ArticleBMC infectious diseases2012
The manual mycobacteria growth indicator tube and the nitrate reductase assay for the rapid detection of rifampicin resistance of M. Tuberculosis in low resource settings.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety, tolerability, and concordance with interferon-γ release assays of a recombinant ESAT6-MPT64 skin test: a phase 1 randomized clinical trial.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Trial
- Integrating pathogen- and host-derived blood biomarkers for enhanced tuberculosis diagnosis: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTuberculosis (TB) is a disease of poverty that contributes significantly to ill-health in developing countries. Drug resistant TB is a major challenge to disease control. Early diagnosis and rapid determination of drug sensitivity is of paramount importance in eradication of TB. Although automated liquid culture based methods are available for rapid detection of drug resistance, the high cost of these tests prevent them from being used routinely in low resource settings. This study compares two phenotypic methods, the manual Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) and the Nitrate Reductase Assay (NRA) in liquid medium, with the agar proportion method (APM), the gold standard for susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. METHODOLOGY: Fourteen day old M. tuberculosis strains (n=373) grown on solid media were used for drug susceptibility testing by APM, NRA and the manual MGIT method. Rifampicin free and rifampicin incorporated (final concentration, 1 μg/ml) media were inoculated with the recommended concentrations of mycobacterial suspensions and incubated at 37°C in 5% CO2. In the APM, the proportion of colonies in the drug containing medium was determined. In the NRA, the colour change in the medium was compared with a standard colour series after day 6 and day 12 of incubation. Growth in the MGIT was detected using the manual MGIT reader from day 2 onwards. The 2 methods were compared with the gold standard, APM to determine sensitivity and specificity and agreement between the methods was calculated using kappa statistics.
resultsThirty one (31) rifampicin resistant isolates were identified. When compared with the APM, the sensitivity of detection of rifampicin resistance was 85% for the NRA and 93% for the manual MGIT and the specificity was 99% and 100% respectively. Both assays, NRA (κ=0.86) and manual MGIT method (κ= 0.94) were in excellent agreement with the APM. The mean turnaround time for manual MGIT method and NRA were 08 days and 10 days respectively.
conclusionThe NRA in liquid medium and manual MGIT are useful alternatives to APM for drug susceptibility testing of M. tuberculosis in low resource settings.
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.