ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2026
Evaluating the Cepheid Xpert TB/LTBI Research-Use-Only Assay for Detection of Active and Latent Mycobacterium tuberculosis Infection.
Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate nonsputum tests are essential for improving tuberculosis (TB) detection. We report the first evaluation of the Xpert TB/LTBI assay (research-use-only; Cepheid, USA), which detects 9 Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigen-stimulated mRNA targets from blood.
methodsWe enrolled individuals ≥12 years with presumptive TB from clinics in Uganda and Vietnam. All participants underwent sputum- (liquid culture; Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra) and blood-based (Xpert TB/LTBI; QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus [QFT-Plus]) testing. Participants were classified as having active TB (positive sputum results), latent TB infection (LTBI; positive QFT-Plus with negative sputum results), or no TB infection. Diagnostic accuracy for active TB (primary analysis) and of a 2-step algorithm that first predicted TB infection (active TB or LTBI) and then distinguished active TB from LTBI was assessed using logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic analysis.
resultsAmong 214 participants included, 56.5% were male, 9.3% were with HIV, 29.0% had active TB, and 31.8% had LTBI. Xpert TB/LTBI area under the curve (AUC) was 0.92 (95% CI: .88-.96) for identifying active TB, and sensitivity was 93.5% (95% CI: 84.6-97.5) and specificity 76.3% (95% CI: 69.0-82.4) at a cut-point that achieved ≥90% sensitivity. In the 2-step algorithm, Xpert TB/LTBI had high accuracy for identifying TB infection in the first step, but accuracy was lower for distinguishing active TB from LTBI in the second step.
conclusionsXpert TB/LTBI exceeded World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended minimum accuracy targets for a TB screening test. However, further refinement is needed to improve its ability to distinguish active TB from LTBI.
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.