Evaluation of Xpert MTB/RIF assay for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in stool samples of adults with pulmonary tuberculosis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: The Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) assay technology allows rapid and sensitive diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) from sputum specimens. However, diagnosis of PTB is difficult for patients who cannot produce sputum. The objective of this study was to investigate the use of Xpert assay for successful detection of PTB using stool samples from adult subjects.Both stool and sputum samples from known smear and Xpert positive PTB patients were collected from a TB hospital in Dhaka. Stool samples were collected from healthy individuals without TB symptoms from a slum area of Dhaka. Stool and sputum samples were decontaminated and concentrated using NALC-NaOH-Na-citrate solution and the resultant sediment was used for Xpert, acid-fast bacilli (AFB) microscopy and culture.A total of 102 stool samples were collected from PTB patients and another 50 stool samples from healthy individuals without TB. The sensitivity of the Xpert assay for detection of M. tuberculosis in stool samples of PTB patients was 90.2% (95% CI, 82.9-95.0). All 50 stool samples from healthy individuals were negative by the assay (Specificity 100%; 95% CI, 92.9-100). Compared with the sputum culture positive results the sensitivity of the stool Xpert assay was 94.8% (95% CI, 88.5-97.8). Moreover, stool Xpert demonstrated full concordant results with the sputum culture for detection of rifampicin susceptibility. The cycle threshold values of rpoB probes obtained from Xpert assay correlated significantly with the bacilli load in the corresponding stool (Spearman correlation = -0.40, P < 0.01) and sputum (Spearman correlation = -0.77, P < 0.01) samples as determined by microscopy.Stool Xpert can be applied as a potential alternative of sputum testing for detection of M. tuberculosis and accurate determination of RIF susceptibility in adult PTB patients. The assay would be beneficial for rapid diagnosis of PTB for those adult patients who cannot expectorate sputum.
<h4>Background</h4>The Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) assay technology allows rapid and sensitive diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) from sputum specimens. However, diagnosis of PTB is difficult for patients who cannot produce sputum. The objective of this study was to investigate the use of Xpert assay for successful detection of PTB using stool samples from adult subjects.<h4>Methods</h4>Both stool and sputum samples from known smear and Xpert positive PTB patients were collected from a TB hospi ...[more]
Project description:Children with tuberculosis (TB) remain underdiagnosed due to difficulty in testing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) infection. We evaluated the Xpert MTB/RIF assay for respiratory and stool testing in children for pulmonary TB through a cross-sectional study at tertiary care facilities in Karachi, Pakistan. Fifty children aged 0-15 years screened by a modified Kenneth-Jones (KJ) score were included. Mycobacterial culture of respiratory samples was the microbiological standard against stool Xpert TB results. All positive TB cases were compared against a treatment response standard (TRS).Twelve study subjects were diagnosed by Xpert TB and nine by MTB culture. Compared with culture [gastric aspirates (GA)/sputum (spm)], stool Xpert TB had a sensitivity of 88.9% (95% CI 50.7-99.4) and a specificity of 95% (95% CI 81.8-99.1). Xpert TB stool versus GA/spm had sensitivity of 81.8% (95% CI 47.8-96.8) and specificity of 94.7% (95% CI 84.6-99.9). We found good agreement (kappa scores of >0.8) between stool Xpert, GA/spm Xpert and GA/spm culture. Stool Xpert PPV and NPV against TRS was 100 and 82.1% respectively. Stool Xpert TB is a relatively easy option for diagnosis for pulmonary childhood TB in a high burden low-resource setting.
Project description:BackgroundAlthough 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsTwenty-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.ConclusionXpert 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.
Project description:PurposeTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay in patients with smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) and to assess clinical and CT characteristics of Xpert-negative pulmonary TB.Material and methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the records of 1,400 patients with suspected pulmonary TB for whom the sputum Xpert MTB/RIF assay was performed between September 1, 2014 and February 28, 2020. Clinical and CT characteristics of smear-negative pulmonary TB patients with negative Xpert MTB/RIF results were compared with positive results.ResultsOf 1,400 patients, 365 (26.1%) were diagnosed with pulmonary TB and 190 of 365 patients (52.1%) were negative for sputum acid-fast bacilli. The diagnosis of pulmonary TB was based on a positive culture, positive Xpert MTB/RIF or the clinical diagnoses of patients treated with an anti-TB medication. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive and negative predictive values of sputum Xpert MTB/RIF for smear-negative pulmonary TB were 41.1%, 100%, 100%, and 90.1%, respectively. Finally, 172 patients with smear-negative pulmonary TB who underwent chest CT within 2 weeks of diagnosis were included to compare Xpert-positive (n = 66) and Xpert- negative (n = 106) groups. Patients with sputum Xpert-negative TB showed lower positive rates for sputum culture (33.0% vs. 81.8%, p<0.001) and bronchoalveolar lavage culture (53.3% vs. 84.6%, p = 0.042) than in Xpert-positive TB. Time to start TB medication was longer in patients with Xpert-negative TB than in Xpert-positive TB (11.3±16.4 days vs. 5.0±8.7 days, p = 0.001). On chest CT, sputum Xpert-negative TB showed significantly lower frequency of consolidation (21.7% vs. 39.4%, p = 0.012), cavitation (23.6% vs. 37.9%, p = 0.045), more frequent peripheral location (50.9% vs. 21.2 p = 0.001) with lower area of involvement (4.3±4.3 vs. 7.6±6.4, p<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed peripheral location (odds ratios, 2.565; 95% confidence interval: 1.157-5.687; p = 0.020) and higher total extent of the involved lobe (odds ratios, 0.928; 95% confidence interval: 0.865-0.995; p = 0.037) were significant factors associated with Xpert MTB/RIF-negative TB. Regardless of Xpert positivity, more than 80% of all cases were diagnosed of TB on chest CT by radiologists.ConclusionThe detection rate of sputum Xpert MTB/RIF assay was relatively low for smear negative pulmonary TB. Chest CT image interpretation may play an important role in early diagnosis and treatment of Xpert MTB/RIF-negative pulmonary TB.
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.
Project description:The Xpert MTB/RIF assay is both sensitive and specific as a diagnostic test. Xpert also reports quantitative output in cycle threshold (CT) values, which may provide a dynamic measure of sputum bacillary burden when used longitudinally. We evaluated the relationship between Xpert CT trajectory and drug exposure during tuberculosis (TB) treatment to assess the potential utility of Xpert CT for treatment monitoring. We obtained serial sputum samples from patients with smear-positive pulmonary TB who were consecutively enrolled at 10 international clinical trial sites participating in study 29X, a CDC-sponsored Tuberculosis Trials Consortium study evaluating the tolerability, safety, and antimicrobial activity of rifapentine at daily doses of up to 20 mg/kg of body weight. Xpert was performed at weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12. Longitudinal CT data were modeled using a nonlinear mixed effects model in relation to rifapentine exposure (area under the concentration-time curve [AUC]). The rate of change of CT was higher in subjects receiving rifapentine than in subjects receiving standard-dose rifampin. Moreover, rifapentine exposure, but not assigned dose, was significantly associated with rate of change in CT (P = 0.02). The estimated increase in CT slope for every additional 100 μg · h/ml of rifapentine drug exposure (as measured by AUC) was 0.11 CT/week (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05 to 0.17). Increasing rifapentine exposure is associated with a higher rate of change of Xpert CT, indicating faster clearance of Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA. These data suggest that the quantitative outputs of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay may be useful as a dynamic measure of TB treatment response.
Project description:Invasive collection methods are often required to obtain samples for the microbiological evaluation of children with presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB). Nucleic acid amplification testing of easier-to-collect stool samples could be a noninvasive method of diagnosing PTB. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of testing stool with the Xpert MTB/RIF assay ("stool Xpert") for childhood PTB. Four databases were searched for publications from January 2008 to June 2018. Studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy among children of stool Xpert compared to a microbiological reference standard of conventional specimens tested by mycobacterial culture or Xpert were eligible. Bivariate random-effects meta-analyses were performed to calculate pooled sensitivity and specificity of stool Xpert against the reference standard. From 1,589 citations, 9 studies (n?=?1,681) were included. Median participant ages ranged from 1.3 to 10.6?years. Protocols for stool processing and testing varied substantially, with differences in reagents and methods of homogenization and filtering. Against the microbiological reference standard, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of stool Xpert were 67% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52 to 79%) and 99% (95% CI, 98 to 99%), respectively. Sensitivity was higher among children with HIV (79% [95% CI, 68 to 87%] versus 60% [95% CI, 44 to 74%] among HIV-uninfected children). Heterogeneity was high. Data were insufficient for subgroup analyses among children under the age of 5 years, the most relevant target population. Stool Xpert could be a noninvasive method of ruling in PTB in children, particularly those with HIV. However, studies focused on children under 5 years of age are needed, and generalizability of the evidence is limited by the lack of standardized stool preparation and testing protocols.
Project description:BackgroundXpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) has improved the sensitivity to detect pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) in adults. However, there have been limited prospective evaluations of its diagnostic accuracy in children.MethodsWe enrolled children undergoing assessment for pulmonary TB in Kampala, Uganda, over a 12-month period. Children received a complete TB evaluation and were classified as Confirmed, Unconfirmed, or Unlikely TB. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of Xpert Ultra among children with Confirmed vs Unlikely TB. We also determined the diagnostic accuracy with clinical, microbiological, and extended microbiological reference standards (MRSs).ResultsOf the 213 children included, 23 (10.8%) had Confirmed TB, 88 (41.3%) had Unconfirmed TB, and 102 (47.9%) had Unlikely TB. The median age was 3.9 years, 13% were HIV-positive, and 61.5% were underweight. Xpert Ultra sensitivity was 69.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 47.1-86.8) among children with Confirmed TB and decreased to 23.4% (95% CI: 15.9-32.4) with the clinical reference standard. Specificity was 100% (95% CI: 96.4-100) among children with Unlikely TB and decreased to 94.7% (95% CI: 90.5-97.4) with a MRS. Sensitivity was 52.9% (95% CI: 35.1-70.2) and specificity 95.5% (95% CI: 91.4-98.1) with the extended MRS. Of the 26 positive Xpert Ultra results, 6 (23.1%) were "Trace-positive," with most (5/6) occurring in children with Unconfirmed TB.ConclusionsXpert Ultra is a useful tool for diagnosing pulmonary TB in children, but there remains a need for more sensitive tests to detect culture-negative TB.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Tuberculosis (TB) causes substantial morbidity and mortality in HIV-infected children. Sample collection and the paucibacillary nature of TB in children makes diagnosis challenging. Rapid diagnostic tools using easily obtained specimens are urgently needed. METHODS:Hospitalized, HIV-infected children aged 12 years or less enrolled in a randomized controlled trial (NCT02063880) comparing urgent to post-stabilization antiretroviral therapy initiation in Kenya underwent TB evaluation. At enrollment, sputum or gastric aspirates were collected for TB culture and Xpert, stool for Xpert, and urine for lipoarabinomannan (LAM). When possible, a second sputum/gastric aspirate for culture was obtained. Stool Xpert and urine LAM performance were compared to reference sputum/gastric aspirate culture. RESULTS:Among 165 HIV-infected children, median age was 24 months [interquartile range (IQR) 13-58], median CD4% was 14.3 (IQR 8.9-22.0%), and 114 (69.5%) had severe immunosuppression. Thirteen (7.9%) children had confirmed TB (positive culture and/or Xpert). Sputum/gastric aspirate Xpert, stool Xpert, and urine LAM sensitivities were 60% [95% confidence interval (CI) 26-88%], 63% (95% CI 25-92%), and 43% (95% CI 10-82%), respectively. Specificity was 98% (95% CI 94-100%) for sputum/gastric aspirate Xpert, 99% (95% CI 95-100%) for stool Xpert, and 91% (95% CI 84-95%) for urine LAM. Stool Xpert and urine LAM sensitivity increased among children with severe immunosuppression [80% (95% CI 28-100) and 60% (95% Cl 15-95%)]. CONCLUSION:Stool Xpert had similar performance compared with sputum/gastric aspirate Xpert to detect TB. Urine LAM had lower sensitivity and specificity, but increased among children with severe immunosuppression. Stool Xpert and urine LAM can aid rapid detection of TB in HIV-infected children using easily accessible samples.
Project description:More sensitive tests are needed for the diagnosis of smear-negative and HIV-associated tuberculosis. This study compares the sensitivities and specificities of three molecular tests, namely, the Xpert MTB/RIF test, the Xpert Ultra (Ultra), and RealTime MTB (RT-MTB), in a high HIV prevalence setting. Symptomatic adults were recruited from three outpatient sites, and each provided 4 sputum specimens. The diagnostic performance of Xpert MTB/RIF, Ultra, and RT-MTB was evaluated, with culture as a reference standard. HIV infection occurred in 62% of patients, with a median CD4 count of 220 cells/µl. The Ultra test had the highest sensitivity of 89.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78.1 to 96) compared to those of the Xpert MTB/RIF at 82.1% (95% CI, 69.6 to 91.1; P?=?0.12) and RT-MTB at 78.6% (95% CI, 65.6 to 88.4; P?=?0.68). The specificity was highest with the Xpert MTB/RIF at 100% (95% CI, 98 to 100), followed by RealTime MTB at 96.7% (95% CI, 92.9 to 98.8; P?=?0.03) and the Ultra at 95.6% (95% CI, 91.5 to 98.1; P?=?0.08). In patients with smear-negative disease, the Ultra was more sensitive than the Xpert MTB/RIF (64.7% [95% CI, 38.3 to 85.8] versus 41.2% [95% CI, 18.4 to 67.1], respectively; P?=?0.12), and RT-MTB performed equally to Xpert MTB/RIF. In a comparison of the Ultra and RT-MTB on the same sputum specimen pellets, the Ultra was more sensitive than RT-MTB in the overall cohort (88.9% [95% CI, 77.4 to 95.8] versus 77.8% [95% CI, 64.4 to 88], respectively; P?=?0.03) and among people with HIV (87.5% [95% CI, 71 to 96.5] versus 68.6% [95% CI, 50 to 83.9], respectively; P?=?0.03). Although these results did not reach statistical significance, they suggest that the Ultra is more sensitive than the Xpert MTB/RIF and RT-MTB, most prominently in smear-negative disease. This was accompanied by a loss of specificity.
