Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26600434›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Comparative Study of a Real-Time PCR Assay Targeting senX3-regX3 versus Other Molecular Strategies Commonly Used in the Diagnosis of Tuberculosis.

Rocio Sanjuan-Jimenez, Inmaculada Toro-Peinado, Pilar Bermudez, Juan D Colmenero, Pilar Morata

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. XpertThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rocio Sanjuan-JimenezBiochemistry, Molecular Biology and Immunology Department, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaga, Malaga, Spain.
Inmaculada Toro-PeinadoMicrobiology Service, Regional University Hospital, Malaga, Spain.
Pilar BermudezMicrobiology Service, Regional University Hospital, Malaga, Spain.
Juan D ColmeneroInfectious Diseases Service, Regional University Hospital, Malaga, Spain.
Pilar MorataBiochemistry, Molecular Biology and Immunology Department, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaga, Malaga, Spain.
Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga · ESUniversidad de Málaga · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNucleic acid amplification tests are increasingly used for the rapid diagnosis of tuberculosis. We undertook a comparative study of the efficiency and diagnostic yield of a real-time PCR senX3-regX3 based assay versus the classical IS6110 target and the new commercial methods.

methodsThis single-blind prospective comparative study included 145 consecutive samples: 76 from patients with culture-confirmed tuberculosis (86.8% pulmonary and 13.2% extrapulmonary tuberculosis: 48.7% smear-positive and 51.3% smear-negative) and 69 control samples (24 from patients diagnosed with non-tuberculous mycobacteria infections and 45 from patients with suspected tuberculosis which was eventually ruled out). All samples were tested by two CE-marked assays (Xpert®MTB/RIF and AnyplexTM plus MTB/NTM) and two in-house assays targeting senX3-regX3 and the IS6110 gene.

resultsThe detection limit ranged from 1.00E+01 fg for Anyplex, senX3-regX3 and IS6110 to 1.00E+04 fg for Xpert. All three Xpert, senX3-regX3 and IS6110 assays detected all 37 smear-positive cases. Conversely, Anyplex was positive in 34 (91.9%) smear-positive cases. In patients with smear-negative tuberculosis, differences were observed between the assays; Xpert detected 22 (56.41%) of the 39 smear-negative samples, Anyplex 24 (61.53%), senX3-regX3 28 (71.79%) and IS6110 35 (89.74%). Xpert and senX3-regX3 were negative in all control samples; however, the false positive rate was 8.7% and 13% for Anyplex and IS6110, respectively. The overall sensitivity was 77.6%, 85.7%, 77.3% and 94.7% and the specificity was 100%, 100%, 90.8% and 87.0% for the Xpert, senX3-regX3, Anyplex and IS6110 assays, respectively.

conclusionReal-time PCR assays targeting IS6110 lack the desired specificity. The Xpert MTB/RIF and in-house senX3-regX3 assays are both sensitive and specific for the detection of MTBC in both pulmonary and extrapulmonary samples. Therefore, the real time PCR senX3-regX3 based assay could be a useful and complementary tool in the diagnosis of tuberculosis.

Indexed as

Molecular Diagnostic TechniquesReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBacterial ProteinsCase-Control StudiesChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionMycobacterium tuberculosisBacterial ProteinsPhosphotransferasesReagent Kits, DiagnosticRegX3 protein, MycobacteriumSenX3 protein, Mycobacterium

Identifiers

PMID26600434
PMCPMC4658205
OpenAlexW2173691856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.