Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17035648›Full record

ArticleThe New England journal of medicine2006

Microscopic-observation drug-susceptibility assay for the diagnosis of TB.

David A J Moore, Carlton A W Evans, Robert H Gilman, Luz Caviedes, Jorge Coronel, Aldo Vivar, Eduardo Sanchez, Yvette Piñedo, Juan Carlos Saravia, Cayo Salazar and 5 more

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The New England journal of medicine, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 177 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
177citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
19.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

177 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 475 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. MPT64 patch test for the diagnosis of active pulmonary tuberculosis: a randomised controlled trial in Peru.The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2018
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. QuantitativeJournal of clinical microbiology · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Tools to Alleviate the Drug Resistance inMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  20. Article

117 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

David A J MooreDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Immunity and the Wellcome Centre for Clinical Tropical Medicine, Imperial College London, Faculty of Medicine (Hammersmith Campus), London, United Kingdom. davidajmoore@msn.com
Carlton A W Evans
Robert H Gilman
Luz Caviedes
Jorge Coronel
Aldo Vivar
Eduardo Sanchez
Yvette Piñedo
Juan Carlos Saravia
Cayo Salazar
Richard Oberhelman
Maria-Graciela Hollm-Delgado
Doris LaChira
A Roderick Escombe
Jon S Friedland
Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia · PEProteogenomics Research Institute for Systems Medicine · USTransnational Press LondonUniversity of San Agustin · PHTulane University · US

Funding

Infectious Diseases Training Program in PeruD43TW006581 · FIC · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI GILMAN, ROBERT H · 2003 to 2012
$2.4M
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW006581FIC NIH HHS TW006581Wellcome Trust 064672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew diagnostic tools are urgently needed to interrupt the transmission of tuberculosis and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Rapid, sensitive detection of tuberculosis and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in sputum has been demonstrated in proof-of-principle studies of the microscopic-observation drug-susceptibility (MODS) assay, in which broth cultures are examined microscopically to detect characteristic growth.

methodsIn an operational setting in Peru, we investigated the performance of the MODS assay for culture and drug-susceptibility testing in three target groups: unselected patients with suspected tuberculosis, prescreened patients at high risk for tuberculosis or multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, and unselected hospitalized patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus. We compared the MODS assay head-to-head with two reference methods: automated mycobacterial culture and culture on Löwenstein-Jensen medium with the proportion method.

resultsOf 3760 sputum samples, 401 (10.7%) yielded cultures positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Sensitivity of detection was 97.8% for MODS culture, 89.0% for automated mycobacterial culture, and 84.0% for Löwenstein-Jensen culture (P<0.001); the median time to culture positivity was 7 days, 13 days, and 26 days, respectively (P<0.001), and the median time to the results of susceptibility tests was 7 days, 22 days, and 68 days, respectively. The incremental benefit of a second MODS culture was minimal, particularly in patients at high risk for tuberculosis or multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Agreement between MODS and the reference standard for susceptibility was 100% for rifampin, 97% for isoniazid, 99% for rifampin and isoniazid (combined results for multidrug resistance), 95% for ethambutol, and 92% for streptomycin (kappa values, 1.0, 0.89, 0.93, 0.71, and 0.72, respectively).

conclusionsA single MODS culture of a sputum sample offers more rapid and sensitive detection of tuberculosis and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis than the existing gold-standard methods used.

Indexed as

AdultBacteriological TechniquesFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMicroscopyMycobacterium tuberculosisPredictive Value of TestsSensitivity and SpecificitySputumTuberculosisTuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant

Identifiers

PMID17035648
PMCPMC1780278
OpenAlexW1976685136

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.