Efficacy Of Line Probe Assay In Detection Of Drug-Resistant Pulmonary Tuberculosis In Comparison With GeneXpert And Phenotypic Methods In Iran And Genetic Analysis Of Isolates By MIRU-VNTR

Epidemiology of first- and second-line drugs-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis in Iran: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Drug resistance among Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) strains is a growing concern in developing countries. We conducted a comprehensive search for relevant studies in Iran on PubMed, Scopus, and Embase until June 12, 2020. Our study focused on determining the prevalence of antibiotic resistance in MTB isolates, with subgroup analyses based on year, location, and drug susceptibility testing (DST) methods. Statistical analyses were performed using STATA software. Our meta-analysis included a total of 47 articles. Among new TB cases, we found the following prevalence rates: Any-resistance to first-line drugs: 31 % (95 % CI, 24-38), mono-drug resistance: 15 % (95 % CI, 10-22), and multidrug resistance to first-line drugs: 6 % (95 % CI, 4-8). There was a significant variation in the rate of MDR among new TB cases based on the year of publication, location, and DST methods (P < 0.0001). We observed substantial variability in multidrug-resistant TB rates among new cases across the studies. Stratified analyses revealed that publication years and DST methods significantly affected resistance rates. Studies from southern and central Iran reported higher any-drug resistance rates, suggesting regional differences. Among retreatment cases, the prevalence rates were as follows: Any resistance: 68 % (95 % CI 58-78), mono-resistance: 19 % (95 % CI 7-34), multidrug resistance: 28 % (95 % CI 15-43). Our study revealed that the prevalence of drug-resistant TB (DR-TB) among TB cases in Iran is higher than the global average. Particularly, MDR-TB among retreatment TB cases is a significant public health issue.

Comparative Performance of Line Probe Assay and GeneXpert in the Detection of Rifampicin Monoresistance in a TB-Endemic African Country

Rapid, accurate and reliable assays are required for timely detection of drug-resistant tuberculosis and early initiation of second-line TB treatment as well as to minimize transmission of resistant strains. This study assessed diagnostic performance characteristics of two rapid molecular assays, line probe assay (LPA) and GeneXpert (MTB/RIF), in the detection rifampicin monoresistance using the phenotypic proportion method on Lowenstein−Jensen media as the gold standard. This study involved a total of 357 isolates, 74 rifampicin-resistant and 283 rifampicin-susceptible, collected at the Central Tuberculosis Reference Laboratory (CTRL) in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, between 2016 and 2019. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were used to assess the performance characteristics of the two assays while kappa coefficient was used to determine agreement of test results. The receiver operating curve (ROC) was used to determine the discriminatory ability of the test in distinguishing resistant and susceptible TB isolates. Our results showed that GeneXpert had sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of 93.2, 82.7, 58.5 and 97.9%, respectively; the corresponding performance for LPA was 86.5, 97.5, 90.1 and 96.5%, respectively. Compared with conventional phenotypic DST results, GeneXpert had a moderate agreement (kappa 0.621, p < 0.001), while LPA had high agreement (0.853, p < 0.001). LPA showed an accuracy of 95.2% compared to GeneXpert’s 84.9%. ROC curve depicted the ability of the tests to distinguish rifampicin-sensitive and rifampicin-resistant strains to be 87.9% for GeneXpert and 92.0% for LPA. Our results indicate the superiority of LPA over GeneXpert regarding detection of rifampicin monoresistance. However, logistic challenges such as longer turnaround time and need for skilled laboratory personnel may limit its use.

The Value of GeneXpert MTB/RIF for Detection in Tuberculosis: A Bibliometrics-Based Analysis and Review

With the continuous development of medical science and technology, especially with the advent of the era of precision diagnosis and treatment, molecular biology detection technology is widely valued and applied as an aid to early diagnosis of tuberculosis. The GeneXpert Mycobacterium tuberculosis Branching (MTB) technology is a suite of semi-nested real-time fluorescent quantitative PCR in vitro diagnostic technologies developed by Cepheid Inc. It targets the rifampicin resistance gene, rpoB, and can detect both MTB and resistance to rifampicin within 2 h. This review analyzed the papers related to GeneXpert using bibliometric software CiteSpace and Bibliometrix. A total of 151 articles were analyzed, spanning from 2011 to 2021. This bibliometrics-based review summarizes the history of the development of GeneXpert in tuberculosis diagnosis and its current status. Contributions of different countries to the topic, journal analysis, key paper analysis, and clustering of keywords were used to analyze this topic.

A Comparison Study of CBNAAT, Gene Xpert and Line Probe Assays in the Diagnosis of Tuberculosis in smear Negative Specimens

Tuberculosis (TB) is a serious and important public health issue to be addressed in India. Timely diagnosis of the drug resistance in tuberculosis is essential to ensure and initiate appropriate therapy. The detection of drug resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) in cases of smear-negative and clinical diagnosed pulmonary TB. A prospective case-control study was conducted on 473 pulmonary samples received at the tertiary care center from January 2019 to December 2019. All specimens were processed for microscopy and culture. CBNAAT- Gene Xpert and LPA Genotype MTBDRplus (VER 2.0) was used to confirm in smear-negative samples. Among the pulmonary samples, 52% smear-positive, and 48% smear-negative, 183 (43%) were found to be culture-positive by Lowenstein Jensen medium (LJ) and MGIT 960, 267 (63%) were positive CBNAAT and LPA n= 216 (51%) samples positive for the TUB band. The use of CBNAAT-Gene Xpert, Line Probe Assay Genotype MTBDR plus(VER 2.0) can be done from the samples directly and the diagnostic performance are more specific for detecting MTB in smear-negative specimens. This study suggests that LPA also helps in the diagnosis of MDR rapidly and in initiation of earlier treatment.

A Saudi Arabian Public Health Perspective of Tuberculosis

Tuberculosis is a global health challenge due to its spreading potential. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) faces a challenge in the spread of tuberculosis from migrant workers, but the foremost threat is the huge number of pilgrims who travel to visit sacred sites of the Islamic world located in the holy cities of Makkah and Al Madina. Pilgrims visit throughout the year but especially in the months of Ramadan and Zul-Hijah. The rise of resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis is an established global phenomenon that makes such large congregations likely hotspots in the dissemination and spread of disease at a global level. Although very stringent and effective measures exist, the threat remains due to the ever-changing dynamics of this highly pathogenic disease. This overview primarily highlights the current public health challenges posed by this disease to the Saudi health system, which needs to be highlighted not only to the concerned authorities of KSA, but also to the concerned global quarters since the pilgrims and migrants come from all parts of the world with a majority coming from high tuberculosis-burdened countries.

Xpert Ultra versus Xpert MTB/RIF for pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults with presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis

BACKGROUND

Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) are World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended rapid tests that simultaneously detect tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in people with signs and symptoms of tuberculosis. This review builds on our recent extensive Cochrane Review of Xpert MTB/RIF accuracy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF for the detection of pulmonary tuberculosis and detection of rifampicin resistance in adults with presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis. For pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance, we also investigated potential sources of heterogeneity. We also summarized the frequency of Xpert Ultra trace-positive results, and estimated the accuracy of Xpert Ultra after repeat testing in those with trace-positive results.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, Web of Science, LILACS, Scopus, the WHO ICTRP, the ISRCTN registry, and ProQuest to 28 January 2020 with no language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy studies using respiratory specimens in adults with presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis that directly compared the index tests. For pulmonary tuberculosis detection, the reference standards were culture and a composite reference standard. For rifampicin resistance, the reference standards were culture-based drug susceptibility testing and line probe assays.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data using a standardized form, including data by smear and HIV status. We assessed risk of bias using QUADAS-2 and QUADAS-C. We performed meta-analyses comparing pooled sensitivities and specificities, separately for pulmonary tuberculosis detection and rifampicin resistance detection, and separately by reference standard. Most analyses used a bivariate random-effects model. For tuberculosis detection, we estimated accuracy in studies in participants who were not selected based on prior microscopy testing or history of tuberculosis. We performed subgroup analyses by smear status, HIV status, and history of tuberculosis. We summarized Xpert Ultra trace results.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified nine studies (3500 participants): seven had unselected participants (2834 participants). All compared Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF for pulmonary tuberculosis detection; seven studies used a paired comparative accuracy design, and two studies used a randomized design. Five studies compared Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF for rifampicin resistance detection; four studies used a paired design, and one study used a randomized design. Of the nine included studies, seven (78%) were mainly or exclusively in high tuberculosis burden countries. For pulmonary tuberculosis detection, most studies had low risk of bias in all domains. Pulmonary tuberculosis detection Xpert Ultra pooled sensitivity and specificity (95% credible interval) against culture were 90.9% (86.2 to 94.7) and 95.6% (93.0 to 97.4) (7 studies, 2834 participants; high-certainty evidence) versus Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity of 84.7% (78.6 to 89.9) and 98.4% (97.0 to 99.3) (7 studies, 2835 participants; high-certainty evidence). The difference in the accuracy of Xpert Ultra minus Xpert MTB/RIF was estimated at 6.3% (0.1 to 12.8) for sensitivity and -2.7% (-5.7 to -0.5) for specificity. If the point estimates for Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF are applied to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients, where 10% of those presenting with symptoms have pulmonary tuberculosis, Xpert Ultra will miss 9 cases, and Xpert MTB/RIF will miss 15 cases. The number of people wrongly diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis would be 40 with Xpert Ultra and 14 with Xpert MTB/RIF. In smear-negative, culture-positive participants, pooled sensitivity was 77.5% (67.6 to 85.6) for Xpert Ultra versus 60.6% (48.4 to 71.7) for Xpert MTB/RIF; pooled specificity was 95.8% (92.9 to 97.7) for Xpert Ultra versus 98.8% (97.7 to 99.5) for Xpert MTB/RIF (6 studies). In people living with HIV, pooled sensitivity was 87.6% (75.4 to 94.1) for Xpert Ultra versus 74.9% (58.7 to 86.2) for Xpert MTB/RIF; pooled specificity was 92.8% (82.3 to 97.0) for Xpert Ultra versus 99.7% (98.6 to 100.0) for Xpert MTB/RIF (3 studies). In participants with a history of tuberculosis, pooled sensitivity was 84.2% (72.5 to 91.7) for Xpert Ultra versus 81.8% (68.7 to 90.0) for Xpert MTB/RIF; pooled specificity was 88.2% (70.5 to 96.6) for Xpert Ultra versus 97.4% (91.7 to 99.5) for Xpert MTB/RIF (4 studies). The proportion of Ultra trace-positive results ranged from 3.0% to 30.4%. Data were insufficient to estimate the accuracy of Xpert Ultra repeat testing in individuals with initial trace-positive results. Rifampicin resistance detection Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 94.9% (88.9 to 97.9) and 99.1% (97.7 to 99.8) (5 studies, 921 participants; high-certainty evidence) for Xpert Ultra versus 95.3% (90.0 to 98.1) and 98.8% (97.2 to 99.6) (5 studies, 930 participants; high-certainty evidence) for Xpert MTB/RIF. The difference in the accuracy of Xpert Ultra minus Xpert MTB/RIF was estimated at -0.3% (-6.9 to 5.7) for sensitivity and 0.3% (-1.2 to 2.0) for specificity. If the point estimates for Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF are applied to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients, where 10% of those presenting with symptoms have rifampicin resistance, Xpert Ultra will miss 5 cases, and Xpert MTB/RIF will miss 5 cases. The number of people wrongly diagnosed with rifampicin resistance would be 8 with Xpert Ultra and 11 with Xpert MTB/RIF. We identified a higher number of rifampicin resistance indeterminate results with Xpert Ultra, pooled proportion 7.6% (2.4 to 21.0) compared to Xpert MTB/RIF pooled proportion 0.8% (0.2 to 2.4). The estimated difference in the pooled proportion of indeterminate rifampicin resistance results for Xpert Ultra versus Xpert MTB/RIF was 6.7% (1.4 to 20.1).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Xpert Ultra has higher sensitivity and lower specificity than Xpert MTB/RIF for pulmonary tuberculosis, especially in smear-negative participants and people living with HIV. Xpert Ultra specificity was lower than that of Xpert MTB/RIF in participants with a history of tuberculosis. The sensitivity and specificity trade-off would be expected to vary by setting. For detection of rifampicin resistance, Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF had similar sensitivity and specificity. Ultra trace-positive results were common. Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF provide accurate results and can allow rapid initiation of treatment for rifampicin-resistant and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.

Systematic Review of Mutations Associated with Isoniazid Resistance Points to Continuing Evolution and Subsequent Evasion of Molecular Detection, and Potential for Emergence of Multidrug Resistance in Clinical Strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis

Molecular testing is rapidly becoming an integral component of global tuberculosis (TB) control. Uncommon mechanisms of resistance escape detection by these platforms and undermine our ability to contain outbreaks. This article is a systematic review of published articles that reported isoniazid (INH) resistance-conferring mutations between September 2013 and December 2019. The genes katG, inhA, and fabG1, and the intergenic region oxyR'-ahpC were considered in this review. Fifty-two articles were included that described 9,306 clinical isolates (5,804 INH resistant [INH^r] and 3,502 INH susceptible [INH^s]) from 31 countries. The three most frequently mutated loci continue to be locus 315 of katG (katG315; n = 4,271), locus -15 of inhA (inhA-15; n = 787), and locus -8 of inhA (inhA-8; 106). However, the diagnostic value of inhA-8 is far lower than previously thought, as it only appears in 25 (0.4%) of the INH^r isolates lacking the first two mutations. I catalogued 45 new loci (29 katG, nine inhA, and seven ahpC) associated with INH resistance and identified 59 loci (common to this and previous reviews) as a reliable basis for molecular diagnostics. Including all observed mutations provides a cumulative sensitivity of 85.6%. In 14.4% of resistant isolates, no mechanism of resistance was detected, making them likely to escape molecular detection, and in the case of INH monoresistance, likely to convert to multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB). Integrating the information cataloged in this study into current diagnostic tools is essential for combating the emergence of MDR-TB, and its exclusion can lead to an unintended selection against common mechanisms and to diversifying evolution. Observation of many low-frequency resistance-conferring mutations points to an advantage of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) for diagnostics. Finally, I provide five recommendations for future diagnostic platforms.

Magnitude of Phenotypic and MTBDRplus Line Probe Assay First-Line Anti-Tuberculosis Drug Resistance Among Tuberculosis Patients; Northwest Ethiopia

Background

Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) drug resistance is a key challenge in ending TB.

Objective

The study aimed to determine anti-TB drug resistance and compare the discordance between phenotypic and genotypic drug-susceptibility testing (DST).

Methods

Prospective enrollment and sputum collection from patients suspected of active pulmonary TB from May 2018 to December 2019 at the University of Gondar Hospital. Phenotypic DST study for streptomycin, isoniazid, rifampin, and ethambutol was done by MGIT 360 SIRE Kit. Genotypic resistance for isoniazid and rifampin was performed by MTBDRplus v2 line probe assay (LPA) and compared to phenotypic drug resistance.

Results

A total of 376 patients, median age 32 years, and 53.7% male were enrolled. Mtb was isolated from 126 patients. 106/126 (84%) patients were newly diagnosed with TB and 20 patients with prior TB treatment. Seventy (66.0%) were susceptible to all anti‐TB drugs tested. Twenty-five (19.8%) of the isolates were resistant to isoniazid, 12 (9.5%) to rifampicin and six (5%) were multidrug resistant. Among previously treated TB patients, 4 (20.0%) and 5 (25.0%) were mono-resistant and poly-resistant, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of LPA resistance for isoniazid were 94.4% and 100%, and for rifampin was 75.0% and 100%, respectively.

Conclusion

The frequency of mono- and poly-drug resistance among both newly diagnosed and previously treated TB patients was high to the rest of the nation. MTBDRplus showed excellent concordance for isoniazid and rifampin. We concluded that DST should be performed for all patients to improve management and decrease spread of drug-resistant Mtb strains in the community.

Identifying isoniazid resistance markers to guide inclusion of high-dose isoniazid in tuberculosis treatment regimens

OBJECTIVES

Effective use of antibiotics is critical to control the global tuberculosis pandemic. High-dose isoniazid (INH) can be effective in the presence of low-level resistance. We performed a systematic literature review to improve our understanding of the differential impact of genomic Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) variants on the level of INH resistance. The following online databases were searched: PubMed, Web of Science and Embase. Articles reporting on clinical Mtb isolates with linked genotypic and phenotypic data and reporting INH resistance levels were eligible for inclusion.

METHODS

All genomic regions reported in the eligible studies were included in the analysis, including: katG, inhA, ahpC, oxyR-ahpC, furA, fabG1, kasA, rv1592c, iniA, iniB, iniC, rv0340, rv2242 and nat. The level of INH resistance was determined by MIC: low-level resistance was defined as 0.1-0.4 μg/mL on liquid and 0.2-1.0 μg/mL on solid media, high-level resistance as >0.4μg/mL on liquid and >1.0 μg/mL on solid media.

RESULTS

A total of 1212 records were retrieved of which 46 were included. These 46 studies reported 1697 isolates of which 21% (n = 362) were INH susceptible, 17% (n = 287) had low-level, and 62% (n = 1048) high-level INH resistance. Overall, 24% (n = 402) of isolates were reported as wild type and 76% (n = 1295) had ≥1 relevant genetic variant. Among 1295 isolates with ≥1 variant, 78% (n = 1011) had a mutation in the katG gene. Of the 867 isolates with a katG mutation in codon 315, 93% (n = 810) had high-level INH resistance. In contrast, only 50% (n = 72) of the 144 isolates with a katG variant not in the 315-position had high-level resistance. Of the 284 isolates with ≥1 relevant genetic variant and wild type katG gene, 40% (n = 114) had high-level INH resistance.

CONCLUSIONS

Presence of a variant in the katG gene is a good marker of high-level INH resistance only if located in codon 315.