Pulmonary tuberculosis screening in anti-retroviral treated adults living with HIV in Kenya

Use of point-of-care C-reactive protein testing for screening of tuberculosis in the community in high-burden settings: a prospective, cross-sectional study in Zambia and South Africa

BACKGROUND

WHO recommends community-wide, systematic tuberculosis screening in high-prevalence settings. C-reactive protein has been proposed as a tuberculosis screening tool for people living with HIV. We aimed to assess the performance of a point-of-care C-reactive protein test for tuberculosis screening in the community in two countries with a high tuberculosis burden.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, cross-sectional study in four communities in Zambia and South Africa, nested in a tuberculosis prevalence survey. We included adults (aged ≥15 years) who were sputum-eligible (tuberculosis-suggestive symptoms or computer-aided-detection score ≥40 on chest x-ray) and whose sputum was tested with Xpert Ultra and liquid culture. A 5% random sample of individuals who were non-sputum-eligible was also included. We calculated sensitivity and specificity of point-of-care C-reactive protein testing, alone and combined with symptom screening, to detect tuberculosis in participants who were sputum-eligible, compared with a microbiological reference standard (positive result in Xpert Ultra, culture, or both).

FINDINGS

Between Feb 19 and Aug 11, 2019, 9588 participants were enrolled in the tuberculosis prevalence study, 1588 of whom had C-reactive protein testing and received results (875 [55·1%] were women and girls, 713 [44·9%] were men and boys, 1317 [82·9%] were sputum-eligible, and 271 [17·1%] were non-sputum-eligible). Among participants who were sputum-eligible, we identified 76 individuals with tuberculosis, of whom 25 were living with HIV. Sensitivity of point-of-care C-reactive protein testing with a cutoff point of 5 mg/L or more was 50·0% (38/76, 95% CI 38·3-61·7) and specificity was 72·3% (890/1231, 69·7-74·8). Point-of-care C-reactive protein combined in parallel with symptom screening had higher sensitivity than symptom screening alone (60·5% [46/76, 95% CI 48·6-71·6] vs 34·2% [26/76, 23·7-46·0]). Specificity of point-of-care C-reactive protein combined in parallel with symptom screening was 51·7% (636/1231, 95% CI 48·8-54·5) versus 70·5% (868/1231, 67·9-73·0) with symptom screening alone. Similarly, in people living with HIV, sensitivity of point-of-care C-reactive protein combined with symptom screening was 72·0% (18/25, 95% CI 50·6-87·9) and that of symptom screening alone was 36·0% (9/25, 18·0-57·5). Specificity of point-of-care C-reactive protein testing combined in parallel with symptom screening in people living with HIV was 47·0% (118/251, 95% CI 40·7-53·4) versus 72·1% (181/251, 66·1-77·6) with symptom screening alone.

INTERPRETATION

Point-of-care C-reactive protein testing alone does not meet the 90% sensitivity stipulated by WHO's target product profile for desirable characteristics for screening tests for detecting tuberculosis. However, combined with symptom screening, it might improve identification of individuals with tuberculosis in communities with high prevalence, and might be particularly useful where other recommended tools, such as chest x-ray, might not be readily available.

FUNDING

European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership.

Screening performance of C-reactive protein for active pulmonary tuberculosis in HIV-positive patients: A systematic review with a meta-analysis

Background

Tuberculosis (TB) is the leading infectious cause of mortality worldwide. In the last years, resistant strains of the etiological agent, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, have emerged, thus demanding more triage tests to identify active pulmonary TB (PTB) patients and to evaluate their disease severity. Therefore, acute-phase reaction serum tests are required for monitoring TB patients, among WHO symptom screening recommendations. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a non-specific inflammatory biomarker that has been recently proposed for TB screening and can be quantitatively analyzed through cost-effective point-of-care assays. A previous meta-analysis found CRP to be highly sensitive and moderately specific for active PTB with confirmed HIV infection.

Methods

We performed a meta-analysis update of diagnostic tests, pooling sensitivities, and specificities in order to assess the accuracy of CRP as a potential test for the screening of HIV-associated PTB in outpatients. We searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, and SCOPUS for eligible articles before 19 October 2021.

Results

We identified 13 eligible studies with HIV-positive patients with PTB. At a CRP threshold of 10 mg/L, CRP pooled sensitivity was 87% (76%–93%) and pooled specificity was 67% (49%–81%), with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.858. Using a CRP threshold of 8 mg/L, pooled sensitivity was 82% (72%–89%) and pooled specificity was 82% (67%–92%), with an AUC of 0.879. We found that CRP has a high sensitivity in the screening of PTB in HIV-positive outpatients, consistent with findings reported previously.

Conclusions

Regardless of pooled specificity, better results were found using the CRP threshold of 8 mg/L as a test screening of PTB, meeting the need of further approaching specific TB diagnostic methods and reducing resource consumption.

Isoniazid preventive therapy and tuberculosis transcriptional signatures in people with HIV

OBJECTIVES

To examine the association between isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) or nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) sputum culture positivity and tuberculosis (TB) transcriptional signatures in people with HIV.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS

We enrolled adults living with HIV who were IPT-naive or had completed IPT more than 6 months prior at HIV care clinics in western Kenya. We calculated TB signatures using gene expression data from qRT-PCR. We used multivariable linear regression to analyze the association between prior receipt of IPT or NTM sputum culture positivity with a transcriptional TB risk score, RISK6 (range 0-1). In secondary analyses, we explored the association between IPT or NTM positivity and four other TB transcriptional signatures.

RESULTS

Among 381 participants, 99.7% were receiving antiretroviral therapy and 86.6% had received IPT (completed median of 1.1 years prior). RISK6 scores were lower (mean difference 0.10; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.06-0.15; P  < 0.001) among participants who received IPT than those who did not. In a model that adjusted for age, sex, duration of ART, and plasma HIV RNA, the RISK6 score was 52.8% lower in those with a history of IPT ( P  < 0.001). No significant association between year of IPT receipt and RISK6 scores was detected. There was no association between NTM sputum culture positivity and RISK6 scores.

CONCLUSION

In people with HIV, IPT was associated with significantly lower RISK6 scores compared with persons who did not receive IPT. These data support investigations of its performance as a TB preventive therapy response biomarker.

Tuberculosis screening among ambulatory people living with HIV: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The WHO-recommended tuberculosis screening and diagnostic algorithm in ambulatory people living with HIV is a four-symptom screen (known as the WHO-recommended four symptom screen [W4SS]) followed by a WHO-recommended molecular rapid diagnostic test (eg Xpert MTB/RIF [hereafter referred to as Xpert]) if W4SS is positive. To inform updated WHO guidelines, we aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of alternative screening tests and strategies for tuberculosis in this population.

METHODS

In this systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, we updated a search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, the Cochrane Library, and conference abstracts for publications from Jan 1, 2011, to March 12, 2018, done in a previous systematic review to include the period up to Aug 2, 2019. We screened the reference lists of identified pieces and contacted experts in the field. We included prospective cross-sectional, observational studies and randomised trials among adult and adolescent (age ≥10 years) ambulatory people living with HIV, irrespective of signs and symptoms of tuberculosis. We extracted study-level data using a standardised data extraction form, and we requested individual participant data from study authors. We aimed to compare the W4SS with alternative screening tests and strategies and the WHO-recommended algorithm (ie, W4SS followed by Xpert) with Xpert for all in terms of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity), overall and in key subgroups (eg, by antiretroviral therapy [ART] status). The reference standard was culture. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020155895.

FINDINGS

We identified 25 studies, and obtained data from 22 studies (including 15 666 participants; 4347 [27·7%] of 15 663 participants with data were on ART). W4SS sensitivity was 82% (95% CI 72-89) and specificity was 42% (29-57). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) had similar sensitivity to (77% [61-88]), but higher specificity (74% [61-83]; n=3571) than, W4SS. Cough (lasting ≥2 weeks), haemoglobin (<10 g/dL), body-mass index (<18·5 kg/m2), and lymphadenopathy had high specificities (80-90%) but low sensitivities (29-43%). The WHO-recommended algorithm had a sensitivity of 58% (50-66) and a specificity of 99% (98-100); Xpert for all had a sensitivity of 68% (57-76) and a specificity of 99% (98-99). In the one study that assessed both, the sensitivity of sputum Xpert Ultra was higher than sputum Xpert (73% [62-81] vs 57% [47-67]) and specificities were similar (98% [96-98] vs 99% [98-100]). Among outpatients on ART (4309 [99·1%] of 4347 people on ART), W4SS sensitivity was 53% (35-71) and specificity was 71% (51-85). In this population, a parallel strategy (two tests done at the same time) of W4SS with any chest x-ray abnormality had higher sensitivity (89% [70-97]) and lower specificity (33% [17-54]; n=2670) than W4SS alone; at a tuberculosis prevalence of 5%, this strategy would require 379 more rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but detect 18 more tuberculosis cases. Among outpatients not on ART (11 160 [71·8%] of 15 541 outpatients), W4SS sensitivity was 85% (76-91) and specificity was 37% (25-51). C-reactive protein (≥10 mg/L) alone had a similar sensitivity to (83% [79-86]), but higher specificity (67% [60-73]; n=3187) than, W4SS and a sequential strategy (both test positive) of W4SS then C-reactive protein (≥5 mg/L) had a similar sensitivity to (84% [75-90]), but higher specificity than (64% [57-71]; n=3187), W4SS alone; at 10% tuberculosis prevalence, these strategies would require 272 and 244 fewer rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but miss two and one more tuberculosis cases, respectively.

INTERPRETATION

C-reactive protein reduces the need for further rapid diagnostic tests without compromising sensitivity and has been included in the updated WHO tuberculosis screening guidelines. However, C-reactive protein data were scarce for outpatients on ART, necessitating future research regarding the utility of C-reactive protein in this group. Chest x-ray can be useful in outpatients on ART when combined with W4SS. The WHO-recommended algorithm has suboptimal sensitivity; Xpert for all offers slight sensitivity gains and would have major resource implications.

FUNDING

World Health Organization.