Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30890135›Full record

SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2019

Diagnostic accuracy of TB-LAMP for pulmonary tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Priya B Shete, Katherine Farr, Luke Strnad, Christen M Gray, Adithya Cattamanchi

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.1field-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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Priya B SheteDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of California San Francisco and Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, 1001 Potrero Avenue, 5K1, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA. Priya.shete@ucsf.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0279-8170
Katherine FarrDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of California San Francisco and Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, 1001 Potrero Avenue, 5K1, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Luke StrnadDivision of Infectious Diseases, Oregon Health & Science University, 3188 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Mail Code: L457, Portland, OR, 97239, USA.
Christen M GrayFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Room G30, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
Adithya CattamanchiDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of California San Francisco and Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, 1001 Potrero Avenue, 5K1, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
San Francisco General Hospital · USOregon Health & Science University · USUniversity of London · GB

Funding

BIOLOGY OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES TRAINING PROGRAMT32AI007641 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI MATTHEW G DORSEY · 2000 to 2026
$6.9M
NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007641
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe need for a rapid, molecular test to diagnose tuberculosis (TB) has prompted exploration of TB-LAMP (Eiken; Tokyo, Japan) for use in resource-limited settings. We conducted a systematic review to assess the accuracy of TB-LAMP as a diagnostic test for pulmonary TB.

methodsWe analyzed individual-level data for eligible patients from all studies of TB-LAMP conducted between Jan 2012 and October 2015 to compare the diagnostic accuracy of TB-LAMP with that of smear microscopy and Xpert MTB/RIF® using 3 reference standards of varying stringency. Pooled sensitivity and specificity and pooled differences in sensitivity and specificity were estimated using random effects meta-analysis. Study quality was evaluated using QUADAS-2.

resultsFour thousand seven hundred sixty individuals across 13 studies met eligibility criteria. Methodological quality was judged to be low for all studies. TB-LAMP had higher sensitivity than sputum smear microscopy (pooled sensitivity difference + 13·2, 95% CI 4·5-21·9%) and similar sensitivity to Xpert MTB/RIF (pooled sensitivity difference - 2·5, 95% CI -8·0 to + 2·9) using the most stringent reference standard available. Specificity of TB-LAMP was similar to that of sputum smear microscopy (pooled specificity difference - 1·8, 95% CI -3·8 to + 0·2) and Xpert MTB/RIF (pooled specificity difference 0·5, 95% CI -0·9 to + 1·8).

conclusionsFrom the perspective of diagnostic accuracy, TB-LAMP may be considered as an alternative test for sputum smear microscopy. Additional factors such as cost, feasibility, and acceptability in settings that continue to rely on sputum smear microscopy should be considered when deciding to adopt this technology. Xpert MTB/RIF should continue to be preferred in settings where resource and infrastructure requirements are adequate and where HIV co-infection or drug-resistance is of concern.

Indexed as

Molecular TypingNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesHumansMycobacterium tuberculosisReproducibility of ResultsTuberculosis, PulmonaryDiagnostic testingMolecular assayPoint of careTuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID30890135
PMCPMC6425614
OpenAlexW2937123139

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.