ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
Comparison of the diagnostic value of targeted next-generation sequencing, metagenomic next-generation sequencing, and Xpert MTB/RIF in adult pulmonary tuberculosis.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tuberculosis (TB) has high morbidity and mortality rates, and drug-resistant strains pose an increasing challenge. Traditional methods for detecting the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) are insufficient for rapid clinical diagnosis. This prospective study compared the diagnostic efficacy of targeted next-generation sequencing (tNGS), metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS), and Xpert MTB/RIF using bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) samples from 121 patients with suspected pulmonary TB. Against the reference standard of mycobacterial culture, tNGS demonstrated the highest sensitivity (97.44%), followed by Xpert MTB/RIF (92.31%) and mNGS (84.62%), specificities were 69.51%, 69.51%, and 75.61%, respectively. To address the limitations of culture as an imperfect reference standard and the potential bias from clinical diagnosis, Bayesian Latent Class Analysis (BLCA) was employed. BLCA, which does not assume a perfect gold standard, estimated sensitivities of 98.7%, 99.8%, and 91.0% for tNGS, Xpert MTB/RIF, and mNGS, with corresponding specificities of 89.3%, 93.3%, and 97.8%, respectively. Both tNGS and Xpert MTB/RIF consistently detected rifampicin resistance mutations (rpoB) (p = 0.219, Kappa = 0.730). In conclusion, tNGS offers comparable specificity and sensitivity to Xpert MTB/RIF for TB diagnosis, with the advantage of distinguishing between MTBC, non-tuberculous Mycobacteria (NTM), and other microorganisms. Simultaneously, it provides insights into anti-TB drug resistance. Thus, tNGS is a valuable tool for diagnosing TB in various clinical settings. Clinical trial number, Not applicable.
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.