Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30804546›Full record

SynthesisNature microbiology2019

A systematic review of biomarkers to detect active tuberculosis.

Emily MacLean, Tobias Broger, Seda Yerlikaya, B Leticia Fernandez-Carballo, Madhukar Pai, Claudia M Denkinger

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nature microbiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 130 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
130citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

130 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Biomarker tests of progression from tuberculosis infection to disease: a systematic review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Revolutionizing diagnosis of pulmonaryFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

70 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Emily MacLean *Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada.
Tobias Broger *FIND, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7959-1055
Seda YerlikayaFIND, Geneva, Switzerland.
B Leticia Fernandez-CarballoFIND, Geneva, Switzerland.
Madhukar PaiMcGill International TB Centre, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Québec, Canada.
Claudia M DenkingerFIND, Geneva, Switzerland. cdenki@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7216-7067

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Millions of cases of tuberculosis (TB) go undiagnosed each year. Better diagnostic tools are urgently needed. Biomarker-based or multiple marker biosignature-based tests, ideally performed on blood or urine, for the detection of active TB might help to meet target product profiles proposed by the World Health Organization for point-of-care testing. We conducted a systematic review to summarize evidence on proposed biomarkers and biosignatures and evaluate their quality and level of evidence. We screened the titles and abstracts of 7,631 citations and included 443 publications that fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were published in 2010-2017. The types of biomarkers identified included antibodies, cytokines, metabolic activity markers, mycobacterial antigens and volatile organic compounds. Only 47% of studies reported a culture-based reference standard and diagnostic sensitivity and specificity. Forty-four biomarkers (4%) were identified in high-quality studies and met the target product profile minimum criteria, of which two have been incorporated into commercial assays. Of the 44 highest-quality biomarkers, 24 (55%) were multiple marker biosignatures. No meta-analyses were performed owing to between-study heterogeneity. In conclusion, TB biomarker discovery studies are often poorly designed and findings are rarely confirmed in independent studies. Few markers progress to a further developmental stage. More validation studies that consider the intended diagnostic use cases and apply rigorous design are needed. The extracted data from this review are currently being used by FIND as the foundation of a dynamic database in which biomarker data and developmental status will be presented.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiomarkersHumansMycobacterium tuberculosisTuberculosisBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID30804546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.