↓ Skip to main content

Performance evaluation of three commercial molecular assays for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from clinical specimens in a high TB-HIV-burden setting

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Performance evaluation of three commercial molecular assays for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from clinical specimens in a high TB-HIV-burden setting
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12879-015-1229-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. M. Z. Matabane, F. Ismail, K. A. Strydom, O. Onwuegbuna, S. V. Omar, N. Ismail

Abstract

A major challenge faced by countries with a high burden of tuberculosis (TB) is early detection especially in individuals with paucibacillary disease which is common in HIV endemic settings. Remarkable efforts have been made globally to accelerate the development and expansion of new diagnostic technologies that allow better and earlier diagnosis of active tuberculosis particularly directly from clinical specimens with a few commercial options available. These include GenoType MTBDRplus Version 2.0 (Hain Lifescience), Xpert® MTB/RIF (Cepheid) and Anyplex™ plus MTB/NTM/DR-TB Real-time detection (Seegene). We evaluated the diagnostic performance of these three commercial molecular assays for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex from clinical specimens in a high TB-HIV-burden setting. This was a retrospective laboratory-based study using stored remnant sediments from clinical specimens of presumptive pulmonary TB cases. A stratified sample of smear positive TB, smear negative TB and TB culture negatives was included. All the samples were tested on the three molecular assays following the manufacturers' instructions; except for Anyplex™plus, for which DNA extraction was performed using the NucliSENS® easyMAG® platform (bioMerieux). Samples were also processed for liquid TB culture and time-to-culture positivity was recorded. Of the 90 sediments processed, 81 were analyzable across all three systems. The overall sensitivity was highest for Xpert® MTB/RIF (89.1 %) followed by GenoType MTBDRplus (70.9 %) and Anyplex™ plus (65.5 %). The specificity and sensitivity in smear positive cases was comparable across all systems. There was a significant difference in sensitivity between Xpert® MTB/RIF and the other two assays for smear-negative cases (P < 0.05). The performance in cases where the time-to-culture positivity was ≥20 days was also significantly poorer for both Anyplex™ plus and GenoType MTBDRplus compared to Xpert® MTB/RIF (P < 0.05). Xpert® MTB/RIF achieved 100 % specificity, while Anyplex™ plus and GenoType MTBDRplus achieved 96.2 and 92.3 % respectively. The Xpert® MTB/RIF was superior to the other two assays for the detection of TB in smear negative specimens notably when bacterial loads are very low in sputum. It is important that studies reporting on test performance stratify their results by time-to-culture positivity to accurately assess clinical performance especially in high HIV settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 17%
Student > Master 11 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Other 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 16 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 34%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 23 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 November 2015.
All research outputs
#18,430,119
of 22,832,057 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#5,604
of 7,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,659
of 284,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#125
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,832,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,678 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,824 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.