ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2015
Evaluation of the characteristics of the enzyme-linked immunospot assay for diagnosis of active tuberculosis in China.
Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and Risk Factors of Interferon-Gamma Release Assays among HIV-Positive Individuals.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Clinical evaluation of the T-SPOT.TB test for detection of tuberculosis infection in northeastern Guangdong Province, China.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Article
- Polymorphism of MPT64 and PstS1 in Mycobacterium tuberculosis is not likely to affect relative immune reaction in human.Medicine · 2019Article
- Evaluation of the performance of two tuberculosis interferon gamma release assays (IGRA-ELISA and T-SPOT.TB) for diagnosingData in brief · 2018Article
- Factors associated with negative T-SPOT.TB results among smear-negative tuberculosis patients in China.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Analysis of Factors Influencing Diagnostic Accuracy of T-SPOT.TB for Active Tuberculosis in Clinical Practice.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Evaluation of a New IFN-γ Release Assay for Rapid Diagnosis of Active Tuberculosis in a High-Incidence Setting.Frontiers in cellular and infection 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of the T-SPOT.TB test for the diagnosis of active tuberculosis (ATB) and to distinguish ATB from other diseases using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. A total of 535 patients with suspected active tuberculosis were enrolled in the study and divided into ATB and nonactive tuberculosis (NATB) groups, as well as pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) and extrapulmonary tuberculosis (EPTB) subgroups. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio of the T-SPOT.TB test for the diagnosis of ATB were 84.95%, 85.12%, 82.94%, 86.93%, 5.71, and 0.18, respectively. The median number of spot-forming cells (SFCs) in the ATB group was higher than that in the NATB group (71 versus 1; P < 0.0001). The sensitivities in the PTB and EPTB subgroups were 92.31% and 81.77%. The areas under the curve (AUC) for the diagnosis of ATB using the T-SPOT.TB, early secreted antigenic target 6 (ESAT-6), and culture filtrate protein 10 (CFP-10) were 0.906, 0.884, and 0.877, respectively. A cutoff of 42.5 SFCs for ATB yielded a positive predictive value of 100%. Our study shows that the T-SPOT.TB test is useful for the diagnosis of ATB. Utilizing an ROC curve to select an appropriate cutoff made it possible to discriminate ATB from NATB.
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.