Dataset Information

Diagnostic values of the QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-tube assay carried out in China for diagnosing pulmonary tuberculosis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Interferon-release assays (IGRAs) for diagnosing active pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) are not yet fully validated, particularly in high TB-endemic areas as the People's Republic of China (PRC). The aim of this report was to assess the performance of the QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-tube (QFT-GIT) and tuberculin skin test (TST), in addition to microbiological results, as contributors for diagnosing active PTB in the PRC.

Methods/principal findings

A total of 300 PTB patients, 41 disease controls (DC) and 59 healthy community controls (HCC) were included prospectively between May 2010 and April 2011 from two provinces of the PRC (Heilongjiang and Zhejiang). The QFT-GIT and TST yielded an overall sensitivity for active TB of 80.9% and 86.2%, and a specificity of 36.6% and 26.8%, respectively. The province of origin and smear microscopy status did not significantly impact the diagnostic values for PTB. However, using the TST with a 10 mm cut-off point, a significantly higher proportion of LTBI was observed in the DC than the HCC (p=0.01). Discordant results between the QFT-GIT and TST were found among 1/3 of the PTB, HCC and DC. Two-thirds of the individuals presented TST-positive/QFT-GIT-negative discordant results. The TST-negative/QFT-GIT-positive result was not associated with age or bacillary load. Cumulative QFT-GIT and TST positive results increased the overall sensitivity (95.9%), but it was associated with a dramatic decrease of the overall specificity (24.8%) leading to a suboptimal PPV (80.1%) and a low NPV (61.1%).

Conclusions/significance

The usefulness of the QFT-GIT to diagnose active TB in high TB-endemic countries remains doubtful because like the TST, the QFT-GIT cannot distinguish between LTBI and active TB. Used as single stand-alone tests, both the QFT-GIT and TST have very limited roles in the diagnosis of active PTB. However, the combined use of SM, the TST and QFT-GIT may allow for the exclusion of ATB.

SUBMITTER: Xia H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4395092 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe QuantiFERON®-TB Gold In-Tube test (QFT-GIT) is a viable alternative to the tuberculin skin test (TST) for detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. However, within-subject variability may limit test utility. To assess variability, we compared results from the same subjects when QFT-GIT enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) were performed in different laboratories.MethodsSubjects were recruited at two sites and blood was tested in three labs. Two labs used the same type of automated ELISA workstation, 8-point calibration curves, and electronic data transfer. The third lab used a different automated ELISA workstation, 4-point calibration curves, and manual data entry. Variability was assessed by interpretation agreement and comparison of interferon-? (IFN-?) measurements. Data for subjects with discordant interpretations or discrepancies in TB Response >0.05 IU/mL were verified or corrected, and variability was reassessed using a reconciled dataset.ResultsNinety-seven subjects had results from three labs. Eleven (11.3%) had discordant interpretations and 72 (74.2%) had discrepancies >0.05 IU/mL using unreconciled results. After correction of manual data entry errors for 9 subjects, and exclusion of 6 subjects due to methodological errors, 7 (7.7%) subjects were discordant. Of these, 6 (85.7%) had all TB Responses within 0.25 IU/mL of the manufacturer's recommended cutoff. Non-uniform error of measurement was observed, with greater variation in higher IFN-? measurements. Within-subject standard deviation for TB Response was as high as 0.16 IU/mL, and limits of agreement ranged from -0.46 to 0.43 IU/mL for subjects with mean TB Response within 0.25 IU/mL of the cutoff.ConclusionGreater interlaboratory variability was associated with manual data entry and higher IFN-? measurements. Manual data entry should be avoided. Because variability in measuring TB Response may affect interpretation, especially near the cutoff, consideration should be given to developing a range of values near the cutoff to be interpreted as "borderline," rather than negative or positive.

Project description:BackgroundWorld Health Organization (WHO) recommends systematic screening of high-risk populations, including household contacts (HHCs) of adult pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) patients, as a key strategy for elimination of TB. QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-GIT) assay and tuberculin skin test (TST) are two commonly used tools for the detection of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) but may yield differential results, affecting eligibility for TB preventive therapy.Materials and methodsA prospective cohort study of adult pulmonary TB patients and their HHCs were recruited in 2 cities of India, Pune and Chennai. HHCs underwent QFT-GIT (QIAGEN) and TST (PPD SPAN 2TU/5TU). A positive QFT-GIT was defined as value ?0.35 IU/ml and a positive TST as an induration of ?5 mm. A secondary outcome of TST induration ?10mm was explored. Proportion positive by either or both assays, discordant positives and negatives were calculated; test concordance was assessed using percentage agreement and kappa statistics; and risk factors for concordance and discordance including age categories were assessed using logistic regression. Sensitivity and specificity was estimated by latent class model.ResultsOf 1048 HHCs enrolled, 869 [median (IQR) age: 27 years (15-40)] had both TST and QFT-GIT results available and prevalence of LTBI by QFT-GIT was 54% [95% CI (51, 57)], by TST was 55% [95% CI (52, 58)], by either test was 74% [95% CI (71, 77) and by both tests was 35% [95% CI (31, 38)]. Discordance of TST+/QFT-GIT- was 21% while TST-/QFT-GIT+ was 26%. Poor to fair agreement occurred with TST 5mm or 10mm cutoff (60 and 61% agreement with kappa value of 0.20 and 0.25 respectively). Test agreement varied by age, TST strength and induration cut-off. In multivariate analysis, span PPD was a risk factor for QFT-GIT+ and TST- while absence of BCG scar was for TST+ and QFT-GIT-. Being employed and exposure to TB case outside the household case were associated with positivity by both the tests. Sensitivity of TST and QFT-GIT to diagnose LTBI was 77% and 69%. Probability of having LTBI was >90% when both tests were positive irrespective of exposure gradient.ConclusionPrevalence of LTBI among HHCs of adult pulmonary TB patients in India is very high and varies by test type, age, and exposure gradient. In our high TB burden setting, a strategy to treat all HHCs or a targeted strategy whereby an exposure index is used should be assessed in future preventive therapy and vaccine studies as HHCs have several factors that place them at high risk for progression to TB disease.

Project description:QuantiFERON®-TB Gold in-tube (QFT-GIT) supernatants may be important samples for use in assessment of anti-tuberculosis (TB) antibodies when only limited volumes of blood can be collected and when a combination of antibody and cytokine measurements are required. These analytes, when used together, may also have the potential to differentiate active pulmonary TB (APTB) from latent TB infection (LTBI). However, few studies have explored the use of QFT-GIT supernatants for investigations of antibody responses. This study determined the correlation and agreement between anti-CFP-10 and anti-ESAT-6 antibody concentrations in QFT-GIT nil supernatant and serum pairs from 68 TB household contacts. We also explored the ability of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M.tb) specific antibodies, or ratios of antibody to interferon gamma (IFN-γ) in QFT-GIT supernatants, to differentiate 97 APTB cases from 58 individuals with LTBI. Sputum smear microscopy was used to define APTB, whereas the QFT-GIT and tuberculin skin test were used to define LTBI. There were strong and statistically significant correlations between anti-CFP-10 and anti-ESAT-6 antibodies in unstimulated QFT-GIT supernatants and sera (r = 0.89; p<0.0001 for both), and no significant differences in antibody concentration between them. Anti-CFP-10 & anti-ESAT-6 antibodies differentiated APTB from LTBI with sensitivities of 88.7% & 71.1% and specificities of 41.4% & 51.7% respectively. Anti-CFP-10 antibody/M.tb specific IFN-γ and anti-ESAT-6 antibody/M.tb specific IFN-γ ratios had sensitivities of 48.5% & 54.6% and specificities of 89.7% and 75.9% respectively. We conclude that QFT-GIT nil supernatants may be used in the place of sera when measuring antibody responses, reducing blood volumes needed for such investigations. Antibodies in QFT-GIT nil supernatants on their own discriminate APTB from LTBI with high sensitivity but have poor specificity, whereas the reverse is true when antibodies are used in combination with M.tb specific cytokines. Further antibody and antibody/cytokine combinations need to be explored to achieve better diagnostic accuracy.