A pre-clinical validation plan to evaluate analytical sensitivities of molecular diagnostics such as BD MAX MDR-TB, Xpert MTB/Rif Ultra and FluoroType MTB

Performance of the BD MAX MDR-TB assay in a clinical setting and its impact on the clinical course of patients with pulmonary tuberculosis: a retrospective before-after study

BACKGROUND

Missing isoniazid (INH) resistance during tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis can worsen the outcomes of INH-resistant TB. The BD MAX MDR-TB assay (BD MAX) facilitates the rapid detection of TB and INH and rifampin (RIF) resistance; however, data related to its performance in clinical setting remain limited. Moreover, its effect on treatment outcomes has not yet been studied.

METHODS

We compared the performance of BD MAX for the detection of INH/RIF resistances to that of the line probe assay (LPA) in patients with pulmonary TB (PTB), using the results of a phenotypic drug sensitivity test as a reference standard. The treatment outcomes of patients who used BD MAX were compared with those of patients who did not.

RESULTS

Of the 83 patients included in the study, the BD MAX was used for an initial PTB diagnosis in 39 patients. The sensitivity of BD MAX for detecting PTB was 79.5%. The sensitivity and specificity of BD MAX for INH resistance were both 100%, whereas these were 50.0% and 95.8%, respectively, for RIF resistance. The sensitivity and specificity of BD MAX were comparable to those of LPA. The BD MAX group had a shorter time interval from specimen request to the initiation of anti-TB drugs (2.0 days vs. 5.5 days, p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

BD MAX showed comparable performance to conventional tests for detecting PTB and INH/RIF resistances. The implementation of BD MAX as a diagnostic tool for PTB resulted in a shorter turnaround time for the initiation of PTB treatment.

Two-stage tuberculosis diagnostics: combining centrifugal microfluidics to detect TB infection and Inh and Rif resistance at the point of care with subsequent antibiotic resistance profiling by targeted NGS

Globally, tuberculosis (TB) remains the deadliest bacterial infectious disease, and spreading antibiotic resistances is the biggest challenge for combatting the disease. Rapid and comprehensive diagnostics including drug susceptibility testing (DST) would assure early treatment, reduction of morbidity and the interruption of transmission chains. To date, rapid genetic resistance testing addresses only one to four drug groups while complete DST is done phenotypically and takes several weeks. To overcome these limitations, we developed a two-stage workflow for rapid TB diagnostics including DST from a single sputum sample that can be completed within three days. The first stage is qPCR detection of M. tuberculosis complex (MTBC) including antibiotic resistance testing against the first-line antibiotics, isoniazid (Inh) and rifampicin (Rif). The test is automated by centrifugal microfluidics and designed for point of care (PoC). Furthermore, enriched MTBC DNA is provided in a detachable sample tube to enable the second stage: if the PCR detects MTBC and resistance to either Inh or Rif, the MTBC DNA is shipped to specialized facilities and analyzed by targeted next generation sequencing (tNGS) to assess the complete resistance profile. Proof-of-concept testing of the PoC test revealed an analytical sensitivity of 44.2 CFU ml-1, a diagnostic sensitivity of 96%, and a diagnostic specificity of 100% for MTBC detection. Coupled tNGS successfully provided resistance profiles, demonstrated for samples from 17 patients. To the best of our knowledge, the presented combination of PoC qPCR with tNGS allows for the fastest comprehensive TB diagnostics comprising decentralized pathogen detection with subsequent resistance profiling in a facility specialized in tNGS.

Xpert MTB/XDR for detection of pulmonary tuberculosis and resistance to isoniazid, fluoroquinolones, ethionamide, and amikacin

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) End TB Strategy stresses universal access to drug susceptibility testing (DST). DST determines whether Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteria are susceptible or resistant to drugs. Xpert MTB/XDR is a rapid nucleic acid amplification test for detection of tuberculosis and drug resistance in one test suitable for use in peripheral and intermediate level laboratories. In specimens where tuberculosis is detected by Xpert MTB/XDR, Xpert MTB/XDR can also detect resistance to isoniazid, fluoroquinolones, ethionamide, and amikacin.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/XDR for pulmonary tuberculosis in people with presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis (having signs and symptoms suggestive of tuberculosis, including cough, fever, weight loss, night sweats). To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/XDR for resistance to isoniazid, fluoroquinolones, ethionamide, and amikacin in people with tuberculosis detected by Xpert MTB/XDR, irrespective of rifampicin resistance (whether or not rifampicin resistance status was known) and with known rifampicin resistance.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched multiple databases to 23 September 2021. We limited searches to 2015 onwards as Xpert MTB/XDR was launched in 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Diagnostic accuracy studies using sputum in adults with presumptive or confirmed pulmonary tuberculosis. Reference standards were culture (pulmonary tuberculosis detection); phenotypic DST (pDST), genotypic DST (gDST),composite (pDST and gDST) (drug resistance detection).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed reports for eligibility and extracted data using a standardized form. For multicentre studies, we anticipated variability in the type and frequency of mutations associated with resistance to a given drug at the different centres and considered each centre as an independent study cohort for quality assessment and analysis. We assessed methodological quality with QUADAS-2, judging risk of bias separately for each target condition and reference standard. For pulmonary tuberculosis detection, owing to heterogeneity in participant characteristics and observed specificity estimates, we reported a range of sensitivity and specificity estimates and did not perform a meta-analysis. For drug resistance detection, we performed meta-analyses by reference standard using bivariate random-effects models. Using GRADE, we assessed certainty of evidence of Xpert MTB/XDR accuracy for detection of resistance to isoniazid and fluoroquinolones in people irrespective of rifampicin resistance and to ethionamide and amikacin in people with known rifampicin resistance, reflecting real-world situations. We used pDST, except for ethionamide resistance where we considered gDST a better reference standard.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two multicentre studies from high multidrug-resistant/rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis burden countries, reporting on six independent study cohorts, involving 1228 participants for pulmonary tuberculosis detection and 1141 participants for drug resistance detection. The proportion of participants with rifampicin resistance in the two studies was 47.9% and 80.9%. For tuberculosis detection, we judged high risk of bias for patient selection owing to selective recruitment. For ethionamide resistance detection, we judged high risk of bias for the reference standard, both pDST and gDST, though we considered gDST a better reference standard. Pulmonary tuberculosis detection - Xpert MTB/XDR sensitivity range, 98.3% (96.1 to 99.5) to 98.9% (96.2 to 99.9) and specificity range, 22.5% (14.3 to 32.6) to 100.0% (86.3 to 100.0); median prevalence of pulmonary tuberculosis 91.3%, (interquartile range, 89.3% to 91.8%), (2 studies; 1 study reported on 2 cohorts, 1228 participants; very low-certainty evidence, sensitivity and specificity). Drug resistance detection People irrespective of rifampicin resistance - Isoniazid resistance: Xpert MTB/XDR summary sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval (CI)) were 94.2% (87.5 to 97.4) and 98.5% (92.6 to 99.7) against pDST, (6 cohorts, 1083 participants, moderate-certainty evidence, sensitivity and specificity). - Fluoroquinolone resistance: Xpert MTB/XDR summary sensitivity and specificity were 93.2% (88.1 to 96.2) and 98.0% (90.8 to 99.6) against pDST, (6 cohorts, 1021 participants; high-certainty evidence, sensitivity; moderate-certainty evidence, specificity). People with known rifampicin resistance - Ethionamide resistance: Xpert MTB/XDR summary sensitivity and specificity were 98.0% (74.2 to 99.9) and 99.7% (83.5 to 100.0) against gDST, (4 cohorts, 434 participants; very low-certainty evidence, sensitivity and specificity). - Amikacin resistance: Xpert MTB/XDR summary sensitivity and specificity were 86.1% (75.0 to 92.7) and 98.9% (93.0 to 99.8) against pDST, (4 cohorts, 490 participants; low-certainty evidence, sensitivity; high-certainty evidence, specificity). Of 1000 people with pulmonary tuberculosis, detected as tuberculosis by Xpert MTB/XDR: - where 50 have isoniazid resistance, 61 would have an Xpert MTB/XDR result indicating isoniazid resistance: of these, 14/61 (23%) would not have isoniazid resistance (FP); 939 (of 1000 people) would have a result indicating the absence of isoniazid resistance: of these, 3/939 (0%) would have isoniazid resistance (FN). - where 50 have fluoroquinolone resistance, 66 would have an Xpert MTB/XDR result indicating fluoroquinolone resistance: of these, 19/66 (29%) would not have fluoroquinolone resistance (FP); 934 would have a result indicating the absence of fluoroquinolone resistance: of these, 3/934 (0%) would have fluoroquinolone resistance (FN). - where 300 have ethionamide resistance, 296 would have an Xpert MTB/XDR result indicating ethionamide resistance: of these, 2/296 (1%) would not have ethionamide resistance (FP); 704 would have a result indicating the absence of ethionamide resistance: of these, 6/704 (1%) would have ethionamide resistance (FN). - where 135 have amikacin resistance, 126 would have an Xpert MTB/XDR result indicating amikacin resistance: of these, 10/126 (8%) would not have amikacin resistance (FP); 874 would have a result indicating the absence of amikacin resistance: of these, 19/874 (2%) would have amikacin resistance (FN).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Review findings suggest that, in people determined by Xpert MTB/XDR to be tuberculosis-positive, Xpert MTB/XDR provides accurate results for detection of isoniazid and fluoroquinolone resistance and can assist with selection of an optimised treatment regimen. Given that Xpert MTB/XDR targets a limited number of resistance variants in specific genes, the test may perform differently in different settings. Findings in this review should be interpreted with caution. Sensitivity for detection of ethionamide resistance was based only on Xpert MTB/XDR detection of mutations in the inhA promoter region, a known limitation. High risk of bias limits our confidence in Xpert MTB/XDR accuracy for pulmonary tuberculosis. Xpert MTB/XDR's impact will depend on its ability to detect tuberculosis (required for DST), prevalence of resistance to a given drug, health care infrastructure, and access to other tests.

Performance of Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra for tuberculosis diagnosis in the context of passive and active case finding

We present a field evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Ultra), using two cohorts in a high TB/HIV burden setting in Southern Mozambique. Single respiratory specimens from symptomatic adults accessing health care services (passive case finding (PCF) cohort), and from household and community close contacts (active case finding (ACF) cohort), were tested by smear microscopy, culture, Xpert and Ultra. Liquid and solid culture served as a composite reference standard. We explored trace results' impact on specificity via their recategorisation to negative (in all and just among those previously treated individuals) A total of 1419 and 252 participants were enrolled in the PCF and ACF cohorts, respectively. For the PCF cohort, Ultra showed higher sensitivity than Xpert overall (0.95 (95% CI: 0.90, 0.98) versus 0.88 (0.82, 0.93); p<0.001) and among smear negative patients (0.63 (0.48, 0.76) and 0.84 (0.71, 0.93). Ultra's specificity was lower than Xpert's (0.98 (0.97, 0.99) versus 0.96 (0.95, 0.97); p=0.008). For ACF, sensitivities were the same (0.67 (95% CI: 0.22,0.96) for both tests), although Ultra detected a higher number of microbiologically confirmed samples than Xpert (4.7% (12/252) versus 2.7% (7/252)). Conditional recategorisation of trace results among previously treated participants maintained differences in specificity in the PCF cohort. These results add evidence on the improved sensitivity of Ultra and support its use in different case finding scenarios.

Comparative Analytical Evaluation of Four Centralized Platforms for the Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Complex and Resistance to Rifampicin and Isoniazid

Failure to rapidly identify drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) increases the risk of patient mismanagement, the amplification of drug resistance, and ongoing transmission. We generated comparative analytical data for four automated assays for the detection of TB and multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB): Abbott RealTime MTB and MTB RIF/INH (Abbott), Hain Lifescience FluoroType MTBDR (Hain), BD Max MDR-TB (BD), and Roche cobas MTB and MTB-RIF/INH (Roche). We included Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) and GenoType MTBDRplus as comparators for TB and drug resistance detection, respectively. We assessed analytical sensitivity for the detection of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex using inactivated strains (M. tuberculosis H37Rv and M. bovis) spiked into TB-negative sputa and computed the 95% limits of detection (LOD95). We assessed the accuracy of rifampicin and isoniazid resistance detection using well-characterized M. tuberculosis strains with high-confidence mutations accounting for >85% of first-line resistance mechanisms globally. For H37Rv and M. bovis, we measured LOD95 values of 3,781 and 2,926 (Xpert), 322 and 2,182 (Abbott), 826 and 4,301 (BD), 10,398 and 23,139 (Hain), and 2,416 and 2,136 (Roche) genomes/ml, respectively. Assays targeting multicopy genes or targets (Abbott, BD, and Roche) showed increased analytical sensitivity compared to Xpert. Quantification of the panel by quantitative real-time PCR prevents the determination of absolute values, and results reported here can be interpreted for comparison purposes only. All assays showed accuracy comparable to that of Genotype MTBDRplus for the detection of rifampicin and isoniazid resistance. The data from this analytical study suggest that the assays may have clinical performances similar to those of WHO-recommended molecular TB and MDR-TB assays.

Laboratory development of a simple stool sample processing method diagnosis of pediatric tuberculosis using Xpert Ultra

Stool samples are alternatives to respiratory samples for bacteriological confirmation of childhood tuberculosis but require intensive laboratory processing before molecular testing to remove PCR inhibitors and debris. We aimed to develop a centrifuge-free processing method for use in resource-limited settings based on a sucrose-flotation method that showed good sensitivity for childhood tuberculosis diagnosis. In an in vitro study using Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra on stool samples spiked with defined bacterial concentrations of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB), we compared different simplification parameters to the reference sucrose-flotation method. Best methods were selected based on the rate of invalid/error results and on sensitivity, compared to the reference method on stools spiked at 10³ colony forming units (CFU)/g MTB. For final selection, we tested the best parameter combinations at 10² CFU/g. Out of 13 different parameter combinations, three were tested at 10² CFU/g. The best combination used 0.5 g stool, manual shaking, no filtration, 30-min sedimentation, and a 1:3.6 dilution ratio. This method gave 10% invalid/error results and a sensitivity of 70% vs 63% at 10³ CFU/g and 53% vs 58% at 10² CFU/g compared to the reference method. This pre-clinical study was able to develop a centrifuge-free processing method to facilitate stool Xpert Ultra testing.

Clinical Evaluation of BD MAX MDR-TB Assay for Direct Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Complex and Resistance Markers

BD MAX MDR-TB assay is a new molecular platform for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) in clinical specimens and simultaneous detection of resistance toward isoniazid and rifampicin. This study assessed the assay's diagnostic accuracy by using pre-characterized MTBC culture-negative (n = 257), smear-negative/MTBC culture-positive (n = 93), and smear-positive/MTBC culture-positive (n = 153) respiratory specimens. Compared with culture, the overall sensitivity and specificity of BD MAX MDR-TB were 86.6% and 100%, respectively; sensitivities for smear-positive and smear-negative samples were 100% and 64.5%. Sensitivity and specificity for isoniazid and rifampicin resistance were 58.3% (biased low due to sample collection strategy in low prevalence setting), 99.3%, 100%, and 98.2%, compared with phenotypic drug resistance testing and 100%, 99.4%, 100%, and 99.4%, compared with GenoType MTBDRplus. In conclusion, BD MAX MDR-TB is an accurate assay for the diagnostic detection of MTBC in respiratory samples and its resistance toward the most important anti-TB drugs isoniazid and rifampicin. Due to its medium to high throughput, good validity, and ease of use, the assay will be of great benefit for medium-sized to large TB diagnostic centers.

Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis 2020: Where We Stand

The control of tuberculosis (TB) is hampered by the emergence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) strains, defined as resistant to at least isoniazid and rifampin, the two bactericidal drugs essential for the treatment of the disease. Due to the worldwide estimate of almost half a million incident cases of MDR/rifampin-resistant TB, it is important to continuously update the knowledge on the mechanisms involved in the development of this phenomenon. Clinical, biological and microbiological reasons account for the generation of resistance, including: (i) nonadherence of patients to their therapy, and/or errors of physicians in therapy management, (ii) complexity and poor vascularization of granulomatous lesions, which obstruct drug distribution to some sites, resulting in resistance development, (iii) intrinsic drug resistance of tubercle bacilli, (iv) formation of non-replicating, drug-tolerant bacilli inside the granulomas, (v) development of mutations in Mtb genes, which are the most important molecular mechanisms of resistance. This review provides a comprehensive overview of these issues, and releases up-dated information on the therapeutic strategies recently endorsed and recommended by the World Health Organization to facilitate the clinical and microbiological management of drug-resistant TB at the global level, with attention also to the most recent diagnostic methods.