ArticleBMC infectious diseases2014
Performance evaluation of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay according to its clinical application.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra assay for tuberculosis disease and rifampicin resistance in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra assays for active tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Xpert MTB/RIF assay for the diagnosis of rifampicin resistance in different regions: a meta-analysis.BMC microbiology · 2019Pooled it
- Xpert MTB/RIF and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra for pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of nucleic acid MALDI-TOF MS in mycobacterial detection, species identification, and drug resistance testing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Tuberculosis Diagnostic Methods: Clinical Applicability, Implementation Challenges, and Integrated Testing Strategies.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Discordant results of Xpert MTB/Rif assay and BACTEC MGIT 960 liquid culture to detect Mycobacterium tuberculosis in community screening in Vietnam.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Article
- Is Cross-reactivity with Nontuberculous Mycobacteria a Systematic Problem in the Xpert MTB/RIF Assay?Tuberculosis and respiratory diseases · 2019Article
- Comparative Evaluation of the Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Assay for Detecting Pulmonary Tuberculosis.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2018Article
- Comparative Study of GeneXpert MTB/RIF Assay and Multiplex PCR Assay for Direct Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Suspected Pulmonary Tuberculosis Patients.Current microbiology · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Xpert MTB/RIF assay (Xpert assay; Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA) is becoming the test of choice for the rapid diagnosis of tuberculosis and rifampin (RIF) resistance. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the Xpert assay with respect to its clinical application at a tertiary care hospital in Korea, a country with an intermediate tuberculosis burden and high-resource.
methodsA total of 303 Xpert assay results from 109 smear-positive and 194 smear-negative respiratory specimens were retrospectively reviewed. Based on patients' medical records, four categories of clinical applications of the Xpert assay were identified: (1) the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in patients with a high probability of pulmonary tuberculosis according to their clinical and radiological features; (2) the exclusion of tuberculosis in clinically indeterminate patients for pulmonary tuberculosis; (3) the differentiation of Mycobacterium tuberculsosis (MTB) from nontuberculous mycobacteria in a smear-positive specimen; and (4) the diagnosis of RIF resistance. Standard culture and drug susceptibility tests were used as reference methods.
resultsThe sensitivity of the Xpert assay for MTB detection in category 1 was 89.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78.5-95.8%), but 66.7% (95% CI, 12.5-98.2%) in category 2. The positive predictive values ranged from 33.3% (95% CI, 6.0-75.9%) in category 2 to 91.3% and 91.7% in categories 1 and 3, respectively. The negative predictive values were over 90% in all categories. The Xpert assay correctly detected RIF resistance in six of the seven (85.7%) isolates tested.
conclusionsThe Xpert assay exhibited variable performance according to its clinical application; this finding cautions that careful interpretation for the results of this assay would be needed according to its intended purpose.
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.