Background

Multiple drug-resistance in new tuberculosis (TB) cases accounts for the majority of all multiple drug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) worldwide. Effective control requires determining which new TB patients should be tested for MDR disease, yet the effectiveness of global screening recommendations of high-risk groups is unknown.

Methods

Sixty MDR-TB cases with no history of previous TB treatment, 80 drug-sensitive TB and 80 community-based controls were recruited in Lima, Peru between August and December, 2008 to investigate whether recommended screening practices identify individuals presenting with MDR-TB. Odd ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using logistic regression to study the association of potential risk factors with case/control variables.

Results

MDR-TB cases did not differ from drug-sensitive TB and community controls in rates of human immunodeficiency virus infection, reported hospital or prison visits in the 3 years prior to diagnosis. MDR-TB cases were more likely than drug-sensitive TB controls to have had a recent MDR-TB household contact (OR 4.66, (95% CI 1.56-13.87)); however, only 15 cases (28.3%) reported this exposure. In multivariate modeling, recent TB household contact, but not contact with an MDR-TB case, remained predictive of MDR-TB, OR 7.47, (95% CI 1.91-29.3). Living with a partner rather than parents was associated with a lower risk of MDR-TB, OR 0.15, (95% CI 0.04-0.51).

Conclusion

Targeted drug susceptibility testing (DST) linked to reported MDR-TB contact or other high-risk exposures does not identify the majority of new TB cases with MDR disease in Lima where it is endemic. All new TB cases should be screened with DST to identify MDR patients. These findings are likely applicable to other regions with endemic MDR-TB.

Over 9 million new active tuberculosis (TB) cases emerge each year from an enormous pool of 2 billion individuals latently infected with Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tb.) worldwide. About 3 million new TB cases per year are unaccounted for, and 1.5 million die. TB, however, is generally curable if diagnosed correctly and in a timely manner. The current diagnostic methods for TB, including state-of-the-art molecular tests, have failed in delivering the capacity needed in endemic countries to curtail this ongoing pandemic. Efficient, cost effective and scalable diagnostic approaches are critically needed. We report a multiplex TB serology panel using microbead suspension array containing a combination of 11 M.tb. antigens that demonstrated overall sensitivity of 91% in serum/plasma samples from TB patients confirmed by culture. Group wise sensitivities for sputum smear positive and negative patients were 95%, and 88%, respectively. Specificity of the test was 96% in untreated COPD patients and 91% in general healthy population. The sensitivity of this test is superior to that of the frontline sputum smear test with a comparable specificity (30-70%, and 93-99%, respectively). The multiplex serology test can be performed with scalability from 1 to 360 patients per day, and is amenable to automation for higher (1000s per day) throughput, thus enabling a scalable clinical work flow model for TB endemic countries. Taken together, the above results suggest that well defined antibody profiles in blood, analyzed by an appropriate technology platform, offer a valuable approach to TB diagnostics in endemic countries.

Background

Introduction of GeneXpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) assay has constituted a major breakthrough for tuberculosis (TB) diagnostics. Several patient factors may influence diagnostic performance of Xpert including sputum quality.

Objective

We carried out a prospective, observational, cross-sectional study to determine the effect of sputum quality on diagnostic performance of Xpert among presumed TB patients in Uganda.

Methods

We collected clinical and demographic information and two sputum samples from participants. Staff recorded sputum quality and performed LED fluorescence microscopy and mycobacterial culture on each sample. If both smear examinations were negative, Xpert testing was performed. We calculated diagnostic yield, sensitivity, specificity, and other indicators for Xpert for each stratum of sputum quality in reference to a standard of mycobacterial culture.

Results

Patients with salivary sputum showed a trend towards a substantially higher proportion of samples that were Xpert-positive (54/286, 19%, 95% CI 15-24) compared with those with all other sputum sample types (221/1496, 15%, 95% CI 13-17). Blood-stained sputum produced the lowest sensitivity (28%; 95% CI 12-49) and salivary sputum the highest (66%; 95% CI 53-77). Specificity didn't vary meaningfully by sample types. Salivary sputum was significantly more sensitive than mucoid sputum (+13%, 95% CI +1 to +26), while blood-stained sputum was significantly less sensitive (-24%, 95% CI -42 to -5).

Conclusions

Our findings demonstrate the need to exercise caution in collecting sputum for Xpert and in interpreting results because sputum quality may impact test yield and sensitivity. In particular, it may be wise to pursue additional testing should blood-stained sputum test negative while salivary sputum should be readily accepted for Xpert testing given its higher sensitivity and potentially higher yield than other sample types. These findings challenge conventional recommendations against collecting salivary sputum for TB diagnosis and could inform new standards for sputum quality.