ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2014
Evaluation of two line probe assays for rapid detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, tuberculosis (TB) drug resistance, and non-TB Mycobacteria in HIV-infected individuals with suspected TB.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of line probe assays for the diagnosis of pulmonary and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The European respiratory journal · 2017Pooled it
- GenoType MTBDRplus Assay for Rapid Detection of Multidrug Resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis: A Meta-Analysis.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Tuberculosis Diagnostic Methods: Clinical Applicability, Implementation Challenges, and Integrated Testing Strategies.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Value of Targeted Next-generation Sequencing in Pulmonary Mycobacterial Infections.Current medical science · 2024Article
- Novel automated AIMLAM for diagnosis ofFuture microbiology · 2024Article
- Advances in technology for the laboratory diagnosis of individuals with HIV/AIDS coinfected withBiosafety and health · 2024Review
- Investigating cutaneous tuberculosis and nontuberculous mycobacterial infections a Department of Dermatology, Beijing, China: a comprehensive clinicopathological analysis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
- HIV-associated tuberculosis.International journal of STD & AIDS · 2021Article
- Article
- Utility of Targeted, Amplicon-Based Deep Sequencing To Detect Resistance to First-Line Tuberculosis Drugs in Botswana.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2019Article
- How Well Do Routine Molecular Diagnostics Detect Rifampin Heteroresistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis?Journal of clinical microbiology · 2019Article
- Comparison of GeneXpert and line probe assay for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and rifampicin-mono resistance at the National Tuberculosis Reference Laboratory, Kenya.BMC infectious diseases · 2019Article
- Diagnostic predictive values of the Hain genotype MTBDRsl assay in mycobacterial strains isolated from Sudan.The Pan African medical journal · 2019Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy and Utility of FluoroType MTBDR, a New Molecular Assay for Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2018Article
- Indicators for prediction of Mycobacterium tuberculosis positivity detected with bronchoalveolar lavage fluid.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2018Article
- Widespread use of incorrect PCR ramp rate negatively impacts multidrug-resistant tuberculosis diagnosis (MTBDRplus).Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Molecular screening of multidrug-resistance tuberculosis by a designated public health laboratory in Taiwan.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2017Article
- Performance of MTBDRplus assay in detecting multidrug resistant tuberculosis at hospital level.BMC research notes · 2017Article
- Evaluation of genotype MTBDRplus VER 2.0 line probe assay for the detection of MDR-TB in smear positive and negative sputum samples.BMC infectious diseases · 2017Article
- A performance evaluation of MTBDRplus version 2 for the diagnosis of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2016Article
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 at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Limited performance data from line probe assays (LPAs), nucleic acid tests used for the rapid diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB), nontuberculosis mycobacteria (NTM), and Mycobacterium tuberculosis drug resistance are available for HIV-infected individuals, in whom paucibacillary TB is common. In this study, the strategy of testing sputum with GenoType MTBDRplus (MTBDR-Plus) and GenoType Direct LPA (Direct LPA) was compared to a gold standard of one mycobacterial growth indicator tube (MGIT) liquid culture. HIV-positive (HIV(+)) individuals with suspected TB from southern Africa and South America with <7 days of TB treatment had 1 sputum specimen tested with Direct LPA, MTBDR-Plus LPA, smear microscopy, MGIT, biochemical identification of mycobacterial species, and culture-based drug-susceptibility testing (DST). Of 639 participants, 59.3% were MGIT M. tuberculosis culture positive, of which 276 (72.8%) were acid-fast bacillus (AFB) smear positive. MTBDR-Plus had a sensitivity of 81.0% and a specificity of 100%, with sensitivities of 44.1% in AFB smear-negative versus 94.6% in AFB smear-positive specimens. For specimens that were positive for M. tuberculosis by MTBDR-Plus, the sensitivity and specificity for rifampin resistance were 91.7% and 96.6%, respectively, and for isoniazid (INH) they were 70.6% and 99.1%. The Direct LPA had a sensitivity of 88.4% and a specificity of 94.6% for M. tuberculosis detection, with a sensitivity of 72.5% in smear-negative specimens. Ten of 639 MGIT cultures grew Mycobacterium avium complex or Mycobacterium kansasii, half of which were detected by Direct LPA. Both LPA assays performed well in specimens from HIV-infected individuals, including in AFB smear-negative specimens, with 72.5% sensitivity for M. tuberculosis identification with the Direct LPA and 44.1% sensitivity with MTBDR-Plus. LPAs have a continued role for use in settings where rapid identification of INH resistance and clinically relevant NTM are priorities.
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.