SynthesisPLoS medicine2019
Host-response-based gene signatures for tuberculosis diagnosis: A systematic comparison of 16 signatures.
Synthesis in PLoS medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 116 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
116 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 170 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomarker tests of progression from tuberculosis infection to disease: a systematic review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026Pooled it
- Gene signature discovery and systematic validation across diverse clinical cohorts for TB prognosis and response to treatment.PLoS computational biology · 2023Pooled it
- The immunoregulatory landscape of human tuberculosis granulomas.Nature immunology · 2022Pooled it
- MicroRNAs as diagnostic biomarkers for Tuberculosis: A systematic review and meta- analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Is interleukin-2 an optimal marker for diagnosing tuberculosis infection? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Concise whole blood transcriptional signatures for incipient tuberculosis: a systematic review and patient-level pooled meta-analysis.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2020Pooled it
- A Meta-Analysis of Multiple Whole Blood Gene Expression Data Unveils a Diagnostic Host-Response Transcript Signature for Respiratory Syncytial Virus.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Co-regulation of innate and adaptive immune responses induced by ID93+GLA-SE vaccination in humans.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Trial
- Host transcriptomic signature as alternative test-of-cure in visceral leishmaniasis patients co-infected with HIV.EBioMedicine · 2020Trial
- Blood transcriptomic signatures predict poor outcomes in drug-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis in Brazil.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2026Article
- Pipettes and Pipelines: The Weapons of Omics Sciences for a New Age of Clinical Studies.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- Monocyte-Amplified Transcriptional Signatures of Human Diseases.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- RISK6 as a Translational Host Transcriptomic Signature for Tuberculosis Diagnosis, Treatment Monitoring, and Risk Stratification.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Unexpected detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA in US-born patients in putative association with clinical syndromes.Nature communications · 2026Observational
- PTBD: a machine learning-based non-invasive diagnostic model for pulmonary tuberculosis using large-scale blood transcriptomes.BMC biology · 2026Article
- Plasma protein biomarkers predictive of progression to active tuberculosis among close contacts of patients with tuberculosis.iScience · 2026Article
- A proof of concept study on the diagnostic utility of in vivo expressed mycobacterial transcripts in tuberculous pleuritis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Nasal Gene Expression in ART-Naive Adults with HIV and Pulmonary Tuberculosis in Uganda.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Integrative transcriptomic meta-analysis reveals conserved transcriptional signatures and predictive biomarkers for active tuberculosis: a pathway-based machine learning approach.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
56 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) and Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) have published target product profiles (TPPs) calling for non-sputum-based diagnostic tests for the diagnosis of active tuberculosis (ATB) disease and for predicting the progression from latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) to ATB. A large number of host-derived blood-based gene-expression biomarkers for diagnosis of patients with ATB have been proposed to date, but none have been implemented in clinical settings. The focus of this study is to directly compare published gene signatures for diagnosis of patients with ATB across a large, diverse list of publicly available gene expression datasets, and evaluate their performance against the WHO/FIND TPPs. METHODS AND
findingsWe searched PubMed, Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO), and ArrayExpress in June 2018. We included all studies irrespective of study design and enrollment criteria. We found 16 gene signatures for the diagnosis of ATB compared to other clinical conditions in PubMed. For each signature, we implemented a classification model as described in the corresponding original publication of the signature. We identified 24 datasets containing 3,083 transcriptome profiles from whole blood or peripheral blood mononuclear cell samples of healthy controls or patients with ATB, LTBI, or other diseases from 14 countries in GEO. Using these datasets, we calculated weighted mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), specificity at 90% sensitivity, and negative predictive value (NPV) for each gene signature across all datasets. We also compared the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), heterogeneity in DOR, and false positive rate (FPR) for each signature using bivariate meta-analysis. Across 9 datasets of patients with culture-confirmed diagnosis of ATB, 11 signatures had weighted mean AUROC > 0.8, and 2 signatures had weighted mean AUROC ≤ 0.6. All but 2 signatures had high NPV (>98% at 2% prevalence). Two gene signatures achieved the minimal WHO TPP for a non-sputum-based triage test. When including datasets with clinical diagnosis of ATB, there was minimal reduction in the weighted mean AUROC and specificity of all but 3 signatures compared to when using only culture-confirmed ATB data. Only 4 signatures had homogeneous DOR and lower FPR when datasets with clinical diagnosis of ATB were included; other signatures either had heterogeneous DOR or higher FPR or both. Finally, 7 of 16 gene signatures predicted progression from LTBI to ATB 6 months prior to sputum conversion with positive predictive value > 6% at 2% prevalence. Our analyses may have under- or overestimated the performance of certain ATB diagnostic signatures because our implementation may be different from the published models for those signatures. We re-implemented published models because the exact models were not publicly available.
conclusionsWe found that host-response-based diagnostics could accurately identify patients with ATB and predict individuals with high risk of progression from LTBI to ATB prior to sputum conversion. We found that a higher number of genes in a signature did not increase the accuracy of the signature. Overall, the Sweeney3 signature performed robustly across all comparisons. Our results provide strong evidence for the potential of host-response-based diagnostics in achieving the WHO goal of ending tuberculosis by 2035, and host-response-based diagnostics should be pursued for clinical implementation.
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.