Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33289038›Full record

SynthesisClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2021

Comparing the Diagnostic Performance of QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus to Other Tests of Latent Tuberculosis Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Chi Eun Oh, Edgar Ortiz-Brizuela, Mayara L Bastos, Dick Menzies

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. IJTLD open · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

4 authors.

Chi Eun OhDepartment of Pediatrics, Kosin University College of Medicine, Busan, Republic of Korea.
Edgar Ortiz-BrizuelaLaboratory of Clinical Microbiology, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico.
Mayara L BastosRespiratory Epidemiology and Clinical Research Unit, McGill International TB Centre, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Dick MenziesRespiratory Epidemiology and Clinical Research Unit, McGill International TB Centre, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

Funding

CIHR 143350
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe conducted a review to compare the sensitivity, specificity, reproducibility, and predictive ability of QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) with that of QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-GIT; QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany) and other latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) tests.

methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from January 2013 through May 2020. We included studies comparing QFT-Plus with at least one other LTBI test. We estimated sensitivity from studies of patients with active tuberculosis, and specificity from studies of healthy individuals with low risk of LTBI. Three independent reviewers evaluated eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias.

resultsCompared with QFT-GIT, the sensitivity of QFT-Plus in patients with active TB was 1.3% higher (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.3% to 2.9%); in 2 studies of patients with very low probability of LTBI, the specificity was 0.9% lower (95% CI, -2.4% to 0.6%). These differences were not statistically significant. The agreement between QFT-Plus and QFT-GIT was high, with a pooled Cohen's kappa statistic of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.88). The reproducibility of QFT-GIT and QFT-Plus was similarly poor. All participants in the studies to estimate sensitivity were aged ≥15 years, and only 6 were people living with human immunodeficiency virus. We found no studies to assess predictive ability.

conclusionsQFT-Plus has diagnostic performance that is very similar to that of QFT-GIT. Further studies are needed to assess the sensitivity of QFT-Plus in immunocompromised patients and younger children before concluding if this new version offers advantages.

Indexed as

Latent TuberculosisTuberculosisChildHumansImmunocompromised HostInterferon-gamma Release TestsReproducibility of ResultsTuberculin Testinterferon-gamma release assaylatent tuberculosis infectionQuantiFERON-TB Gold Plussensitivityspecificity

Identifiers

PMID33289038
PMCPMC8423471

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.