Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28415989›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2017

Evaluation of genotype MTBDRplus VER 2.0 line probe assay for the detection of MDR-TB in smear positive and negative sputum samples.

Abyot Meaza, Abebaw Kebede, Zelalem Yaregal, Zekarias Dagne, Shewki Moga, Bazezew Yenew, Getu Diriba, Helina Molalign, Mengistu Tadesse, Desalegn Adisse and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Establishing proof of concept for utility of TrueprepThe international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Abyot MeazaEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. abimeaza@gmail.com.
Abebaw KebedeEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Zelalem YaregalEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Zekarias DagneEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Shewki MogaEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Bazezew YenewEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Getu DiribaEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Helina MolalignEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Mengistu TadesseEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Desalegn AdisseEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Muluwork GetahunEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Kassu DestaAddis Ababa University College of Health Science Department of Medical Laboratory Science, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Ethiopian Public Health Institute · ETAddis Ababa University · ET

Funding

Ethiopia-Emory TB Research Training ProgramD43TW009127 · FIC · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI HENRY M BLUMBERG, Kidist Bobosha · 2013 to 2026
$3.4M
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW009127
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMulti drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) poses formidable challenges to TB control due to its complex diagnostic and treatment challenges and often associated with a high rate of mortality. Accurate and rapid detection of MDR-TB is critical for timely initiation of treatment. Line Probe Assay (LPA) is a qualitative in vitro diagnostic test based on DNA-STRIP technology for the identification of the M. tuberculosis complex and its resistance to rifampicin (RMP) and/or isoniazid (INH). Hain Lifescience, GmbH, Germany has improved the sensitivity of Genotype MTBDRplus VER 2.0 LPA for the detection of MDR-TB; with the possibility of applying the tool in smear negative sputum samples.

methodA cross sectional study was conducted on 274 presumptive MDR-TB patients referred to the National TB Reference Laboratory (NTRL), Ethiopian Public Health Institute (EPHI) who submitted sputum samples for laboratory diagnosis of drug resistant-TB testing. Seventy-two smear and culture positive samples processed in smear positive direct LPA category and 197 smear negative sputum samples were processed for direct LPA. Among the smear negative samples 145 (73.6%) were culture negative and 26 (13.2%) were culture positive. All specimens were processed using NALC-NaOH method and ZN smear microscopy done from sediments. Genotype MTBDRplus VER 2.0 done from processed sputum sediments and the result was compared against the reference, BACTEC MGIT 960 culture and DST. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of Genotype MTBDRplus VER 2.0 assay was determined and P-value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

resultsThe sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of Genotype MTBDRplus VER 2.0 LPA were 96.4, 100, 100 and 96.9%, respectively for the detection of MDR-TB from direct smear positive sputum samples. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of Genotype MTBDR plus VER 2.0 LPA were 77.8, 97.2, 82.4 and 97.2%, respectively, for the detection of M. tuberculosis from direct smear negative sputum samples. Fourteen (53.8%) samples had valid results with LPA among the 26 smear negative culture positive samples. The remaining 8 (30.8%) and 4 (15.4%) were invalid and negative with LPA, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of Genotype MTBDRplus VER 2.0 LPA were 100% for the detection of MDR-TB among 14 direct smear negative and culture positive sputum samples. The most common mutations associated with RMP and INH resistance were S531L and S315TL, respectively. A single rare mutation (C15T/A16G) was detected for INH resistance.

conclusionThe diagnostic performance of Genotype MTBDRplus VER 2.0 LPA in direct smear positive sputum sample was highly sensitive and specific for early detection of MDR-TB. However, the diagnostic performance of this molecular assay in direct smear negative sputum sample was low and showed a high level of invalid results for detection of M. tuberculosis and its resistance to RMP and/or INH so it is unlikely to implement Genotype MTBDRplus VER 2.0 for the detection of MDR-TB in direct smear negative sample in our routine settings. The sensitivity of the assay should be improved for detection of MDR-TB in direct smear negative sputum specimens.

Indexed as

AdultAntitubercular AgentsBacterial Typing TechniquesCross-Sectional StudiesCytodiagnosisEarly DiagnosisEthiopiaFemaleGenotypeHumansIsoniazidMaleMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPoint MutationRifampinSensitivity and SpecificityAntitubercular AgentsIsoniazidRifampinGenotype MTBDRplus VER 2.0MDR-TBPerformance

Identifiers

PMID28415989
PMCPMC5392973
OpenAlexW2607463220

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.