Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28070206›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2017

QFT-Plus: a plus in variability? - Evaluation of new generation IGRA in serial testing of students with a migration background in Germany.

J Knierer, E N Gallegos Morales, A Schablon, A Nienhaus, J F Kersten

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Comparing the Diagnostic Performance of QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus to Other Tests of Latent Tuberculosis Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Risk Analysis of Latent Tuberculosis Infection among Health Workers Compared to Employees in Other Sectors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

J KniererUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Center of Excellence for Health Services Research in Nursing (CVcare), Hamburg, Germany.
E N Gallegos MoralesUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Center of Excellence for Health Services Research in Nursing (CVcare), Hamburg, Germany.
A SchablonUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Center of Excellence for Health Services Research in Nursing (CVcare), Hamburg, Germany.
A NienhausUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Center of Excellence for Health Services Research in Nursing (CVcare), Hamburg, Germany ; Institute for Statutory Accident Insurance and Prevention in the Health and Welfare Services (BGW), Principles of Prevention and Rehabilitation Department (GPR), Hamburg, Germany.
J F KerstenUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Center of Excellence for Health Services Research in Nursing (CVcare), Hamburg, Germany.
University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf · DEUniversität Hamburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrently available Interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs) show a considerable variability in serial testing for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). This study offers first results for the new generation IGRA QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) introduced in 2015 in comparison with its predecessor QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-GIT) from serial testing of students with a migration background at German universities.

methodsForty-one students were selected from a previous study. All students with a positive IGRA were asked and 11 agreed to participate in this cohort study. Additionally 30 students with negative IGRA results were selected by chance. Weekly testing with QFT-Plus and QFT-GIT was performed in all individuals over a 4-week period. IGRA variability was evaluated by calculating conversion and reversion rates.

resultsFrom 41 participants a total number of 163 serial measurements were analyzed for each IGRA, leading to 122 possible IGRA changes each. QFT-Plus had four conversions and two reversions leading to a conversion rate of 4.3% (4 of 93 possible conversions, 95% CI 1.4-11.3%) and reversion rate of 6.9% (2 of 29 possible reversions, 95% CI 1.2-24.2%). QFT-GIT had 2 conversions and 1 reversion causing slightly lower rates with 2.2% conversions (2 of 91, 95% CI 0.4-8.5%) and 3.2% reversions (1 of 31, 95% CI 0.2-18.5%). Inconsistent IGRA results occurred in 4 subjects for QFT-Plus (8 stable positives, 29 stable negatives) and in 2 subjects for QFT-GIT (9 stable positives, 30 stable negatives). Agreement between the two IGRAs was 95.1% (

conclusionThis study confirms occurrence of conversions and reversions for the new QFT-Plus in serial testing of a high-risk cohort in a low-incidence setting with improbable new TB contact during the study. QFT-Plus conversion and reversion rates were slightly higher than for the QFT-GIT but overall they were lower for both IGRAs than in other studies that investigated IGRA variability.

Indexed as

Latent tuberculosis infectionQFT-PlusSerial testingStudentsVariability

Identifiers

PMID28070206
PMCPMC5216544
OpenAlexW2569875732

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.