ArticlePloS one2025
Evaluation of QIAreach QuantiFERON-TB lateral-flow nanoparticle fluorescence assay for TB infection diagnosis among TB household contacts in three high-burden settings.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTuberculosis infection (TBI) testing, and treatment are fundamental to achieve TB elimination. TBI testing among close or household contacts (HHCs) has been limited, in part due to perceived complexity and high operational cost. We evaluated the performance of a new near-patient and field-based QIAreach QuantiFERON-TB (QIAreach) against QuantiFERON-TB-Gold-Plus (QFT-Plus) among HHCs of people with TB.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted from July 2021 to September 2022 in Lesotho, South Africa and Tanzania. Blood samples were collected from HHCs for paired QFT-Plus and QIAreach processing, testing and interpretation. To evaluate the performance of QIAreach against QFT-Plus as a reference, we determined the: i) prevalence of TBI, ii) total concordance using Cohen's Kappa, iii) predictors of discordant results using logistic regression, and iv) relationship between time to results and interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) response levels using linear correlation.
resultsOut of 964 enrolled HHCs, 464 had paired results, of whom 64.9% (302/465) were female with a cohort median age of 27 years (interquartile range (IQR): 13-45). Overall, 50.9% (236/464) tested positive on QFT-Plus, while 57.1% (265/464) were positive on QIAreach assay. Total concordance between QFT-Plus and QIAreach was 78.4% [353/450, 95% confidence interval (CI): 74.4-82.2, Cohen's Kappa: 0.5627, p < 0.001]. Discordance between assays was 23.9% (111/464) and was associated with Lesotho site (adjusted odds ratio 2.70, 95%CI: 1.48-4.92, p = 0.001). HHCs with higher IFN-γ response (QFT-Plus) (≥0.35 IU.ml-l) had a shorter time to results on QIAreach. In addition, a strong negative correlation between QIAreach time to results and IFN-γ response (QFT-Plus) levels (R = -0.64, 95% CI: -0.87 to -0.41, p < 0.001) was observed.
conclusionQIAreach demonstrated a moderate concordance against QFT-Plus among HHCs in three high-burden countries. Further work is needed to understand and improve its usability in high TB and low resource settings.
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.