ArticleThe Indian journal of medical research2019
Rapid detection of drug-resistant
Article in The Indian journal of medical research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Evaluating the Sensitivity of Different Molecular Techniques for DetectingPolish journal of microbiology · 2023Article
- Revisiting the methods for detectingAccess microbiology · 2021Review
- Innovations in tuberculosis diagnostics: How far are we from reaching our goal?The Indian journal of medical research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background & objectives: Rapid detection of drug resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) is essential for the efficient control of tuberculosis. Hence, in this study a nested-allele-specific (NAS) PCR, nested multiple allele-specific PCR (NMAS-PCR) and multiple allele-specific (MAS) PCR assays were evaluated that enabled detection of the most common mutations responsible for isoniazid (INH) and rifampicin (RIF) resistance in MTB isolates directly from clinical specimens. Methods: Six pairs of primers, mutated and wild type, were used for the six targets such as codon 516, 526 and 531 of rpoB, codon 315 of katG and C15-T substitution in the promoter region of mabA-inhA using allele-specific (AS) PCR assays (NAS-PCR, NMAS-PCR and MAS-PCR). The performance of AS PCR method was compared with phenotypic drug susceptibility testing (DST). Results: The usefulness of AS PCR assays was evaluated with 391 clinical specimens (251 Acid fast bacilli smear positive and MTB culture positive; 93 smear negative and MTB culture positive; 47 smear positive and MTB culture negative) and 344 MTB culture positive isolates. With culture-based phenotypic DST as a reference standard, the sensitivity and specificity of the NAS-PCR, NMAS-PCR and MAS-PCR assay for drug resistance-related genetic mutation detection were 98.6 and 97.8 per cent for INH, 97.5 and 97.9 per cent for RIF and 98.9 and 100 per cent for multidrug resistance (MDR). Interpretation & conclusions: The performance of AS PCR assays showed that those could be less expensive and technically executable methods for rapid detection of MDR-TB directly from clinical specimens.
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.