Piloting Upfront Xpert MTB/RIF Testing on Various Specimens under Programmatic Conditions for Diagnosis of TB & DR-TB in Paediatric Population

India accounts for one-fifth of the global TB incidence. While the exact burden of childhood TB is not known, TB remains one of the leading causes of childhood mortality in India. Bacteriological confirmation of TB in children is challenging due to difficulty in obtaining quality specimens, in the absence of which diagnosis is largely based on clinical judgement. While testing multiple specimens can potentially contribute to higher proportion of laboratory confirmed paediatric TB cases, lack of high sensitivity tests adds to the diagnostic challenge. We describe here our experiences in piloting upfront Xpert MTB/RIF testing, for diagnosis of TB in paediatric population in respiratory and extra pulmonary specimens, as recently recommended by WHO.Xpert MTB/RIF testing was offered to all paediatric (0-14 years) presumptive TB cases (both pulmonary and extra-pulmonary) seeking care at public and private health facilities in the project areas covering 4 cities of India.Under this pilot project, 8,370 paediatric presumptive TB & presumptive DR-TB cases were tested between April and-November 2014. Overall, 9,149 specimens were tested, of which 4,445 (48.6%) were non-sputum specimens. Xpert MTB/RIF gave 9,083 (99.2%, CI 99.0-99.4) valid results. Of the 8,143 presumptive TB cases enrolled, 517 (6.3%, CI 5.8-6.9) were bacteriologically confirmed. TB detection rates were two fold higher with Xpert MTB/RIF as compared to smear microscopy. Further, a total of 60 rifampicin resistant TB cases were detected, of which 38 were detected among 512 presumptive TB cases while 22 were detected amongst 227 presumptive DR-TB cases tested under the project.Xpert MTB/RIF with advantages of quick turnaround testing-time, high proportion of interpretable results and feasibility of rapid rollout, substantially improved the diagnosis of bacteriologically confirmed TB in children, while simultaneously detecting rifampicin resistance

Diagnostic accuracy of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay for extrapulmonary and pulmonary tuberculosis when testing non-respiratory samples: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Although the evidence base regarding the use of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) when testing respiratory samples is well established, the evidence base for its diagnostic accuracy for extrapulmonary and sputum-scarce pulmonary TB when testing non-respiratory samples is less clearly defined. METHODS: A systematic literature search of 7 electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, BIOSIS, Global Health Database, Scopus and Cochrane Database) was conducted to identify studies of the diagnostic accuracy of the Xpert assay when testing non-respiratory samples compared with a culture-based reference standard. Data were extracted and study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Sensitivities and specificities were calculated on a per-sample basis, stratified by sample type and smear microscopy status and summarised using forest plots. Pooled estimates were calculated for groups with sufficient data. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies with a total of 6,026 non-respiratory samples were included. Among the 23 studies comparing Xpert and culture done on the same samples, sensitivity was very heterogeneous with a median sensitivity of 0.83 (IQR, 0.68-0.94) whereas specificities were typically very high (median, 0.98; IQR, 0.89-1.00). The pooled summary estimates of sensitivity when testing smear-positive and smear-negative samples were 0.95 (95% CI 0.91-1.00) and 0.69 (95% CI 0.60-0.80), respectively. Pooled summary estimates of sensitivity varied substantially between sample types: lymph node tissue, 0.96 (95% CI, 0.72-0.99); tissue samples of all types, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.76-0.94); pleural fluid, 0.34 (95% CI, 0.24-0.44); gastric aspirates for diagnosis of sputum-scarce pulmonary TB, 0.78 (IQR, 0.68 - 0.85). Median sensitivities when testing cerebrospinal fluid and non-pleural serous fluid samples were 0.85 (IQR, 0.75-1.00) and 0.67 (IQR, 0.00-1.00), respectively. CONCLUSION: Xpert detects with high specificity the vast majority of EPTB cases with smear-positive non-respiratory samples and approximately two-thirds of those with smear-negative samples. Xpert is a useful rule-in diagnostic test for EPTB, especially when testing cerebrospinal fluid and tissue samples. In addition, it has a high sensitivity for detecting pulmonary TB when using gastric aspirate samples. These findings support recent WHO guidelines regarding the use of Xpert for TB diagnosis from non-respiratory samples