Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26797499›Full record

Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2016

Comparative performance characteristics of the urine lipoarabinomannan strip test and sputum smear microscopy in hospitalized HIV-infected patients with suspected tuberculosis in Harare, Zimbabwe.

Lynn Sodai Zijenah, Gerard Kadzirange, Tsitsi Bandason, Maria Mary Chipiti, Bevel Gwambiwa, Forget Makoga, Pauline Chungu, Philip Kaguru, Keertan Dheda

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Lynn Sodai ZijenahDepartments of Immunology, University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Harare, Zimbabwe. Lzijenah@gmail.com.
Gerard KadzirangeDepartments of Medicine, University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Harare, Zimbabwe. gkadzirange@gmail.com.
Tsitsi BandasonBiomedical Research and Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe. tbandason@brti.co.zw.
Maria Mary ChipitiDepartments of Immunology, University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Harare, Zimbabwe. mmchipiti@gmail.com.
Bevel GwambiwaDepartments of Immunology, University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Harare, Zimbabwe. bevelg@yahoo.com.
Forget MakogaDepartments of Immunology, University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Harare, Zimbabwe. fmakoga@gmail.com.
Pauline ChunguDepartments of Immunology, University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Harare, Zimbabwe. pchungu@gmail.com.
Philip KaguruDepartments of Immunology, University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Harare, Zimbabwe. pkaguru@gmail.com.
Keertan DhedaLung Infection and Immunity Unit, Division of Pulmonology, Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. keertan.dheda@uct.ac.za.
University of Zimbabwe · ZWBiomedical Research and Training Institute · ZWUniversity of Cape Town · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Zimbabwe, sputum smear microscopy (SSM) is the routinely used TB diagnostic tool in hospitalised HIV-infected patients. However, SSM has poor sensitivity in HIV-infected patients. We compared performance of urine lipoarabinomannan strip test (LAM) and SSM among hospitalized HIV-infected patients with suspected TB.

methodsHospitalized HIV-infected patients with suspected TB were randomized to LAM plus SSM or SSM alone groups as part of a larger multi-country parent study. Here we present a comparison of LAM versus SSM performance from the Zimbabwe study site. LAM analyses (grade 2 cut-off) were conducted using (i) a microbiological reference standard (MRS; culture positivity for M.tb and designated definite TB) and (ii) a composite reference standard (CRS; definite TB plus probable TB i.e. patients with clinical TB excluded from the culture negative group). CRS constituted the primary analysis.

results82/457 (18%) of the patients randomized to the LAM group were M.tuberculosis culture positive. Using CRS, sensitivity (%, 95% CI) of LAM was significantly higher than SSM [49.2 (42.1-56.4) versus 29.4(23.2-36.3); p < 0.001]. Specificity and PPV were 98.1%, and 95.8%, respectively. By contrast, using MRS, LAM sensitivity was similar to SSM and specificity was significantly lower, however, the combined sensitivity of LAM and SSM was significantly higher than that of SSM alone, p = 0.009. Using CRS, LAM sensitivity (%, CI) was CD4 count dependent [60.6(50.7-69.8) at ≤50 cells/μL; 40.0(22.7-59.4) at 51-100 cells/μL, and 32.8(21.0-46.3) at >100 cells/μL. The combined sensitivity of LAM and SSM was higher than SSM alone being highest at CD4 counts <50 cells/μL [67.6(57.9-76.3); p = <0.001]. Specificity of LAM or SSM alone, or of combined LAM and SSM was >97% in all the 3 CD4 strata.

conclusionAmong hospitalized HIV-infected patients with suspected TB, the sensitivity of LAM is significantly higher than that of SSM, especially at low CD4 counts. LAM and SSM are complimentary tests for diagnosis of TB in HIV-infected patients. We recommend a combination of LAM and SSM for TB diagnosis in HIV-infected patients with low CD4 counts in HIV/TB co-endemic countries, where alternative methods are unavailable.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansLipopolysaccharidesMaleMicroscopyMiddle AgedMycobacterium tuberculosisSensitivity and SpecificitySputumTuberculosisZimbabwelipoarabinomannanLipopolysaccharides

Identifiers

PMID26797499
PMCPMC4722705
OpenAlexW2277404544

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.