ArticleScientific reports2017
Improved performance of the artus Mycobacterium tuberculosis RG PCR kit in a low incidence setting: a retrospective monocentric study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does multiple gastric aspirate collection increase sensitivity of M. tuberculosis detection in children with pulmonary tuberculosis?European journal of pediatrics · 2024Article
- Novel Long Non-coding RNA and LASSO Prediction Model to Better Identify Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Case-Control Study in China.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tuberculosis (TB) and the spread of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) strains resistant against rifampin (RIF) and isoniazid (INH) pose a serious threat to global health. However, rapid and reliable MTBC detection along with RIF/INH susceptibility testing are challenging in low prevalence countries due to the higher rate of false positives. Here, we provide the first performance data for the artus MTBC PCR assay in a low prevalence setting. We analyze 1323 respiratory and 311 non-respiratory samples with the artus MTBC PCR assay as well as by mycobacterial culture and microscopy. We propose retesting of specimens in duplicate and consideration of a determined cycle-threshold value cut-off greater than 34, as this significantly increases accuracy, specificity, and negative predictive value without affecting sensitivity. Furthermore, we tested fourteen MTBC positive samples with the GenoType MTBDRplus test and demonstrate that using an identical DNA extraction protocol for both assays does not impair downstream genotypic testing for RIF and INH susceptibility. In conclusion, our procedure optimizes the use of the artus MTB assay with workload efficient methods in a low incidence setting. Combining the modified artus MTB with the GenoType MTBDRplus assays allows rapid and accurate detection of MTBC and RIF/INH resistance.
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.