Cargando…

Comparison of same day diagnostic tools including Gene Xpert and unstimulated IFN-γ for the evaluation of pleural tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of currently available same-day diagnostic tools (smear microscopy and conventional nucleic acid amplification tests) for pleural tuberculosis (TB) is sub-optimal. Newer technologies may offer improved detection. METHODS: Smear-microscopy, adenosine deaminase (ADA), interfer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meldau, Richard, Peter, Jonny, Theron, Grant, Calligaro, Greg, Allwood, Brian, Symons, Greg, Khalfey, Hoosain, Ntombenhle, Gina, Govender, Ureshnie, Binder, Anke, van Zyl-Smit, Richard, Dheda, Keertan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4108018/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24708530
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2466-14-58
_version_ 1782327694187298816
author Meldau, Richard
Peter, Jonny
Theron, Grant
Calligaro, Greg
Allwood, Brian
Symons, Greg
Khalfey, Hoosain
Ntombenhle, Gina
Govender, Ureshnie
Binder, Anke
van Zyl-Smit, Richard
Dheda, Keertan
author_facet Meldau, Richard
Peter, Jonny
Theron, Grant
Calligaro, Greg
Allwood, Brian
Symons, Greg
Khalfey, Hoosain
Ntombenhle, Gina
Govender, Ureshnie
Binder, Anke
van Zyl-Smit, Richard
Dheda, Keertan
author_sort Meldau, Richard
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The accuracy of currently available same-day diagnostic tools (smear microscopy and conventional nucleic acid amplification tests) for pleural tuberculosis (TB) is sub-optimal. Newer technologies may offer improved detection. METHODS: Smear-microscopy, adenosine deaminase (ADA), interferon gamma (IFN-γ), and Xpert MTB/RIF [using an unprocessed (1 ml) and centrifuged (~20 ml) sample] test accuracy was evaluated in pleural fluid from 103 consecutive patients with suspected pleural TB. Culture for M.tuberculosis and/or histopathology (pleural biopsy) served as the reference standard. Patients were followed prospectively to determine their diagnostic categorisation. RESULTS: Of 93 evaluable participants, 40 had definite-TB (reference positive), 5 probable-TB (not definite but treated for TB) and 48 non-TB (culture and histology negative, and not treated for TB). Xpert MTB/RIF sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) was 22.5% (12.4 - 37.6) and 98% (89.2 - 99.7), respectively, and centrifugation did not improve sensitivity (23.7%). The Xpert MTB/RIF internal positive control showed no evidence of inhibition. Biomarker specific sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPVs were: ADA (48.85 IU/L; rule-in cut-point) 55.3% (39.8 - 69.9), 95.2% (83.9 - 98.7), 91.4 (73.4 - 95.4), 69.7% (56.7 - 80.1); ADA (30 IU/L; clinically used cut-point) 79% (63.7 - 89), 92.7% (80.6 - 97.5), 91.0 (73.4 - 95.4), 82.7% (69.3 - 90.1); and IFN-γ (107.7 pg/ml; rule-in cut-point) 92.5% (80.2 - 97.5), 95.9% (86.1 - 98.9), 94.9% (83.2 - 98.6), 93.9% (83.5 - 97.9), respectively (IFN-γ sensitivity and NPV better than Xpert [p < 0.05] and rule-in ADA [p < 0.05]). CONCLUSION: The usefulness of Xpert MTB/RIF to diagnose pleural TB is limited by its poor sensitivity. IFN-γ is an excellent rule-in test and, compared to ADA, has significantly better sensitivity and rule-out value in a TB-endemic setting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4108018
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41080182014-07-24 Comparison of same day diagnostic tools including Gene Xpert and unstimulated IFN-γ for the evaluation of pleural tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study Meldau, Richard Peter, Jonny Theron, Grant Calligaro, Greg Allwood, Brian Symons, Greg Khalfey, Hoosain Ntombenhle, Gina Govender, Ureshnie Binder, Anke van Zyl-Smit, Richard Dheda, Keertan BMC Pulm Med Research Article BACKGROUND: The accuracy of currently available same-day diagnostic tools (smear microscopy and conventional nucleic acid amplification tests) for pleural tuberculosis (TB) is sub-optimal. Newer technologies may offer improved detection. METHODS: Smear-microscopy, adenosine deaminase (ADA), interferon gamma (IFN-γ), and Xpert MTB/RIF [using an unprocessed (1 ml) and centrifuged (~20 ml) sample] test accuracy was evaluated in pleural fluid from 103 consecutive patients with suspected pleural TB. Culture for M.tuberculosis and/or histopathology (pleural biopsy) served as the reference standard. Patients were followed prospectively to determine their diagnostic categorisation. RESULTS: Of 93 evaluable participants, 40 had definite-TB (reference positive), 5 probable-TB (not definite but treated for TB) and 48 non-TB (culture and histology negative, and not treated for TB). Xpert MTB/RIF sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) was 22.5% (12.4 - 37.6) and 98% (89.2 - 99.7), respectively, and centrifugation did not improve sensitivity (23.7%). The Xpert MTB/RIF internal positive control showed no evidence of inhibition. Biomarker specific sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPVs were: ADA (48.85 IU/L; rule-in cut-point) 55.3% (39.8 - 69.9), 95.2% (83.9 - 98.7), 91.4 (73.4 - 95.4), 69.7% (56.7 - 80.1); ADA (30 IU/L; clinically used cut-point) 79% (63.7 - 89), 92.7% (80.6 - 97.5), 91.0 (73.4 - 95.4), 82.7% (69.3 - 90.1); and IFN-γ (107.7 pg/ml; rule-in cut-point) 92.5% (80.2 - 97.5), 95.9% (86.1 - 98.9), 94.9% (83.2 - 98.6), 93.9% (83.5 - 97.9), respectively (IFN-γ sensitivity and NPV better than Xpert [p < 0.05] and rule-in ADA [p < 0.05]). CONCLUSION: The usefulness of Xpert MTB/RIF to diagnose pleural TB is limited by its poor sensitivity. IFN-γ is an excellent rule-in test and, compared to ADA, has significantly better sensitivity and rule-out value in a TB-endemic setting. BioMed Central 2014-04-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4108018/ /pubmed/24708530 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2466-14-58 Text en Copyright © 2014 Meldau et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Meldau, Richard
Peter, Jonny
Theron, Grant
Calligaro, Greg
Allwood, Brian
Symons, Greg
Khalfey, Hoosain
Ntombenhle, Gina
Govender, Ureshnie
Binder, Anke
van Zyl-Smit, Richard
Dheda, Keertan
Comparison of same day diagnostic tools including Gene Xpert and unstimulated IFN-γ for the evaluation of pleural tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study
title Comparison of same day diagnostic tools including Gene Xpert and unstimulated IFN-γ for the evaluation of pleural tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study
title_full Comparison of same day diagnostic tools including Gene Xpert and unstimulated IFN-γ for the evaluation of pleural tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study
title_fullStr Comparison of same day diagnostic tools including Gene Xpert and unstimulated IFN-γ for the evaluation of pleural tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of same day diagnostic tools including Gene Xpert and unstimulated IFN-γ for the evaluation of pleural tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study
title_short Comparison of same day diagnostic tools including Gene Xpert and unstimulated IFN-γ for the evaluation of pleural tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study
title_sort comparison of same day diagnostic tools including gene xpert and unstimulated ifn-γ for the evaluation of pleural tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4108018/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24708530
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2466-14-58
work_keys_str_mv AT meldaurichard comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy
AT peterjonny comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy
AT therongrant comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy
AT calligarogreg comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy
AT allwoodbrian comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy
AT symonsgreg comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy
AT khalfeyhoosain comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy
AT ntombenhlegina comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy
AT govenderureshnie comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy
AT binderanke comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy
AT vanzylsmitrichard comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy
AT dhedakeertan comparisonofsamedaydiagnostictoolsincludinggenexpertandunstimulatedifngfortheevaluationofpleuraltuberculosisaprospectivecohortstudy