

BACKGROUND: Identification of an accurate, low-cost triage test for pulmonary TB among people presenting to healthcare facilities is an urgent global research priority. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of C-reactive protein (CRP) for TB triage among symptomatic adult outpatients, irrespective of HIV status. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled adults reporting at least one (for people with HIV) or two (for people without HIV) symptoms of cough, fever, night sweats, or weight loss at two TB clinics in Cape Town, South Africa. Participants provided sputum for culture and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of CRP (measured using a laboratory-based assay) against a TB-culture reference standard as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and sensitivity and specificity at pre-specified thresholds. We assessed clinical utility using decision curve analysis and benchmarked against WHO recommendations. RESULTS: Of 932 included individuals, 255 (27%) had culture-confirmed pulmonary TB and 389 (42%) were living with HIV. CRP demonstrated an AUROC of 0·80 (95% confidence interval 0·77–0·83), with sensitivity 93% (89–95%) and specificity 54% (50–58%) using a primary cut-off of ≥10mg/L. Performance was similar among people with HIV to those without. In decision curve analysis, CRP-based triage offered greater clinical utility than confirmatory testing for all up to a number willing to test threshold of 20 confirmatory tests per true positive pulmonary TB case diagnosed (threshold probability 5%). If it is possible to perform more confirmatory tests than this, a ‘confirmatory test for all’ strategy performed better. CONCLUSIONS: CRP achieved the WHO-defined sensitivity, but not specificity, targets for a triage test for pulmonary TB and showed evidence of clinical utility among symptomatic outpatients, irrespective of HIV status

Clinical utility of WHO-recommended screening tools and development and validation of novel clinical prediction models for pulmonary tuberculosis screening among outpatients living with HIV: an individual participant data meta-analysis

BackgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that outpatient people living with HIV (PLHIV) undergo tuberculosis screening with the WHO four-symptom screen (W4SS) or C-reactive protein (CRP) (5 mg·L-1 cut-off) followed by confirmatory testing if screen positive. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis to determine the performance of WHO-recommended screening tools and two newly developed clinical prediction models (CPMs).MethodsFollowing a systematic review, we identified studies that recruited adult outpatient PLHIV irrespective of tuberculosis signs and symptoms or with a positive W4SS, evaluated CRP and collected sputum for culture. We used logistic regression to develop an extended CPM (which included CRP and other predictors) and a CRP-only CPM. We used internal-external cross-validation to evaluate performance.ResultsWe pooled data from eight cohorts (n=4315 participants). The extended CPM had excellent discrimination (C-statistic 0.81); the CRP-only CPM had similar discrimination. The C-statistics for WHO-recommended tools were lower. Both CPMs had equivalent or higher net benefit compared with the WHO-recommended tools. Compared with both CPMs, CRP (5 mg·L-1 cut-off) had equivalent net benefit across a clinically useful range of threshold probabilities, while the W4SS had a lower net benefit. The W4SS would capture 91% of tuberculosis cases and require confirmatory testing for 78% of participants. CRP (5 mg·L-1 cut-off), the extended CPM (4.2% threshold) and the CRP-only CPM (3.6% threshold) would capture similar percentages of cases but reduce confirmatory tests required by 24, 27 and 36%, respectively.ConclusionsCRP sets the standard for tuberculosis screening among outpatient PLHIV. The choice between using CRP at 5 mg·L-1 cut-off or in a CPM depends on available resources

Tuberculosis screening among ambulatory people living with HIV: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

BackgroundThe WHO-recommended tuberculosis screening and diagnostic algorithm in ambulatory people living with HIV is a four-symptom screen (known as the WHO-recommended four symptom screen [W4SS]) followed by a WHO-recommended molecular rapid diagnostic test (eg Xpert MTB/RIF [hereafter referred to as Xpert]) if W4SS is positive. To inform updated WHO guidelines, we aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of alternative screening tests and strategies for tuberculosis in this population.MethodsIn this systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, we updated a search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, the Cochrane Library, and conference abstracts for publications from Jan 1, 2011, to March 12, 2018, done in a previous systematic review to include the period up to Aug 2, 2019. We screened the reference lists of identified pieces and contacted experts in the field. We included prospective cross-sectional, observational studies and randomised trials among adult and adolescent (age ≥10 years) ambulatory people living with HIV, irrespective of signs and symptoms of tuberculosis. We extracted study-level data using a standardised data extraction form, and we requested individual participant data from study authors. We aimed to compare the W4SS with alternative screening tests and strategies and the WHO-recommended algorithm (ie, W4SS followed by Xpert) with Xpert for all in terms of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity), overall and in key subgroups (eg, by antiretroviral therapy [ART] status). The reference standard was culture. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020155895.FindingsWe identified 25 studies, and obtained data from 22 studies (including 15 666 participants; 4347 [27·7%] of 15 663 participants with data were on ART). W4SS sensitivity was 82% (95% CI 72-89) and specificity was 42% (29-57). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) had similar sensitivity to (77% [61-88]), but higher specificity (74% [61-83]; n=3571) than, W4SS. Cough (lasting ≥2 weeks), haemoglobin (<10 g/dL), body-mass index (<18·5 kg/m2), and lymphadenopathy had high specificities (80-90%) but low sensitivities (29-43%). The WHO-recommended algorithm had a sensitivity of 58% (50-66) and a specificity of 99% (98-100); Xpert for all had a sensitivity of 68% (57-76) and a specificity of 99% (98-99). In the one study that assessed both, the sensitivity of sputum Xpert Ultra was higher than sputum Xpert (73% [62-81] vs 57% [47-67]) and specificities were similar (98% [96-98] vs 99% [98-100]). Among outpatients on ART (4309 [99·1%] of 4347 people on ART), W4SS sensitivity was 53% (35-71) and specificity was 71% (51-85). In this population, a parallel strategy (two tests done at the same time) of W4SS with any chest x-ray abnormality had higher sensitivity (89% [70-97]) and lower specificity (33% [17-54]; n=2670) than W4SS alone; at a tuberculosis prevalence of 5%, this strategy would require 379 more rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but detect 18 more tuberculosis cases. Among outpatients not on ART (11 160 [71·8%] of 15 541 outpatients), W4SS sensitivity was 85% (76-91) and specificity was 37% (25-51). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) alone had a similar sensitivity to (83% [79-86]), but higher specificity (67% [60-73]; n=3187) than, W4SS and a sequential strategy (both test positive) of W4SS then C-reactive protein (≥5 mg/L) had a similar sensitivity to (84% [75-90]), but higher specificity than (64% [57-71]; n=3187), W4SS alone; at 10% tuberculosis prevalence, these strategies would require 272 and 244 fewer rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but miss two and one more tuberculosis cases, respectively.InterpretationC-reactive protein reduces the need for further rapid diagnostic tests without compromising sensitivity and has been included in the updated WHO tuberculosis screening guidelines. However, C-reactive protein data were scarce for outpatients on ART, necessitating future research regarding the utility of C-reactive protein in this group. Chest x-ray can be useful in outpatients on ART when combined with W4SS. The WHO-recommended algorithm has suboptimal sensitivity; Xpert for all offers slight sensitivity gains and would have major resource implications.FundingWorld Health Organization