Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37936093›Full record

ArticleMolecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.)2023

Performance of the MeltPro TB assay as initial test for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis with drug-resistance detection.

Zhi-Bin Liu, Li-Ping Cheng, Hong-Qiu Pan, Xiao-Cui Wu, Fu-Hui Lu, Jie Cao, Lei Wang, Wei Wei, Hong-Yu Chen, Wei Sha and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Identification and quantification ofJournal of clinical microbiology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhi-Bin Liu *Shanghai Clinical Research Center for Infectious Disease (Tuberculosis), Shanghai Key Laboratory of Tuberculosis, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200433, China.
Li-Ping Cheng *Shanghai Clinical Research Center for Infectious Disease (Tuberculosis), Shanghai Key Laboratory of Tuberculosis, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200433, China.
Hong-Qiu Pan *Department of Tuberculosis, The Third People's Hospital of Zhenjiang, School of Medicine, Jiangsu University, Jiangsu, China.
Xiao-Cui WuDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Fu-Hui LuDepartment of Tuberculosis, The Third People's Hospital of Zhenjiang, School of Medicine, Jiangsu University, Jiangsu, China.
Jie CaoShanghai Clinical Research Center for Infectious Disease (Tuberculosis), Shanghai Key Laboratory of Tuberculosis, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200433, China.
Lei WangShanghai Clinical Research Center for Infectious Disease (Tuberculosis), Shanghai Key Laboratory of Tuberculosis, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200433, China.
Wei WeiShanghai Clinical Research Center for Infectious Disease (Tuberculosis), Shanghai Key Laboratory of Tuberculosis, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200433, China.
Hong-Yu ChenDepartment of Tuberculosis, The Third People's Hospital of Zhenjiang, School of Medicine, Jiangsu University, Jiangsu, China.
Wei ShaShanghai Clinical Research Center for Infectious Disease (Tuberculosis), Shanghai Key Laboratory of Tuberculosis, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200433, China. shfksw@126.com.
Qin SunShanghai Clinical Research Center for Infectious Disease (Tuberculosis), Shanghai Key Laboratory of Tuberculosis, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200433, China. sunqinbonjour@163.com.ORCID 0000-0003-3445-920X
Tongji University · CNJiangsu University · CN

Funding

Key Research and Development Plan of Zhenjiang SH2021055Science and Technology Innovation Action Plan of STCSM 22Y11900700Shanghai Clinical Research Center for Infectious Disease (Tuberculosis) 19MC1910800Shanghai Nature Science Foundation 21ZR1453400Three Year Action Plan for the Construction of Shanghai Public Health System GWVI-11.2-XD02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe MeltPro TB assay (MeltPro) is a molecular rapid diagnostic test designed for detecting resistance to antituberculosis drugs. However, the performance of MeltPro as an initial diagnostic test for simultaneously detecting the presence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) and drug resistance has not been evaluated. This study aims to assess the performance of MeltPro as initial diagnostic test for simultaneous detection of MTB and drug resistance in clinical samples from patients with presumptive pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB).

methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 1283 patients with presumptive PTB from two clinical centers, out of which 875 were diagnosed with PTB. The diagnostic accuracy of MeltPro, Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert), and MGIT 960 for PTB detection was evaluated. Rifampicin (RIF), isoniazid (INH), ethambutol (EMB), streptomycin (STR), and fluoroquinolone (FQ) resistance were detected using MeltPro, with Xpert and/or the broth microdilution plate method (MYCOTB) results as references.

resultsFor the diagnosis of PTB, MeltPro showed a sensitivity of 69.0%, which was similar to Xpert (72.7%; P > 0.05) and higher than MGIT (58.1%; P < 0.001). The specificity of MeltPro was 97.1%, similar to Xpert (98.0%; P > 0.05). In smear-negative patients, MeltPro's sensitivity was 50.9%, similar to Xpert (56.5%; P > 0.05), and higher than MGIT (33.1%; P < 0.001). Based on Xpert and/or MYCOTB results, MeltPro exhibited a sensitivity and specificity of 98.3% and 99.2%, respectively, for detecting RIF resistance. Based on MYCOTB results, MeltPro's sensitivity for detecting resistance to INH, EMB, STR, and FQ was 96.4%, 89.1%, 97.5%, and 90.3%, respectively, with specificities of 96.0%, 96.0%, 95.2%, and 99.4%, respectively.

conclusionThe MeltPro TB assay could potentially be an effective alternative as the initial test for rapid diagnosis of PTB with drug-resistance detection in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Mycobacterium tuberculosisTuberculosis, PulmonaryDrug Resistance, BacterialHumansRetrospective StudiesRifampinSputumRifampinDiagnosisDrug-resistanceMeltPro TBPulmonary tuberculosisXpert MTB/RIF

Identifiers

PMID37936093
PMCPMC10629162
OpenAlexW4388463835

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.