Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24902569›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease2014

False-positive Xpert® MTB/RIF assays in previously treated patients: need for caution in interpreting results.

T H Boyles, J Hughes, V Cox, R Burton, G Meintjes, M Mendelson

Abstract readCase Reports
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. XpertThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Clinical management of XpertBMC infectious diseases · 2026
    Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Use of a molecular bacterial load assay to distinguish between active TB and post-TB lung disease.The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

T H Boyles<label>*</label>Division of Infectious Diseases and HIV Medicine, Department of Medicine, Groote Schuur Hospital, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
J Hughes<label><sup>†</sup></label>Médecins Sans Frontières, Khayelitsha, Cape Town, South Africa.
V Cox<label><sup>†</sup></label>Médecins Sans Frontières, Khayelitsha, Cape Town, South Africa.
R Burton<label><sup>‡</sup></label>Khayelitsha District Hospital, Khayelitsha, Cape Town, South Africa.
G Meintjes<label><sup>§</sup></label>Institute of Infectious Disease and Molecular Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
M Mendelson<label>*</label>Division of Infectious Diseases and HIV Medicine, Department of Medicine, Groote Schuur Hospital, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Xpert(®) MTB/RIF is the initial diagnostic test of choice for tuberculosis (TB). It is not known if false-positive results are more common in previously treated patients. We report four patients with successful treatment for TB up to 5 years previously who presented with respiratory tract infection and were Xpert-positive, but had negative TB cultures and clinical improvement without anti-tuberculosis treatment. We hypothesise that the Xpert results were false-positive due to the presence of dead Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacilli in lungs and sputum. Further work is required to determine the specificity of Xpert in previously treated patients.

Indexed as

False Positive ReactionsFemaleHumansLungMycobacterium tuberculosisNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesRespiratory Tract InfectionsSensitivity and SpecificitySputumTuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID24902569

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.