Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF assays for extrapulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kohli M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8078545 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF assays for extrapulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults.
Kohli Mikashmi M Schiller Ian I Dendukuri Nandini N Yao Mandy M Dheda Keertan K Denkinger Claudia M CM Schumacher Samuel G SG Steingart Karen R KR
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20210115
<h4>Background</h4>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).<h4>Objectives</h4>To estimate diagnostic acc ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6555588 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (diagnostic). The objectives are as follows: To determine the accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra for screening for tuberculosis in adults irrespective of signs or symptoms of pulmonary tuberculosis in the general population (i.e. low‐risk population). To determine the accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra for screening of pulmonary tuberculosis in adults in the following high‐risk groups. People living with HIV. Household contacts of people with tuberculosis. Patients residing in high‐tuberculosis‐burden settings attending primary health facilities. Homeless people. Miners. People with diabetes mellitus. People who abuse alcohol. Smokers. People residing in prisons. Healthcare workers. To determine the accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra for the detection of rifampicin resistance in the general population and in the high‐risk groups and settings described above. Secondary objectives To compare the accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra in the above high‐risk groups and settings. To investigate potential sources of heterogeneity in accuracy estimates, including the percentage of participants with tuberculosis symptoms, tuberculosis burden, tuberculosis/HIV burden, and MDR‐TB burden.
| S-EPMC7390655 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We assessed the diagnostic yield of urine GeneXpert MTB/RIF Ultra and factors associated with a positive test among adult patients suspected to have extrapulmonary tuberculosis. Urine Ultra was positive in 14% of participants with definite or probable tuberculosis. Hospitalization, disseminated tuberculosis, and human immunodeficiency virus infection were associated with a positive result.
| S-EPMC11218765 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Extrapulmonary tuberculosis (EPTB) remains a challenging diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Cepheid, USA) for rapid diagnosis of EPTB in Tunisia. Eight hundred and forty-seven extrapulmonary samples collected from 2017 to 2021, were subjected to Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra. Microscopy and culture were performed for all the specimens. The accuracy of Xpert Ultra was evaluated in comparison to the culture. Xpert Ultra diagnosed EPTB with a global sensitivity of 80.66% (74.3-85.75) and specificity of 70.87% (67.31-74.20). The molecular test was most accurate when performed in cerebrospinal fluids, bones and joints and cutaneous specimens showing a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity ranging from 70.60 to 91.11%. In lymph node samples comprising aspirates and biopsies, the sensitivity of Xpert Ultra was high 87.50% (77.23-93.53), however, the specificity was 51.08% (44.67-57.46). For pleural samples, the Xpert Ultra sensitivity was 77.50% (68.34-84.68) ranging from 71.43 to 80% in pleural biopsies and fluids respectively. The specificity in all pleural specimens was 79.56% (74.40-83.91). Xpert Ultra showed promise in the diagnosis of EPTB. The performances varied according to the site of the disease. The test may be more valuable if used in combination with other diagnostic modalities.
| S-EPMC10817909 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundXpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Ultra) is a widely used rapid front-line tuberculosis and rifampicin-susceptibility testing. Mycobacterium Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) 960 liquid culture is used as an adjunct but is vulnerable to contamination. We aimed to assess whether Ultra can be used on to-be-discarded contaminated cultures.MethodsWe stored contaminated MGIT960 tubes (growth-positive, acid-fast bacilli [AFB]-negative) originally inoculated at a high-volume laboratory in Cape Town, South Africa, to diagnose patients with presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis. Patients who had no positive tuberculosis results (smear, Ultra, or culture) at contamination detection and had another, later specimen submitted within 3 months of the contaminated specimen were selected. We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of Ultra on contaminated growth from the first culture for tuberculosis (next-available non-contaminated culture result reference standard) and rifampicin resistance (vs MTBDRplus on a later isolate). We calculated potential time-to-diagnosis improvements and also evaluated the immunochromatographic MPT64 TBc assay.FindingsBetween June 1 and Aug 31, 2019, 36 684 specimens from 26 929 patients were processed for diagnostic culture. 2402 (7%) cultures from 2186 patients were contaminated. 1068 (49%) of 2186 patients had no other specimen submitted. After 319 exclusions, there were 799 people with at least one repeat specimen submitted; of these, we included in our study 246 patients (31%) with a culture-positive repeat specimen and 429 patients (54%) with a culture-negative repeat specimen. 124 patients (16%) with a culture-contaminated repeat specimen were excluded. When Ultra was done on the initial contaminated growth, sensitivity was 89% (95% CI 84-94) for tuberculosis and 95% (75-100) for rifampicin-resistance detection, and specificity was 95% (90-98) for tuberculosis and 98% (93-100) for rifampicin-resistance detection. If our approach were used the day after contamination detection, the time to tuberculosis detection would improve by a median of 23 days (IQR 13-45) and provide a result in many patients who had none. MPT64 TBc had a sensitivity of 5% (95% CI 0-25).InterpretationUltra on AFB-negative growth from contaminated MGIT960 tubes had high sensitivity and specificity, approximating WHO criteria for sputum test target product performance and exceeding drug susceptibility testing. Our approach could mitigate negative effects of culture contamination, especially when repeat specimens are not submitted.FundingThe European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, National Institutes of Health.
| S-EPMC10600950 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Xpert MTB/RIF assay is an automated molecular test that has improved the detection of tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance, but its sensitivity is inadequate in patients with paucibacillary disease or HIV. Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) was developed to overcome this limitation. We compared the diagnostic performance of Xpert Ultra with that of Xpert for detection of tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance.MethodsIn this prospective, multicentre, diagnostic accuracy study, we recruited adults with pulmonary tuberculosis symptoms presenting at primary health-care centres and hospitals in eight countries (South Africa, Uganda, Kenya, India, China, Georgia, Belarus, and Brazil). Participants were allocated to the case detection group if no drugs had been taken for tuberculosis in the past 6 months or to the multidrug-resistance risk group if drugs for tuberculosis had been taken in the past 6 months, but drug resistance was suspected. Demographic information, medical history, chest imaging results, and HIV test results were recorded at enrolment, and each participant gave at least three sputum specimen on 2 separate days. Xpert and Xpert Ultra diagnostic performance in the same sputum specimen was compared with culture tests and drug susceptibility testing as reference standards. The primary objectives were to estimate and compare the sensitivity of Xpert Ultra test with that of Xpert for detection of smear-negative tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance and to estimate and compare Xpert Ultra and Xpert specificities for detection of rifampicin resistance. Study participants in the case detection group were included in all analyses, whereas participants in the multidrug-resistance risk group were only included in analyses of rifampicin-resistance detection.FindingsBetween Feb 18, and Dec 24, 2016, we enrolled 2368 participants for sputum sampling. 248 participants were excluded from the analysis, and 1753 participants were distributed to the case detection group (n=1439) and the multidrug-resistance risk group (n=314). Sensitivities of Xpert Ultra and Xpert were 63% and 46%, respectively, for the 137 participants with smear-negative and culture-positive sputum (difference of 17%, 95% CI 10 to 24); 90% and 77%, respectively, for the 115 HIV-positive participants with culture-positive sputum (13%, 6·4 to 21); and 88% and 83%, respectively, across all 462 participants with culture-positive sputum (5·4%, 3·3 to 8·0). Specificities of Xpert Ultra and Xpert for case detection were 96% and 98% (-2·7%, -3·9 to -1·7) overall, and 93% and 98% for patients with a history of tuberculosis. Xpert Ultra and Xpert performed similarly in detecting rifampicin resistance.InterpretationFor tuberculosis case detection, sensitivity of Xpert Ultra was superior to that of Xpert in patients with paucibacillary disease and in patients with HIV. However, this increase in sensitivity came at the expense of a decrease in specificity.FundingGovernment of Netherlands, Government of Australia, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Government of the UK, and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
| S-EPMC6168783 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUganda introduced Xpert® MTB/RIF assay into its TB diagnostic algorithm in January 2012. In July 2018, this assay was replaced with Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra assay. We set out to compare the tests done and tuberculosis cases detected by Xpert® MTB/RIF and Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra assay in Uganda.MethodsThis was a before and after study, with the tests done and TB cases detected between Jan-June 2019 when using Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra assay compared to those done between Jan-June 2018 while using Xpert® MTB/RIF assay. This data was analyzed using Stata version 13, it was summarized into measures of central tendency and the comparison between Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra and Xpert® MTB/RIF was explored using a two-sided T-test which was considered significant if p <0.05.ResultsOne hundred and twelve (112) GeneXpert sites out of a possible 239 were included in the study. 128,476 (M: 1147.11, SD: 842.88) tests were performed with Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra assay, with 9693 drug-susceptible TB (DS-TB) cases detected (M: 86.54, SD: 62.12) and 144 (M: 1.28, SD: 3.42) Rifampicin Resistant TB cases (RR-TB). Whilst 107, 890 (M: 963.30, SD: 842.88) tests were performed with Xpert® MTB/RIF assay between, 8807 (M: 78.63, SD: 53.29) DS-TB cases were detected, and 147 (M: 1.31, SD: 2.39) RR-TB cases. The Number Need to Test (NNT) to get one TB case was 12 for Xpert® MTB/RIF and 13 for Xpert ®MTB/RIF Ultra. On comparing the two assays in terms of test performance (p = 0.75) and case detection both susceptible TB (p = 0.31) and RR-TB (p = 0.95) were not found statistically significant.ConclusionsThis study found no significant difference in test performance and overall detection of DS-TB and RR-TB when using Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra and Xpert® MTB/RIF assays. The health systems approach should be used to elucidate all the probable potential of Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra.
| S-EPMC9550068 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organization endorsed Truenat MTB rapid molecular assay in 2020 and recommended additional in-country evaluation studies before uptake. We evaluated the accuracy and operational feasibility of Truenat MTB assay (Truenat) in comparison with GeneXpert Ultra and culture.MethodsIn a cross-sectional study of 250 presumptive TB patients, participants were requested to provide a sputum sample on the day of their visit to the clinic. The sputum sample was homogenized and a portion was tested using GeneXpert Ultra as per the routine standard procedure and the other portion was tested using Truenat assay at the clinic laboratory. The second sample portion was processed for Concentrated Fluorescent smear Microscopy (CFM), LJ, and MGIT cultures. Truenat sensitivity and specificity were compared to GeneXpert Ultra and culture. Test performance characteristics and operational feasibility assessment data through interview of the study laboratory staff were also collected and summarized as proportions and percentages.ResultsOf the 250 participants recruited in the study, the sensitivity and specificity of Truenat was n/N (%, 95%CI); 66/82 (80.5, 70.2-88.4) and 156/159 (98.1, 94.5-99.6) when compared with Ultra, 50/64 (89.3, 66.0-87.4) and 166/180 (92.2, 87.2-95.6) when compared with LJ, 58/71 (81.7,70.7-89.8) and 131/138 (94.9, 89.8-97.9) when compared to MGIT culture and 59/73 (80.8, 69.9-89.1) and 159/169 (94.1,89.3-97.1) when compared to LJ and/or MGIT culture. The sensitivity of Truenat was lower, 14/23 (60.9, 40.6-82.8) among smear-negative compared to 45/50 (90.0, 78.1-96.6) among smear-positive participants but not different by HIV status. There were no special training needs especially among laboratory personnel with previous GeneXpert /molecular test experience, 19/242 (7.8%) error/invalid, and 12 (17,4%) uninterpretable/indeterminate results mainly for rifampicin resistance determination. However, there were 3 (3.5%) of GeneXpert Ultra indeterminate results.ConclusionAmong presumptive TB patients in Uganda, the Truenat assay has high sensitivity and specificity. The Truenat assay has acceptable operational feasibility attributes when compared with the GeneXpert Assay.
| S-EPMC10863216 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Effective treatment of tuberculosis (TB) remains a serious public health problem in many countries, including Brazil, especially when considering drug-resistant disease. Xpert MTB/RIF has been implemented in many countries to reduce the time to TB diagnosis and to rapidly detect rifampicin resistance. The study aimed to describe and evaluate Xpert MTB/RIF performance in diagnosing pulmonary TB and rifampicin resistance in a tertiary healthcare facility in Brazil. A cross-sectional study was performed, which included all isolates of confirmed pulmonary TB patients from 2015 to 2018. Both Xpert MTB/RIF and GenoType MTBDRplus assays were performed to detect rifampicin and isoniazid resistance. In addition, isolates with detected resistance to rifampicin and/or isoniazid were analysed by phenotypic testing using MGIT-960 SIRE kit and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) using Illumina MiSeq Sequencing System. 2148 respiratory specimens tested with Xpert MTB/RIF were included: n=1556 sputum, n=348 bronchoalveolar lavage and n=244 gastric washing. The overall Xpert MTB/RIF sensitivity in sputum was 94% and the overall specificity was 98%. The negative predictive value in sputum of all the patients was 99% with a positive predictive value of 89%. The concordance between Xpert MTB/RIF and phenotypic susceptibility test was 94.1%, while its concordance with WGS was 78.9%. Xpert MTB/RIF is a rapid and accurate diagnostic strategy for pulmonary TB, which can contribute to improvement in TB control. However, detection of rifampicin resistance might be associated with false-positive results.
| S-EPMC6680070 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Extra-pulmonary TB (EPTB) is difficult to diagnose due to paucibacillary nature of disease. Current study evaluated accuracy of Truenat MTB and MTB-Rif Dx (TN), for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and resistance to rifampicin. Samples were collected from 2103 treatment naive adults with presumptive EPTB, and tested by smear microscopy, liquid culture (LC) (MGIT-960) and GeneXpert MTB/RIF (GX) (Microbiological Reference Standards, MRS). TN results were compared to MRS and Composite Reference Standards (CRS, Microbiology, histopathology, radiology, clinical features prompting decision to treat, response to treatment). CRS grouped patients into 551 confirmed, 1096 unconfirmed, and 409 as unlikely TB. TN sensitivity and specificity was 73.7% and 90.4% against GX. Against LC, Overall sensitivity of GX was 67.6%, while that of TN was 62.3%. Highest sensitivity by TN was observed in pus samples (89%) and highest specificity (92%) in CSF samples, similar to GX. TN sensitivity was better in fluid and biopsy samples and slightly inferior for lymph node aspirates compared to GX. TN sensitivity for RIF resistance detection was slightly superior to GX. TN and GX results were further compared to Clinical Reference Standards. TN detected 170 TB patients initiated on treatment missed by GX, while GX detected 113 such patients missed by TN. Of 124 samples with RIF resistance discordance between GX and TN, GX reported 103/124 as sensitive, 3/124 as indeterminate and 18 as resistant (13/18 samples had low/very low DNA load) while TN reported RIF resistance indeterminate in 103/111 low/very low DNA load samples. Due to paucibacillary nature of EPTB samples, culture yield was poor and phenotypic drug susceptibility testing failed to resolve the discordance. The study establishes TN at par with GX and can be utilized for quick and accurate diagnosis of EPTB.
| S-EPMC11231208 | biostudies-literature