ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2012
Direct drug susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis for rapid detection of multidrug resistance using the Bactec MGIT 960 system: a multicenter study.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
43 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Direct Susceptibility Testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis for Pyrazinamide by Use of the Bactec MGIT 960 System.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2016Trial
- Genomic epidemiology of theFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Interaction effects of environmental factors with white blood cell profiles on mycobacterial pulmonary diseases: a case-control study.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Article
- Unpacking bedaquiline heteroresistance: the importance of intermediate profiles for phenotypic drug susceptibility testing.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2025Article
- Drug resistance profile of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex isolated from pulmonary tuberculosis patients and their household contacts in central Ethiopia.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of direct drug susceptibility testing of second-line antitubercular drugs.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Assessing the propensity of TB clinical isolates to form viable but non-replicating subpopulations.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A Genome-Focused Investigation Reveals the Emergence of aMicroorganisms · 2024Article
- Drug susceptibility testing and line probe assay of first-line anti-tuberculosis drugs among presumptive tuberculosis patients attending a secondary care hospital in Bhubaneswar.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
- Phenotype versus genotype discordant rifampicin susceptibility testing in tuberculosis: implications for a diagnostic accuracy.Microbiology spectrum · 2024Article
- High-throughput nanopore targeted sequencing for efficient drug resistance assay ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Rapid Diagnosis of Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis-Opportunities and Challenges.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- The Biosafety Research Road Map: The Search for Evidence to Support Practices in the Laboratory-Zoonotic Avian Influenza andApplied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association · 2023Review
- Article
- Article
- Novel Mutations in MPT64 Secretory Protein ofInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Article
- Reevaluating Rifampicin Breakpoint Concentrations for Mycobacterium tuberculosis Isolates with DisputedMicrobiology spectrum · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conventional indirect drug susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis with liquid medium is well established and offers time-saving and reliable results. This multicenter study was carried out to evaluate if drug susceptibility testing (DST) can be successfully carried out directly from processed smear-positive specimens (direct DST) and if this approach could offer substantial time savings. Sputum specimens were digested, decontaminated, and concentrated by the laboratory routine procedure and were inoculated in Bactec MGIT 960 as well as Lowenstein-Jensen (LJ) medium for primary isolation. All the processed specimens which were acid-fast bacterium (AFB) smear positive were used for setting up direct DST for isoniazid (INH) and rifampin (RIF). After the antimicrobial mixture of polymyxin B, amphotericin B, nalidixic acid, trimethoprim, and azlocillin (PANTA) was added, the tubes were entered in the MGIT 960 instrument using the 21-day protocol (Bactec 960 pyrazinamide [PZA] protocol). Results obtained by direct DST were compared with those obtained by indirect DST to establish accuracy and time savings by this approach. Of a total of 360 AFB smear-positive sputum specimens set up for direct DST at four sites in three different countries, 307 (85%) specimens yielded reportable results. Average reporting time for direct DST was 11 days (range, 10 to 12 days). The average time savings by direct DST compared to indirect DST, which included time to isolate a culture and perform DST, was 8 days (range, 6 to 9 days). When results of direct DST were compared with those of indirect DST, there was 95.1% concordance with INH and 96.1% with rifampin. These findings indicate that direct DST with the Bactec MGIT 960 system offers further time savings and is a quick method to reliably detect multidrug resistance (MDR) cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.