Point-of-care Xpert® MTB/RIF for smear-negative tuberculosis suspects at a primary care clinic in South Africa

Cost-effectiveness of GeneXpert Omni compared with GeneXpert MTB/Rif for point-of-care diagnosis of tuberculosis in a low-resource, high-burden setting in Eastern Uganda: a cost-effectiveness analysis based on decision analytical modelling

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of Xpert Omni compared with Xpert MTB/Rif for point-of-care diagnosis of tuberculosis among presumptive cases in a low-resource, high burden facility.

DESIGN

Cost-effectiveness analysis from the provider's perspective.

SETTING

A low-resource, high tuberculosis burden district in Eastern Uganda.

PARTICIPANTS

A provider's perspective was used, and thus, data were collected from experts in the field of tuberculosis diagnosis purposively selected at the local, subnational and national levels.

METHODS

A decision analysis model was contracted from TreeAge comparing Xpert MTB/Rif and Xpert Omni. Cost estimation was done using the ingredients' approach. One-way deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed to identify the most influential model parameters.

OUTCOME MEASURE

The outcome measure was incremental cost per additional test diagnosed expressed as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

The total cost per test for Xpert MTB/Rif was US$14.933. Cartridge and reagent kits contributed to 67% of Xpert MTB/Rif costs. Sample transport costs increased the cost per test of Xpert MTB/Rif by $1.28. The total cost per test for Xpert Omni was $16.153. Cartridge and reagent kits contributed to over 71.2% of Xpert Omni's cost per test. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for using Xpert Omni as a replacement for Xpert MTB/Rif was US$30.73 per additional case detected. There was no dominance noted in the cost-effectiveness analysis, meaning no strategy was dominant over the other.

CONCLUSION

The use of Xpert Omni at the point-of-care health facility was more effective but with an increased cost compared with Xpert MTB/Rif at the centralised referral testing facility.

Economic Analyses of Respiratory Tract Infection Diagnostics: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic testing for respiratory tract infections is a tool to manage the current COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the rising incidence of antimicrobial resistance. At the same time, new European regulations for market entry of in vitro diagnostics, in the form of the in vitro diagnostic regulation, may lead to more clinical evidence supporting health-economic analyses.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review was to review the methods used in economic evaluations of applied diagnostic techniques, for all patients seeking care for infectious diseases of the respiratory tract (such as pneumonia, pulmonary tuberculosis, influenza, sinusitis, pharyngitis, sore throats and general respiratory tract infections).

METHODS

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, articles from three large databases of scientific literature were included (Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed) for the period January 2000 to May 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 70 economic analyses are included, most of which use decision tree modelling for diagnostic testing for respiratory tract infections in the community-care setting. Many studies do not incorporate a generally comparable clinical outcome in their cost-effectiveness analysis: fewer than half the studies (33/70) used generalisable outcomes such as quality-adjusted life-years. Other papers consider outcomes related to the accuracy of the test or outcomes related to the prescribed treatment. The time horizons of the studies generally are limited.

CONCLUSIONS

The methods to economically assess diagnostic tests for respiratory tract infections vary and would benefit from clear recommendations from policy makers on the assessed time horizon and outcomes used.

Costs and cost-effectiveness of Gene Xpert compared to smear microscopy for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis using real-world data from Arsi zone, Ethiopia

Background

Early diagnosis and treatment are one of the key strategies of tuberculosis control globally, and there are strong efforts in detecting and treating tuberculosis cases in Ethiopia. Smear microscopy examination has been a routine diagnostic test for pulmonary tuberculosis diagnosis in resource-constrained settings for decades. Recently, many countries, including Ethiopia, are scaling up the use of Gene Xpert without the evaluation of the cost and cost-effectiveness implications of this strategy. Therefore, this study evaluated the cost and cost-effectiveness of Gene Xpert (MTB/RIF) and smear microscopy tests to diagnosis tuberculosis patients in Ethiopia.

Methods

We compared the costs and cost-effectiveness of tuberculosis diagnosis using smear microscopy and Gene Xpert among 1332 patients per intervention in the Arsi zone. We applied combinations of top-down and bottom-up costing approaches. The costs were estimated from the health providers’ perspective within one year (2017–2018). We employed “cases detected” as an effectiveness measure, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated by dividing the changes in cost and change in effectiveness. All costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were reported in 2018 US$.

Results

The unit cost per test for Gene Xpert was $12.9 whereas it is $3.1 for AFB smear microscopy testing. The cost per TB case detected was $77.9 for Gene Xpert while it was $55.8 for the smear microscopy method. The cartridge kit cost accounted for 42% of the overall Gene Xpert’s costs and the cost of the reagents and consumables accounted for 41.3% ($1.3) of the unit cost for the smear microscopy method. The ICER for the Gene Xpert strategy was $20.0 per tuberculosis case detected.

Conclusion

Using Gene Xpert as a routine test instead of standard care (smear microscopy) can be potentially cost-effective. In the cost scenario analysis, the price of the cartridge, the number of tests performed per day, and the life span of the capital equipment were the drivers of the unit cost of the Gene Xpert method. Therefore, Gene Xpert can be a part of the routine TB diagnostic testing strategy in Ethiopia.

A Systematic Review of Methodological Variation in Healthcare Provider Perspective Tuberculosis Costing Papers Conducted in Low- and Middle-Income Settings, Using An Intervention-Standardised Unit Cost Typology

BACKGROUND

There is a need for easily accessible tuberculosis unit cost data, as well as an understanding of the variability of methods used and reporting standards of that data.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to descriptively review papers reporting tuberculosis unit costs from a healthcare provider perspective looking at methodological variation; to assess quality using a study quality rating system and machine learning to investigate the indicators of reporting quality; and to identify the data gaps to inform standardised tuberculosis unit cost collection and consistent principles for reporting going forward.

METHODS

We searched grey and published literature in five sources and eight databases, respectively, using search terms linked to cost, tuberculosis and tuberculosis health services including tuberculosis treatment and prevention. For inclusion, the papers needed to contain empirical unit cost estimates for tuberculosis interventions from low- and middle-income countries, with reference years between 1990 and 2018. A total of 21,691 papers were found and screened in a phased manner. Data were extracted from the eligible papers into a detailed Microsoft Excel tool, extensively cleaned and analysed with R software (R Project, Vienna, Austria) using the user interface of RStudio. A study quality rating was applied to the reviewed papers based on the inclusion or omission of a selection of variables and their relative importance. Following this, machine learning using a recursive partitioning method was utilised to construct a classification tree to assess the reporting quality.

RESULTS

This systematic review included 103 provider perspective papers with 627 unit costs (costs not presented here) for tuberculosis interventions among a total of 140 variables. The interventions covered were active, passive and intensified case finding; tuberculosis treatment; above-service costs; and tuberculosis prevention. Passive case finding is the detection of tuberculosis cases where individuals self-identify at health facilities; active case finding is detection of cases of those not in health facilities, such as through outreach; and intensified case finding is detection of cases in high-risk populations. There was heterogeneity in some of the reported methods used such cost allocation, amortisation and the use of top-down, bottom-up or mixed approaches to the costing. Uncertainty checking through sensitivity analysis was only reported on by half of the papers (54%), while purposive and convenience sampling was reported by 72% of papers. Machine learning indicated that reporting on 'Intervention' (in particular), 'Urbanicity' and 'Site Sampling', were the most likely indicators of quality of reporting. The largest data gap identified was for tuberculosis vaccination cost data, the Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine in particular. There is a gap in available unit costs for 12 of 30 high tuberculosis burden countries, as well as for the interventions of above-service costs, tuberculosis prevention, and active and intensified case finding.

CONCLUSION

Variability in the methods and reporting used makes comparison difficult and makes it hard for decision makers to know which unit costs they can trust. The study quality rating system used in this review as well as the classification tree enable focus on specific reporting aspects that should improve variability and increase confidence in unit costs. Researchers should endeavour to be explicit and transparent in how they cost interventions following the principles as laid out in the Global Health Cost Consortium's Reference Case for Estimating the Costs of Global Health Services and Interventions, which in turn will lead to repeatability, comparability and enhanced learning from others.

Examining Approaches to Estimate the Prevalence of Catastrophic Costs Due to Tuberculosis from Small-Scale Studies in South Africa

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In context of the End TB goal of zero tuberculosis (TB)-affected households encountering catastrophic costs due to TB by 2020, the estimation of national prevalence of catastrophic costs due to TB is a priority to inform programme design. We explore approaches to estimate the national prevalence of catastrophic costs due to TB from existing datasets as an alternative to nationally representative surveys.

METHODS

We obtained, standardized and merged three patient-level datasets from existing studies on patient-incurred costs due to TB in South Africa. A deterministic cohort model was developed with the aim of estimating the national prevalence of catastrophic costs, using national data on the prevalence of TB and likelihood of loss to follow-up by income quintile and HIV status. Two approaches were tested to parameterize the model with existing cost data. First, a meta-analysis summarized study-level data by HIV status and income quintile. Second, a regression analysis of patient-level data also included employment status, education level and urbanicity. We summarized findings by type of cost and examined uncertainty around resulting estimates.

RESULTS

Overall, the median prevalence of catastrophic costs for the meta-analysis and regression approaches were 11% (interquartile range [IQR] 9-13%) and 6% (IQR 5-8%), respectively. Both approaches indicated that the main burden of catastrophic costs falls on the poorest households. An individual-level regression analysis produced lower uncertainty around estimates than a study-level meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper presents a novel application of existing data to estimate the national prevalence of catastrophic costs due to TB. This type of model could be useful for researchers and policy makers looking to inform certain policy decisions; however, some uncertainties remain due to limitations in data availability. There is an urgent need for standardized reporting of cost data and improved guidance on methods to collect income data to improve these estimates going forward.

Point of care Xpert MTB/RIF versus smear microscopy for tuberculosis diagnosis in southern African primary care clinics: a multicentre economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Rapid on-site diagnosis facilitates tuberculosis control. Performing Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) at point of care is feasible, even when performed by minimally trained health-care workers, and when compared with point-of-care smear microscopy, reduces time to diagnosis and pretreatment loss to follow-up. However, whether Xpert is cost-effective at point of care remains unclear.

METHODS

We empirically collected cost (US$, 2014) and clinical outcome data from participants presenting to primary health-care facilities in four African countries (South Africa, Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Tanzania) during the TB-NEAT trial. Costs were determined using an bottom-up ingredients approach. Effectiveness measures from the trial included number of cases diagnosed, initiated on treatment, and completing treatment. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness of point-of-care Xpert relative to smear microscopy. The study was performed from the perspective of the health-care provider.

FINDINGS

Using data from 1502 patients, we calculated that the mean Xpert unit cost was lower when performed at a centralised laboratory (Lab Xpert) rather than at point of care ($23·00 [95% CI 22·12-23·88] vs $28·03 [26·19-29·87]). Per 1000 patients screened, and relative to smear microscopy, point-of-care Xpert cost an additional $35 529 (27 054-40 025) and was associated with an additional 24·3 treatment initiations ([-20·0 to 68·5]; $1464 per treatment), 63·4 same-day treatment initiations ([27·3-99·4]; $511 per same-day treatment), and 29·4 treatment completions ([-6·9 to 65·6]; $1211 per completion). Xpert costs were most sensitive to test volume, whereas incremental outcomes were most sensitive to the number of patients initiating and completing treatment. The probability of point-of-care Xpert being cost-effective was 90% at a willingness to pay of $3820 per treatment completion.

INTERPRETATION

In southern Africa, although point-of-care Xpert unit cost is higher than Lab Xpert, it is likely to offer good value for money relative to smear microscopy. With the current availability of point-of-care nucleic acid amplification platforms (eg, Xpert Edge), these data inform much needed investment and resource allocation strategies in tuberculosis endemic settings.

FUNDING

European Union European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership.

Urine lipoarabinomannan (LAM) and antimicrobial usage in seriously-ill HIV-infected patients with sputum smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis

Background

Based on current WHO guidelines, hospitalized tuberculosis (TB) and HIV co-infected patients with CD4 count <100 cells/mm³ who are urine lipoarabinomannan (LAM) positive should be initiated on TB treatment. This recommendation is conditional, and data are limited in sputum smear-negative patients from TB endemic countries where the LAM test is largely inaccessible. Other potential benefits of LAM, including reduction in antibiotic usage have, hitherto, not been explored.

Methods

We consecutively enrolled newly-admitted seriously-ill HIV-infected patients (n=187) with suspected TB from three hospitals in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. All patients were empirically treated for TB as per the WHO 2007 smear-negative TB algorithm (patients untreated for TB were not recruited). Bio-banked urine, donated prior to anti-TB treatment, was tested for TB-infection using a commercially available LAM-ELISA test. TB sputum and blood cultures were performed.

Results

Data from 156 patients containing CD4 count, urine-LAM, sputum and blood culture results were analysed. Mean age was 37 years, median CD4-count was 75 cells/mm³ [interquartile range (IQR), 34-169 cells/mm³], 54/156 (34.6%) were sputum culture-positive, 12/54 (22.2%) blood-culture positive, and 53/156 (34.0%) LAM-positive. Thus, LAM sensitivity was 55.6% (30/54). The study design did not allow for calculation of specificity. Urine-LAM positivity was associated with low CD4 count (P=0.002). Ninety-point-six percent (48/53) of LAM-positive patients received antibiotics [15/48 (31.3%), 23/48 (47.9%) and 10/48 (20.8%) received one, two or three different antibiotics respectively], while the duration of antibiotic therapy was more than 5 days in 26 of 46 (56.5%) patients.

Conclusions

Urine LAM testing in sputum smear-negative severely-ill hospitalized patients with TB-HIV co-infection and advanced immunosuppression, offered an immediate rule-in diagnosis in one-third of empirically treated patients. Moreover, LAM, by providing a rapid alternative diagnosis, could potentially reduce antibiotic overusage in such patients thereby reducing health-care costs and facilitating antibiotic stewardship.

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

BACKGROUND

Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert MTB/RIF) and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra), the newest version, are the only World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended rapid tests that simultaneously detect tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in persons with signs and symptoms of tuberculosis, at lower health system levels. A previous Cochrane Review found Xpert MTB/RIF sensitive and specific for tuberculosis (Steingart 2014). Since the previous review, new studies have been published. We performed a review update for an upcoming WHO policy review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra for tuberculosis in adults with presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) and for rifampicin resistance in adults with presumptive rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, Web of Science, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Scopus, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Registry, and ProQuest, to 11 October 2018, without language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials, cross-sectional, and cohort studies using respiratory specimens that evaluated Xpert MTB/RIF, Xpert Ultra, or both against the reference standard, culture for tuberculosis and culture-based drug susceptibility testing or MTBDRplus for rifampicin resistance.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently extracted data using a standardized form. When possible, we also extracted data by smear and HIV status. We assessed study quality using QUADAS-2 and performed meta-analyses to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity separately for tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance. We investigated potential sources of heterogeneity. Most analyses used a bivariate random-effects model. For tuberculosis detection, we first estimated accuracy using all included studies and then only the subset of studies where participants were unselected, i.e. not selected based on prior microscopy testing.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified in total 95 studies (77 new studies since the previous review): 86 studies (42,091 participants) evaluated Xpert MTB/RIF for tuberculosis and 57 studies (8287 participants) for rifampicin resistance. One study compared Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra on the same participant specimen.Tuberculosis detectionOf the total 86 studies, 45 took place in high tuberculosis burden and 50 in high TB/HIV burden countries. Most studies had low risk of bias.Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity (95% credible Interval (CrI)) were 85% (82% to 88%) and 98% (97% to 98%), (70 studies, 37,237 unselected participants; high-certainty evidence). We found similar accuracy when we included all studies.For a population of 1000 people where 100 have tuberculosis on culture, 103 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-positive and 18 (17%) would not have tuberculosis (false-positives); 897 would be Xpert MTB/RIF-negative and 15 (2%) would have tuberculosis (false-negatives).Xpert Ultra sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI)) was 88% (85% to 91%) versus Xpert MTB/RIF 83% (79% to 86%); Xpert Ultra specificity was 96% (94% to 97%) versus Xpert MTB/RIF 98% (97% to 99%), (1 study, 1439 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 98% (97% to 98%) in smear-positive and 67% (62% to 72%) in smear-negative, culture-positive participants, (45 studies). Xpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 88% (83% to 92%) in HIV-negative and 81% (75% to 86%) in HIV-positive participants; specificities were similar 98% (97% to 99%), (14 studies).Rifampicin resistance detectionXpert MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity and specificity (95% Crl) were 96% (94% to 97%) and 98% (98% to 99%), (48 studies, 8020 participants; high-certainty evidence).For a population of 1000 people where 100 have rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis, 114 would be positive for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis and 18 (16%) would not have rifampicin resistance (false-positives); 886 would be would be negative for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis and four (0.4%) would have rifampicin resistance (false-negatives).Xpert Ultra sensitivity (95% CI) was 95% (90% to 98%) versus Xpert MTB/RIF 95% (91% to 98%); Xpert Ultra specificity was 98% (97% to 99%) versus Xpert MTB/RIF 98% (96% to 99%), (1 study, 551 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found Xpert MTB/RIF to be sensitive and specific for diagnosing PTB and rifampicin resistance, consistent with findings reported previously. Xpert MTB/RIF was more sensitive for tuberculosis in smear-positive than smear-negative participants and HIV-negative than HIV-positive participants. Compared with Xpert MTB/RIF, Xpert Ultra had higher sensitivity and lower specificity for tuberculosis and similar sensitivity and specificity for rifampicin resistance (1 study). Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert Ultra provide accurate results and can allow rapid initiation of treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.

Toward Improving Accessibility of Point-of-Care Diagnostic Services for Maternal and Child Health in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Point-of-care (POC) testing can improve health care provision in settings with limited access to health care services. Access to POC diagnostic services has shown potential to alleviate some diagnostic challenges and delays associated with laboratory-based methods in low- and middle-income countries. Improving accessibility to POC testing (POCT) services during antenatal and perinatal care is among the global health priorities to improve maternal and child health. This review provides insights on the availability of POC testing designed for diagnosing HIV, syphilis, and malaria in pregnancy to improve maternal and child health. In addition, factors such as accessibility of POC testing, training of health work force, and the efficiency of POC testing services delivery in low- and middle-income countries are discussed. A framework to help increase access to POC diagnostic services and improve maternal and child health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries is proposed.

Cost Analysis of Tuberculosis Diagnosis in Cambodia with and without Xpert® MTB/RIF for People Living with HIV/AIDS and People with Presumptive Multidrug-resistant Tuberculosis

BACKGROUND

The Xpert^® MTB/RIF (Xpert) test has been shown to be effective and cost-effective for diagnosing tuberculosis (TB) under conditions with high HIV prevalence and HIV-TB co-infection but less is known about Xpert's cost in low HIV prevalence settings. Cambodia, a country with low HIV prevalence (0.7%), high TB burden, and low multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB burden (1.4% of new TB cases, 11% of retreatment cases) introduced Xpert into its TB diagnostic algorithms for people living with HIV (PLHIV) and people with presumptive MDR TB in 2012. The study objective was to estimate these algorithms' costs pre- and post-Xpert introduction in four provinces of Cambodia.

METHODS

Using a retrospective, ingredients-based microcosting approach, primary cost data on personnel, equipment, maintenance, supplies, and specimen transport were collected at four sites through observation, records review, and key informant consultations.

RESULTS

Across the sample facilities, the cost per Xpert test was US$33.88-US$37.11, clinical exam cost US$1.22-US$1.84, chest X-ray cost US$2.02-US$2.14, fluorescent microscopy (FM) smear cost US$1.56-US$1.93, Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN) smear cost US$1.26, liquid culture test cost US$11.63-US$22.83, follow-on work-up for positive culture results and Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTB) identification cost US$11.50-US$14.72, and drug susceptibility testing (DST) cost US$44.26. Specimen transport added US$1.39-US$5.21 per sample. Assuming clinician adherence to the algorithms and perfect test accuracy, the normative cost per patient correctly diagnosed under the post-Xpert algorithms would be US$25-US$29 more per PLHIV and US$34-US$37 more per person with presumptive MDR TB (US$41 more per PLHIV when accounting for variable test sensitivity and specificity).

CONCLUSIONS

Xpert test unit costs could be reduced through lower cartridge prices, longer usable life of GeneXpert^® (Cepheid, USA) instruments, and increased test volumes; however, epidemiological and test eligibility conditions in Cambodia limit the number of specimens received at laboratories, leading to sub-optimal utilization of current instruments. Improvements to patient referral and specimen transport could increase test volumes and reduce Xpert test unit costs in this setting.

Utilization and Clinical Value of Diagnostic Modalities for Tuberculosis in a High HIV Prevalence Setting

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection is a major risk factor for the development of active tuberculosis (TB), one of the deadliest infectious diseases globally. The high mortality associated with the disease can be reduced by early diagnosis and prompt antituberculous treatment initiation. Facilities in TB-endemic regions are increasing the use of nucleic acid amplification (e.g., GeneXpert), which provides rapid results but may have suboptimal sensitivity in HIV-associated TB. Our objective was to evaluate the current practices for TB diagnosis at Edendale Hospital, a large regional hospital in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa-a TB-endemic region with high HIV prevalence. In this cross-sectional study, all adult inpatients newly started on TB treatment at Edendale were identified over a 6-week period. Demographics, clinical information, diagnostic test results, and outcomes were documented. Pulmonary TB (PTB), extrapulmonary TB (EXTB), and PTB + EXTB were defined as disease evidence in the lungs, other organs, or both, respectively. Ninety-four cases were identified, of which 83% were HIV-associated. Only 30% of all TB patients were microbiologically confirmed, consisting of 7/16 (44%) HIV-uninfected and 21/78 (27%) HIV-infected TB patients. Smear microscopy and mycobacterial culture were seldom ordered. Ultrasound was performed in about one-third of suspected EXTB cases and was valuable in identifying abdominal TB. In this clinical setting with a high incidence of HIV-associated TB, TB diagnosis was more commonly based on clinical assessment and imaging results than on mycobacterial gold standard test confirmation.

Implications of Failure to Routinely Diagnose Resistance to Second-Line Drugs in Patients With Rifampicin-Resistant Tuberculosis on Xpert MTB/RIF: A Multisite Observational Study

Background.

Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) detects rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-tuberculosis), enabling physicians to rapidly initiate a World Health Organization-recommended 5-drug regimen while awaiting second-line drug-susceptibility test (DST) results. We quantified the second-line DST results time and proportion of patients potentially placed on suboptimal therapy.

Methods.

We included RR-tuberculosis patients detected using Xpert at the South African National Health Laboratory Services (NHLS) of the Western Cape between November 2011 and June 2013 and at Eastern Cape, Free State, and Gauteng NHLS between November 2012 and December 2013. We calculated time from specimen collection to phenotypic second-line DST results. We identified isoniazid and ethionamide resistance mutations on line probe assay and performed pyrazinamide sequencing.

Results.

Among 1332 RR-tuberculosis patients, only 44.7% (596) had second-line DST for both fluoroquinolones and second-line injectable: 55.8% (466 of 835) in the Western Cape and 26.2% (130 of 497) in the other provinces. Patients with smear negative disease and age ≤10 years were less likely to have a result (risk ratio [RR] = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.64-0.81 and RR = 0.49; 95% CI, 0.26-0.79). Median time to second-line DST was 53 days (range, 8-259). Of the 252 patients with complete second-line DST, 101 (40.1%) potentially initiated a suboptimal regimen: 46.8% in the Western Cape and 25.3% in the other provinces.

Conclusions.

Many South Africans diagnosed with RR-tuberculosis by Xpert initiate a suboptimal regimen, with information to adjust therapy available in half of all patients after a median 7 weeks. Algorithm completion and time delays remain challenging.

The South African Tuberculosis Care Cascade: Estimated Losses and Methodological Challenges

Background

While tuberculosis incidence and mortality are declining in South Africa, meeting the goals of the End TB Strategy requires an invigorated programmatic response informed by accurate data. Enumerating the losses at each step in the care cascade enables appropriate targeting of interventions and resources.

Methods

We estimated the tuberculosis burden; the number and proportion of individuals with tuberculosis who accessed tests, had tuberculosis diagnosed, initiated treatment, and successfully completed treatment for all tuberculosis cases, for those with drug-susceptible tuberculosis (including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)–coinfected cases) and rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis. Estimates were derived from national electronic tuberculosis register data, laboratory data, and published studies.

Results

The overall tuberculosis burden was estimated to be 532005 cases (range, 333760–764480 cases), with successful completion of treatment in 53% of cases. Losses occurred at multiple steps: 5% at test access, 13% at diagnosis, 12% at treatment initiation, and 17% at successful treatment completion. Overall losses were similar among all drug-susceptible cases and those with HIV coinfection (54% and 52%, respectively, successfully completed treatment). Losses were substantially higher among rifampicin- resistant cases, with only 22% successfully completing treatment.

Conclusion

Although the vast majority of individuals with tuberculosis engaged the public health system, just over half were successfully treated. Urgent efforts are required to improve implementation of existing policies and protocols to close gaps in tuberculosis diagnosis, treatment initiation, and successful treatment completion.

Rolling Out Xpert® MTB/RIF for TB Detection in HIV-Infected Populations:An Opportunity for Systems Strengthening

Background

To eliminate preventable deaths, disease and suffering due to tuberculosis, improved diagnostic capacity is critical. The Cepheid Xpert MTB/RIF^® assay is recommended by the World Health Organization as the initial diagnostic test for people with suspected HIV-associated tuberculosis. However, despite high expectations, its scale-up in real-world settings has faced challenges, often due to the systems that support it.

Opportunities for System Strengthening

In this commentary, we discuss needs and opportunities for systems strengthening to support widespread scale-up of Xpert MTB/RIF as they relate to each step within the tuberculosis diagnostic cascade, from finding presumptive patients, to collecting, transporting and testing sputum specimens, to reporting and receiving results, to initiating and monitoring treatment and, ultimately, to ensuring successful and timely treatment and cure. Investments in evidence-based interventions at each step along the cascade and within the system as a whole will augment not only the utility of Xpert MTB/RIF, but also the successful implementation of future diagnostic tests.

Conclusion

Xpert MTB/RIF will only improve patient outcomes if optimally implemented within the context of strong tuberculosis programmes and systems. Roll-out of this technology to people living with HIV and others in resource-limited settings offers the opportunity to leverage current tuberculosis and HIV laboratory, diagnostic and programmatic investments, while also addressing challenges and strengthening coordination between laboratory systems, laboratory-programme interfaces, and tuberculosis-HIV programme interfaces. If successful, the benefits of this tool could extend beyond progress toward global End TB Strategy goals, to improve system-wide capacity for global disease detection and control.

Risk factors for mortality in TB patients: a 10-year electronic record review in a South African province

Background

Since 1990, reduction of tuberculosis (TB) mortality has been lower in South Africa than in other high-burden countries in Africa. This research investigated the influence of routinely captured demographic and clinical or programme variables on death in TB patients in the Free State Province.

Methods

A retrospective review of case information captured in the Electronic TB register (ETR.net) over the years 2003 to 2012 was conducted. Extracted data were subjected to descriptive and logistic regression analyses. The outcome variable was defined as all registered TB cases with ‘died’ as the recorded outcome. The variables associated with increased or decreased odds of dying in TB patients were established. The univariate and adjusted odds ratios (OR and AOR) together with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated, taking the clustering effect of the districts into account.

Results

Of the 190,472 TB cases included in the analysis, 30,991 (16.3%) had ‘died’ as the recorded treatment outcome. The proportion of TB patients that died increased from 15.1% in 2003 to 17.8% in 2009, before declining to 15.4% in 2012. The odds of dying was incrementally higher in the older age groups: 8–17 years (AOR: 2.0; CI: 1.5–2.7), 18–49 years (AOR: 5.8; CI: 4.0–8.4), 50–64 years (AOR: 7.7; CI: 4.6–12.7), and ≥65 years (AOR: 14.4; CI: 10.3–20.2). Other factors associated with increased odds of mortality included: HIV co-infection (males – AOR: 2.4; CI: 2.1–2.8; females – AOR: 1.9; CI: 1.7–2.1) or unknown HIV status (males – AOR: 2.8; CI: 2.5–3.1; females – AOR: 2.4; CI: 2.2–2.6), having a negative (AOR: 1.4; CI: 1.3–1.6) or a missing (AOR: 2.1; CI: 1.4–3.2) pre-treatment sputum smear result, and being a retreatment case (AOR: 1.3; CI: 1.2–1.4).

Conclusions

Although mortality in TB patients in the Free State has been falling since 2009, it remained high at more than 15% in 2012. Appropriately targeted treatment and care for the identified high-risk groups could be considered.

Performance evaluation of Xpert MTB/RIF in a moderate tuberculosis incidence compared with TaqMan MTB and TRCRapid M.TB

Xpert MTB/RIF is an automated nucleic acid amplification test (NAT) that can detect the presence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTC) in clinical specimens as well as rifampicin (RIF) resistance resulting from rpoB mutation. Despite its high sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing tuberculosis (TB) with or without RIF resistance, the clinical performance of the test is variable. In this study, we evaluated the performance of Xpert MTB/RIF in a setting of moderate TB burden and high medical resources. A total of 427 sputum specimens were obtained from 237 suspected TB cases. Of these, 159 were identified as active TB, while the other 78 were non-TB diseases. The overall sensitivity and specificity of MTC detection by Xpert MTB/RIF using culture results as a reference were 86.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 81.8%-90.6%] and 96.8% (95% CI: 93.1%-98.5%), respectively. Among MTC-positive culture specimens, Xpert MTB/RIF positivity was 95.2% (95% CI: 91.2%-97.5%) in smear-positive and 44.7% (95% CI 30.1-60.3) in smear-negative specimens. Xpert MTB/RIF was similar to other NATs (TaqMan MTB and TRCRapid M.TB) in terms of performance. Xpert MTB/RIF detected 25 RIF-resistant isolates as compared to 22 with the mycobacterial growth indicator tube antimicrobial susceptibility testing system, yielding a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 85.1%-100%) and specificity of 98.3% (95% CI: 95.1%-99.4%). These results indicate that although sensitivity in smear-negative/culture-positive specimens was relatively low, Xpert MTB/RIF is a useful diagnostic tool for detecting TB and RIF resistance even in settings of moderate TB burden.

Comparative Yield of Different Diagnostic Tests for Tuberculosis among People Living with HIV in Western Kenya

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis followed by effective treatment of tuberculosis (TB) reduces transmission and saves lives in persons living with HIV (PLHIV). Sputum smear microscopy is widely used for diagnosis, despite limited sensitivity in PLHIV. Evidence is needed to determine the optimal diagnostic approach for these patients.

METHODS

From May 2011 through June 2012, we recruited PLHIV from 15 HIV treatment centers in western Kenya. We collected up to three sputum specimens for Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN) and fluorescence microscopy (FM), GeneXpert MTB/RIF (Xpert), and culture, regardless of symptoms. We calculated the incremental yield of each test, stratifying results by CD4 cell count and specimen type; data were analyzed to account for complex sampling.

RESULTS

From 778 enrolled patients, we identified 88 (11.3%) laboratory-confirmed TB cases. Of the 74 cases who submitted 2 specimens for microscopy and Xpert testing, ZN microscopy identified 25 (33.6%); Xpert identified those plus an additional 18 (incremental yield = 24.4%). Xpert testing of spot specimens identified 48 (57.0%) of 84 cases; whereas Xpert testing of morning specimens identified 50 (66.0%) of 76 cases. Two Xpert tests detected 22/24 (92.0%) TB cases with CD4 counts <100 cells/μL and 30/45 (67.0%) of cases with CD4 counts ≥100 cells/μl.

CONCLUSIONS

In PLHIV, Xpert substantially increased diagnostic yield compared to smear microscopy and had the highest yield when used to test morning specimens and specimens from PLHIV with CD4 count <100 cells/μL. TB programs unable to replace smear microscopy with Xpert for all symptomatic PLHIV should consider targeted replacement and using morning specimens.

Impact of Molecular Diagnostics for Tuberculosis on Patient-Important Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Study Methodologies

BACKGROUND

Several reviews on the accuracy of Tuberculosis (TB) Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) have been performed but the evidence on their impact on patient-important outcomes has not been systematically reviewed. Given the recent increase in research evaluating such outcomes and the growing list of TB NAATs that will reach the market over the coming years, there is a need to bring together the existing evidence on impact, rather than accuracy. We aimed to assess the approaches that have been employed to measure the impact of TB NAATs on patient-important outcomes in adults with possible pulmonary TB and/or drug-resistant TB.

METHODS

We first develop a conceptual framework to clarify through which mechanisms the improved technical performance of a novel TB test may lead to improved patient outcomes and outline which designs may be used to measure them. We then systematically review the literature on studies attempting to assess the impact of molecular TB diagnostics on such outcomes and provide a narrative synthesis of designs used, outcomes assessed and risk of bias across different study designs.

RESULTS

We found 25 eligible studies that assessed a wide range of outcomes and utilized a variety of experimental and observational study designs. Many potentially strong design options have never been used. We found that much of the available evidence on patient-important outcomes comes from a small number of settings with particular epidemiological and operational context and that confounding, time trends and incomplete outcome data receive insufficient attention.

CONCLUSIONS

A broader range of designs should be considered when designing studies to assess the impact of TB diagnostics on patient outcomes and more attention needs to be paid to the analysis as concerns about confounding and selection bias become relevant in addition to those on measurement that are of greatest concern in accuracy studies.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Xpert Test in Tuberculosis Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the use of Xpert MTB/RIF assay for rapid diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB) and detection of rifampicin resistance. This systematic review was done to know about the diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, PUBMED, Scopus, Science Direct and Google Scholar for relevant studies for studies published between 2010 and December 2014. Studies given in the systematic reviews were accessed separately and used for analysis. Selection of studies, data extraction and assessment of quality of included studies was performed independently by two reviewers. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF assay among adult or predominantly adult patients (≥14 years), presumed to have pulmonary TB with or without HIV infection were included in the review. Also, studies that had assessed the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF assay using sputum and other respiratory specimens were included.

RESULTS

The included studies had a low risk of any form of bias, showing that findings are of high scientific validity and credibility. Quantitative analysis of 37 included studies shows that Xpert MTB/RIF is an accurate diagnostic test for TB and detection of rifampicin resistance.

CONCLUSION

Xpert MTB/RIF assay is a robust, sensitive and specific test for accurate diagnosis of tuberculosis as compared to conventional tests like culture and microscopic examination.

Access and Quality of HIV-Related Point-of-Care Diagnostic Testing in Global Health Programs

Access to point-of-care testing (POCT) improves patient care, especially in resource-limited settings where laboratory infrastructure is poor and the bulk of the population lives in rural settings. However, because of challenges in rolling out the technology and weak quality assurance measures, the promise of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-related POCT in resource-limited settings has not been fully exploited to improve patient care and impact public health. Because of these challenges, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), in partnership with other organizations, recently launched the Diagnostics Access Initiative. Expanding HIV programs, including the "test and treat" strategies and the newly established UNAIDS 90-90-90 targets, will require increased access to reliable and accurate POCT results. In this review, we examine various components that could improve access and uptake of quality-assured POC tests to ensure coverage and public health impact. These components include evaluation, policy, regulation, and innovative approaches to strengthen the quality of POCT.

Effects of Introducing Xpert MTB/RIF on Diagnosis and Treatment of Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis Patients in Indonesia: A Pre-Post Intervention Study

Background

In March 2012, the Xpert MTB/RIF assay (Xpert) was introduced in three provincial public hospitals in Indonesia as a novel diagnostic to detect tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance among high risk individuals.

Objective

This study assessed the effects of using Xpert in place of conventional solid and liquid culture and drug-susceptibility testing on case detection rates, treatment initiation rates, and health system delays among drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) patients.

Methods

Cohort data on registration, test results and treatment initiation were collected from routine presumptive patient registers one year before and one year after Xpert was introduced. Proportions of case detection and treatment initiation were compared using the Pearson Chi square test and median time delays using the Mood’s Median test.

Results

A total of 975 individuals at risk of drug-resistant TB were registered in the pre-intervention year and 1,442 in the post-intervention year. After Xpert introduction, TB positivity rate increased by 15%, while rifampicin resistance rate reduced by 23% among TB positive cases and by 9% among all tested. Second-line TB treatment initiation rate among rifampicin resistant patients increased by 19%. Time from client registration to diagnosis was reduced by 74 days to a median of a single day (IQR 0–4) and time from diagnosis to treatment start was reduced by 27 days to a median of 15 days (IQR 7–51). All findings were significant with p<0.001.

Conclusion

Compared to solid and liquid culture and drug-susceptibility testing, Xpert detected more TB and less rifampicin resistance, increased second-line treatment initiation rates and shortened time to diagnosis and treatment. This test holds promise to improve rapid case finding and management of drug-resistant TB patients in Indonesia.

Diagnostic delays and clinical decision making with centralized Xpert MTB/RIF testing in Durban, South Africa

SETTING

We conducted a retrospective study among HIV-infected adult suspects (≥18 years) with pulmonary tuberculosis (TB), who underwent Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) testing at McCord Hospital and its adjoining HIV clinic in Durban, South Africa.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if Xpert testing performed at a centralized laboratory accelerated time to TB diagnosis.

DESIGN

We obtained data on sputum smear microscopy [acid-fast bacilli (AFB)], Xpert, and the rationale for treatment initiation from medical records. The primary outcome was "total diagnostic time," defined as time from sputum collection to clinicians' receipt of results. A linear mixed-effect model compared the duration of steps in the diagnostic pathway across testing modalities.

RESULTS

Among 403 participants, the median "total diagnostic time" for AFB and Xpert was 3.3 and 6.4 days, respectively (P < 0.001). When compared with AFB, the median delay for Xpert "laboratory processing" was 1.4 days (P < 0.001) and "result transfer to clinic" was 1.7 days (P < 0.001). Among 86 Xpert-positive participants who initiated treatment, 49 (57%) started treatment based on clinical suspicion or AFB-positive results, whereas only 32 (37%) started treatment based on Xpert-positive results.

CONCLUSIONS

In our setting, Xpert results took twice as long as AFB results to reach clinicians. Replacing AFB with centralized Xpert may delay TB diagnoses in some settings.

Molecular oncology testing in resource-limited settings

Cancer prevalence and mortality are high in developing nations, where resources for cancer control are inadequate. Nearly one-quarter of cancers in resource-limited nations are infection related, and molecular assays can capitalize on this relationship by detecting pertinent pathogen genomes and human gene variants to identify those at highest risk for progression to cancer, to classify lesions, to predict effective therapy, and to monitor tumor burden over time. Prime examples are human papillomavirus in cervical neoplasia, Helicobacter pylori and Epstein-Barr virus in gastric adenocarcinoma and lymphoma, and hepatitis B or C virus in hepatocellular cancer. Research is underway to engineer devices that overcome social, economic, and technical barriers limiting effective laboratory support. Additional challenges include an educated workforce, infrastructure for quality metrics and record keeping, and funds to sustain molecular test services. The combination of well-designed interfaces, novel and robust electrochemical technology, and telemedicine tools will promote adoption by frontline providers. Fast turnaround is crucial for surmounting loss to follow-up, although increased use of cell phones, even in rural areas, enhances options for patient education and engagement. Links to a broadband network facilitate consultation and centralized storage of medical data. Molecular technology shows promise to address gaps in health care through rapid, user-friendly, and cost-effective devices reflecting clinical priorities in resource-poor areas.

Effects of introducing Xpert MTB/RIF test on multi-drug resistant tuberculosis diagnosis in KwaZulu-Natal South Africa

Background

An algorithm instituted following Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) introduction in South Africa advocates for treating all Xpert rifampicin resistant patients as MDR-TB cases while awaiting confirmation by phenotypic or genotypic drug susceptibility testing. This study evaluates how the Xpert has influenced the diagnosis and management of drug resistant TB in the highest burdened district of KwaZulu-Natal Province.

Methods

Data was retrospectively collected from all patients with rifampicin resistance on Xpert performed between March 2011 and April 2012. Xpert results were compared with those of phenotypic and/genotypic drug susceptibility testing. Patients’ records were used to determine the time to treatment initiation.

Results

Out of 637 patients tested by Xpert, 50% had confirmatory results, of which a third were sent on the same day as Xpert test. The rate of rifampicin discordance and monoresistance was 8.8% and 13.4% respectively and there was no difference between phenotypic and genotypic confirmation. Among those who had been initiated on treatment, 28%, 40%, 21% and 8% of patients commenced within 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months and 3 months of Xpert testing respectively, while the remaining 3% were observed without treatment.

Conclusion

This study emphasizes the importance of complying with the algorithm in confirming all Xpert rif resistant cases so as to ensure proper management of these patients. Despite the rapidity of the Xpert results, only about 70% of patients had been initiated treatment at one month. Therefore there is a definite need to improve the health systems in order to improve on these delays.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2334-14-442) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Feasibility, accuracy, and clinical effect of point-of-care Xpert MTB/RIF testing for tuberculosis in primary-care settings in Africa: a multicentre, randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The Xpert MTB/RIF test for tuberculosis is being rolled out in many countries, but evidence is lacking regarding its implementation outside laboratories, ability to inform same-day treatment decisions at the point of care, and clinical effect on tuberculosis-related morbidity. We aimed to assess the feasibility, accuracy, and clinical effect of point-of-care Xpert MTB/RIF testing at primary-care health-care facilities in southern Africa.

METHODS

In this pragmatic, randomised, parallel-group, multicentre trial, we recruited adults with symptoms suggestive of active tuberculosis from five primary-care health-care facilities in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Tanzania. Eligible patients were randomly assigned using pregenerated tables to nurse-performed Xpert MTB/RIF at the clinic or sputum smear microscopy. Participants with a negative test result were empirically managed according to local WHO-compliant guidelines. Our primary outcome was tuberculosis-related morbidity (measured with the TBscore and Karnofsky performance score [KPS]) in culture-positive patients who had begun anti-tuberculosis treatment, measured at 2 months and 6 months after randomisation, analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01554384.

FINDINGS

Between April 12, 2011, and March 30, 2012, we randomly assigned 758 patients to smear microscopy (182 culture positive) and 744 to Xpert MTB/RIF (185 culture positive). Median TBscore in culture-positive patients did not differ between groups at 2 months (2 [IQR 0-3] in the smear microscopy group vs 2 [0·25-3] in the MTB/RIF group; p=0·85) or 6 months (1 [0-3] vs 1 [0-3]; p=0·35), nor did median KPS at 2 months (80 [70-90] vs 90 [80-90]; p=0·23) or 6 months (100 [90-100] vs 100 [90-100]; p=0·85). Point-of-care MTB/RIF had higher sensitivity than microscopy (154 [83%] of 185 vs 91 [50%] of 182; p=0·0001) but similar specificity (517 [95%] 544 vs 540 [96%] of 560; p=0·25), and had similar sensitivity to laboratory-based MTB/RIF (292 [83%] of 351; p=0·99) but higher specificity (952 [92%] of 1037; p=0·0173). 34 (5%) of 744 tests with point-of-care MTB/RIF and 82 (6%) of 1411 with laboratory-based MTB/RIF failed (p=0·22). Compared with the microscopy group, more patients in the MTB/RIF group had a same-day diagnosis (178 [24%] of 744 vs 99 [13%] of 758; p<0·0001) and same-day treatment initiation (168 [23%] of 744 vs 115 [15%] of 758; p=0·0002). Although, by end of the study, more culture-positive patients in the MTB/RIF group were on treatment due to reduced dropout (15 [8%] of 185 in the MTB/RIF group did not receive treatment vs 28 [15%] of 182 in the microscopy group; p=0·0302), the proportions of all patients on treatment in each group by day 56 were similar (320 [43%] of 744 in the MTB/RIF group vs 317 [42%] of 758 in the microscopy group; p=0·6408).

INTERPRETATION

Xpert MTB/RIF can be accurately administered by a nurse in primary-care clinics, resulting in more patients starting same-day treatment, more culture-positive patients starting therapy, and a shorter time to treatment. However, the benefits did not translate into lower tuberculosis-related morbidity, partly because of high levels of empirical-evidence-based treatment in smear-negative patients.

FUNDING

European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, National Research Foundation, and Claude Leon Foundation.

Xpert® MTB/RIF assay for pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults

BACKGROUND

Accurate, rapid detection of tuberculosis (TB) and TB drug resistance is critical for improving patient care and decreasing TB transmission. Xpert® MTB/RIF assay is an automated test that can detect both TB and rifampicin resistance, generally within two hours after starting the test, with minimal hands-on technical time. The World Health Organization (WHO) issued initial recommendations on Xpert® MTB/RIF in early 2011. A Cochrane Review on the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF for pulmonary TB and rifampicin resistance was published January 2013. We performed this updated Cochrane Review as part of a WHO process to develop updated guidelines on the use of the test.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF for pulmonary TB (TB detection), where Xpert® MTB/RIF was used as both an initial test replacing microscopy and an add-on test following a negative smear microscopy result.To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF for rifampicin resistance detection, where Xpert® MTB/RIF was used as the initial test replacing culture-based drug susceptibility testing (DST).The populations of interest were adults presumed to have pulmonary, rifampicin-resistant or multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB), with or without HIV infection. The settings of interest were intermediate- and peripheral-level laboratories. The latter may be associated with primary health care facilities.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for publications in any language up to 7 February 2013 in the following databases: Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; MEDLINE; EMBASE; ISI Web of Knowledge; MEDION; LILACS; BIOSIS; and SCOPUS. We also searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and the search portal of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to identify ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials, cross-sectional studies, and cohort studies using respiratory specimens that allowed for extraction of data evaluating Xpert® MTB/RIF against the reference standard. We excluded gastric fluid specimens. The reference standard for TB was culture and for rifampicin resistance was phenotypic culture-based DST.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For each study, two review authors independently extracted data using a standardized form. When possible, we extracted data for subgroups by smear and HIV status. We assessed the quality of studies using QUADAS-2 and carried out meta-analyses to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity of Xpert® MTB/RIF separately for TB detection and rifampicin resistance detection. For TB detection, we performed the majority of analyses using a bivariate random-effects model and compared the sensitivity of Xpert® MTB/RIF and smear microscopy against culture as reference standard. For rifampicin resistance detection, we undertook univariate meta-analyses for sensitivity and specificity separately to include studies in which no rifampicin resistance was detected.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 unique studies (integrating nine new studies) involving 9557 participants. Sixteen studies (59%) were performed in low- or middle-income countries. For all QUADAS-2 domains, most studies were at low risk of bias and low concern regarding applicability.As an initial test replacing smear microscopy, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 89% [95% Credible Interval (CrI) 85% to 92%] and pooled specificity 99% (95% CrI 98% to 99%), (22 studies, 8998 participants: 2953 confirmed TB, 6045 non-TB).As an add-on test following a negative smear microscopy result, Xpert®MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 67% (95% CrI 60% to 74%) and pooled specificity 99% (95% CrI 98% to 99%; 21 studies, 6950 participants).For smear-positive, culture-positive TB, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 98% (95% CrI 97% to 99%; 21 studies, 1936 participants).For people with HIV infection, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 79% (95% CrI 70% to 86%; 7 studies, 1789 participants), and for people without HIV infection, it was 86% (95% CrI 76% to 92%; 7 studies, 1470 participants). Comparison with smear microscopy In comparison with smear microscopy, Xpert® MTB/RIF increased TB detection among culture-confirmed cases by 23% (95% CrI 15% to 32%; 21 studies, 8880 participants).For TB detection, if pooled sensitivity estimates for Xpert® MTB/RIF and smear microscopy are applied to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients where 10% of those with symptoms have TB, Xpert® MTB/RIF will diagnose 88 cases and miss 12 cases, whereas sputum microscopy will diagnose 65 cases and miss 35 cases. Rifampicin resistance For rifampicin resistance detection, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 95% (95% CrI 90% to 97%; 17 studies, 555 rifampicin resistance positives) and pooled specificity was 98% (95% CrI 97% to 99%; 24 studies, 2411 rifampicin resistance negatives). Among 180 specimens with nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM), Xpert® MTB/RIF was positive in only one specimen that grew NTM (14 studies, 2626 participants).For rifampicin resistance detection, if the pooled accuracy estimates for Xpert® MTB/RIF are applied to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 individuals where 15% of those with symptoms are rifampicin resistant, Xpert® MTB/RIF would correctly identify 143 individuals as rifampicin resistant and miss eight cases, and correctly identify 833 individuals as rifampicin susceptible and misclassify 17 individuals as resistant. Where 5% of those with symptoms are rifampicin resistant, Xpert® MTB/RIF would correctly identify 48 individuals as rifampicin resistant and miss three cases and correctly identify 931 individuals as rifampicin susceptible and misclassify 19 individuals as resistant.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In adults thought to have TB, with or without HIV infection, Xpert® MTB/RIF is sensitive and specific. Compared with smear microscopy, Xpert® MTB/RIF substantially increases TB detection among culture-confirmed cases. Xpert® MTB/RIF has higher sensitivity for TB detection in smear-positive than smear-negative patients. Nonetheless, this test may be valuable as an add-on test following smear microscopy in patients previously found to be smear-negative. For rifampicin resistance detection, Xpert® MTB/RIF provides accurate results and can allow rapid initiation of MDR-TB treatment, pending results from conventional culture and DST. The tests are expensive, so current research evaluating the use of Xpert® MTB/RIF in TB programmes in high TB burden settings will help evaluate how this investment may help start treatment promptly and improve outcomes.

Xpert® MTB/RIF assay for pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults

BACKGROUND

Accurate, rapid detection of tuberculosis (TB) and TB drug resistance is critical for improving patient care and decreasing TB transmission. Xpert® MTB/RIF assay is an automated test that can detect both TB and rifampicin resistance, generally within two hours after starting the test, with minimal hands-on technical time. The World Health Organization (WHO) issued initial recommendations on Xpert® MTB/RIF in early 2011. A Cochrane Review on the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF for pulmonary TB and rifampicin resistance was published January 2013. We performed this updated Cochrane Review as part of a WHO process to develop updated guidelines on the use of the test.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF for pulmonary TB (TB detection), where Xpert® MTB/RIF was used as both an initial test replacing microscopy and an add-on test following a negative smear microscopy result.To assess the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF for rifampicin resistance detection, where Xpert® MTB/RIF was used as the initial test replacing culture-based drug susceptibility testing (DST).The populations of interest were adults presumed to have pulmonary, rifampicin-resistant or multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB), with or without HIV infection. The settings of interest were intermediate- and peripheral-level laboratories. The latter may be associated with primary health care facilities.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for publications in any language up to 7 February 2013 in the following databases: Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; MEDLINE; EMBASE; ISI Web of Knowledge; MEDION; LILACS; BIOSIS; and SCOPUS. We also searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and the search portal of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to identify ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials, cross-sectional studies, and cohort studies using respiratory specimens that allowed for extraction of data evaluating Xpert® MTB/RIF against the reference standard. We excluded gastric fluid specimens. The reference standard for TB was culture and for rifampicin resistance was phenotypic culture-based DST.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For each study, two review authors independently extracted data using a standardized form. When possible, we extracted data for subgroups by smear and HIV status. We assessed the quality of studies using QUADAS-2 and carried out meta-analyses to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity of Xpert® MTB/RIF separately for TB detection and rifampicin resistance detection. For TB detection, we performed the majority of analyses using a bivariate random-effects model and compared the sensitivity of Xpert® MTB/RIF and smear microscopy against culture as reference standard. For rifampicin resistance detection, we undertook univariate meta-analyses for sensitivity and specificity separately to include studies in which no rifampicin resistance was detected.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 unique studies (integrating nine new studies) involving 9557 participants. Sixteen studies (59%) were performed in low- or middle-income countries. For all QUADAS-2 domains, most studies were at low risk of bias and low concern regarding applicability.As an initial test replacing smear microscopy, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 89% [95% Credible Interval (CrI) 85% to 92%] and pooled specificity 99% (95% CrI 98% to 99%), (22 studies, 8998 participants: 2953 confirmed TB, 6045 non-TB).As an add-on test following a negative smear microscopy result, Xpert®MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 67% (95% CrI 60% to 74%) and pooled specificity 99% (95% CrI 98% to 99%; 21 studies, 6950 participants).For smear-positive, culture-positive TB, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 98% (95% CrI 97% to 99%; 21 studies, 1936 participants).For people with HIV infection, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 79% (95% CrI 70% to 86%; 7 studies, 1789 participants), and for people without HIV infection, it was 86% (95% CrI 76% to 92%; 7 studies, 1470 participants). Comparison with smear microscopy In comparison with smear microscopy, Xpert® MTB/RIF increased TB detection among culture-confirmed cases by 23% (95% CrI 15% to 32%; 21 studies, 8880 participants).For TB detection, if pooled sensitivity estimates for Xpert® MTB/RIF and smear microscopy are applied to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients where 10% of those with symptoms have TB, Xpert® MTB/RIF will diagnose 88 cases and miss 12 cases, whereas sputum microscopy will diagnose 65 cases and miss 35 cases. Rifampicin resistance For rifampicin resistance detection, Xpert® MTB/RIF pooled sensitivity was 95% (95% CrI 90% to 97%; 17 studies, 555 rifampicin resistance positives) and pooled specificity was 98% (95% CrI 97% to 99%; 24 studies, 2411 rifampicin resistance negatives). Among 180 specimens with nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM), Xpert® MTB/RIF was positive in only one specimen that grew NTM (14 studies, 2626 participants).For rifampicin resistance detection, if the pooled accuracy estimates for Xpert® MTB/RIF are applied to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 individuals where 15% of those with symptoms are rifampicin resistant, Xpert® MTB/RIF would correctly identify 143 individuals as rifampicin resistant and miss eight cases, and correctly identify 833 individuals as rifampicin susceptible and misclassify 17 individuals as resistant. Where 5% of those with symptoms are rifampicin resistant, Xpert® MTB/RIF would correctly identify 48 individuals as rifampicin resistant and miss three cases and correctly identify 931 individuals as rifampicin susceptible and misclassify 19 individuals as resistant.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In adults thought to have TB, with or without HIV infection, Xpert® MTB/RIF is sensitive and specific. Compared with smear microscopy, Xpert® MTB/RIF substantially increases TB detection among culture-confirmed cases. Xpert® MTB/RIF has higher sensitivity for TB detection in smear-positive than smear-negative patients. Nonetheless, this test may be valuable as an add-on test following smear microscopy in patients previously found to be smear-negative. For rifampicin resistance detection, Xpert® MTB/RIF provides accurate results and can allow rapid initiation of MDR-TB treatment, pending results from conventional culture and DST. The tests are expensive, so current research evaluating the use of Xpert® MTB/RIF in TB programmes in high TB burden settings will help evaluate how this investment may help start treatment promptly and improve outcomes.

Xpert MTB/RIF testing in a low tuberculosis incidence, high-resource setting: limitations in accuracy and clinical impact

BACKGROUND

Xpert MTB/RIF, the first automated molecular test for tuberculosis, is transforming the diagnostic landscape in low-income countries. However, little information is available on its performance in low-incidence, high-resource countries.

METHODS

We evaluated the accuracy of Xpert in a university hospital tuberculosis clinic in Montreal, Canada, for the detection of pulmonary tuberculosis on induced sputum samples, using mycobacterial cultures as the reference standard. We also assessed the potential reduction in time to diagnosis and treatment initiation.

RESULTS

We enrolled 502 consecutive patients who presented for evaluation of possible active tuberculosis (most with abnormal chest radiographs, only 18% symptomatic). Twenty-five subjects were identified to have active tuberculosis by culture. Xpert had a sensitivity of 46% (95% confidence interval [CI], 26%-67%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI, 99%-100%) for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Sensitivity was 86% (95% CI, 42%-100%) in the 7 subjects with smear-positive results, and 28% (95% CI, 10%-56%) in the remaining subjects with smear-negative, culture-positive results; in this latter group, positive Xpert results were obtained a median 12 days before culture results. Subjects with positive cultures but negative Xpert results had minimal disease: 11 of 13 had no symptoms on presentation, and mean time to positive liquid culture results was 28 days (95% CI, 25-47 days) compared with 14 days (95% CI, 8-21 days) in Xpert/culture-positive cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest limited potential impact of Xpert testing in high-resource, low-incidence ambulatory settings due to lower sensitivity in the context of less extensive disease, and limited potential to expedite diagnosis beyond what is achieved with the existing, well-performing diagnostic algorithm.

Impact of a novel molecular TB diagnostic system in patients at high risk of TB mortality in rural South Africa (Uchwepheshe): study protocol for a cluster randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Tuberculosis control in sub-Saharan Africa has long been hampered by poor diagnostics and weak health systems. New molecular diagnostics, such as the Xpert® MTB/RIF assay, have the potential to improve patient outcomes. We present a cluster randomised trial designed to evaluate whether the positioning of this diagnostic system within the health system has an impact on important patient-level outcomes.

METHODS/DESIGN

This pragmatic cluster randomised clinical trial compared two positioning strategies for the Xpert MTB/RIF system: centralised laboratory versus primary health care clinic. The cluster (unit of randomisation) is a 2-week time block at the trial clinic. Adult pulmonary tuberculosis suspects with confirmed human immunodeficiency virus infection and/or at high risk of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis are enrolled from the primary health care clinic. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of culture-confirmed pulmonary tuberculosis cases initiated on appropriate treatment within 30 days of initial clinic visit. Univariate logistic regression will be performed as the primary analysis using generalised estimating equations with a binomial distribution function and a logit link.

CONCLUSION

Diagnostic research tends to focus only on performance of diagnostic tests rather than on patient-important outcomes. This trial has been designed to improve the quality of evidence around diagnostic strategies and to inform the scale-up of new tuberculosis diagnostics within public health systems in high-burden settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN18642314; South African National Clinical Trials Registry DOH-27-0711-3568.