SynthesisFrontiers in microbiology2024
Diagnostic performance of biomarkers for differentiating active tuberculosis from latent tuberculosis: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cepheid 9-gene host mRNA expression across the spectrum of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection and disease: insights across the lifespan.EBioMedicine · 2026Article
- Benchmarking large language models for cell-free RNA diagnostic biomarker discovery.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Detection for New Biomarkers of Tuberculosis Infection Activity Using Machine Learning Methods.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Early Mycobacterial Antigens in the Immunodiagnosis of Latent Tuberculosis Infection.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Diagnostic efficacy of the TSPOT assay for tuberculosis infection and drug resistance in mycobacterium tuberculosis in patients with malignant tumors.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
- N-Acetylcysteine as a Potential Immunomodulator in Tuberculosis: Evidence of IL-2 Elevation in a Pilot Study.Journal of inflammation research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: PCR and culture tests are used together to confirm the diagnosis of active tuberculosis (TB). Due to the long culture period, if the PCR test is negative, it takes a significant amount of time for the culture result to be available. Interferon- Methods: PubMed-Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched up to the end of May 2024, without restrictions on publication date and population. Articles describing the diagnostic value of at least one biomarker for differentiating between TB and LTBI were included. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess study quality. Two independent researchers assessed the articles using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed for diagnostic tools of 11 groups used to differentiate TB from LTBI. Results: Out of 164 identified articles, 159 reports were included in the systematic review and 58 in the meta-analysis. Seventy results from 58 reports accounting for 9,291 participants were included. When measuring interleukin-2 (IL-2) after stimulation with latency antigen, the most significant odds ratio was shown in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. The values were 9.46, 18.5, 11.30, and 9.61, respectively. Conclusion: This study shows that the IL-2 level after stimulation with latent antigen is a potential biomarker for differentiating TB from LTBI. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024542996.
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.