↓ Skip to main content

Increased isolation of nontuberculous mycobacteria among TB suspects in Northeastern, Tanzania: public health and diagnostic implications for control programmes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
144 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
Increased isolation of nontuberculous mycobacteria among TB suspects in Northeastern, Tanzania: public health and diagnostic implications for control programmes
Published in
BMC Research Notes, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13104-016-1928-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abubakar S. Hoza, Sayoki G. M. Mfinanga, Arne C. Rodloff, Irmgard Moser, Brigitte König

Abstract

Non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) are increasingly reported worldwide associated with human disease. Defining the significance of NTM in settings with endemic tuberculosis (TB) requires the discrimination of NTM from TB in suspect patients. Correct and timely identification of NTM will impact both therapy and epidemiology of TB and TB-like diseases. The present study aimed at determining the frequency and diversity of NTM among TB suspects in northeastern Tanzania. A cross-sectional study was conducted between November 2012 through January 2013. Seven hundred and forty-four sputum samples were collected from 372 TB suspects. Detection was done by using phenotypic, GenoType(®) Mycobacterium CM/AS kits, 16S rRNA and hsp65 gene sequencing for identification of isolates not identified by Hain kits. Binary regression model was used to analyse the predictors of NTM detection. The prevalence of NTM was 9.7 % of the mycobacterial isolates. Out of 36 patients with confirmed NTM infection, 12 were HIV infected with HIV being a significant predictor of NTM detection (P < 0.001). Co-infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tb) was found in five patients. Twenty-eight NTM isolates were identified using GenoType(®) Mycobacterium CM/AS and eight isolates could not be identified. Identified species included M. gordonae and M. interjectum 6 (16.7 %), M. intracelullare 4 (11.1 %), M. avium spp. and M. fortuitum 2 (5.5 %), M. kansasii, M. lentiflavum, M. simiae, M. celatum, M. marinum 1 (2.8 %) each. Of isolates not identified to subspecies level, we identified M. kumamotonense (2), M. intracellulare/kansasii, M. intermedium/triplex, M. acapulcensis/flavescens, M. stomatepiae, M. colombiense and M. terrae complex (1) each using 16S rRNA sequencing. Additionally, hsp65 gene sequencing identified M. kumamotonense, M. scrofulaceum/M. avium, M. avium, M. flavescens/novocastrense, M. kumamotonense/hiberniae, M. lentiflavum, M. colombiense/M. avium and M. kumamotonense/terrae/hiberniae (1) each. Results of the 16S rRNA and hsp65 gene sequencing were concordant in three and discordant in five isolates not identified by GenoType(®) Mycobacterium CM/AS. NTM infections may play a vital role in causing lung disease and impact management of TB in endemic settings. GenoType(®) Mycobacterium CM/AS represents a useful tool to identify clinical NTM infections. However, 16S rRNA gene sequencing should be thought for confirmatory diagnosis of the clinical isolates. Due to the complexity and inconsistence of NTM identification, we recommend diagnosis of NTM infections be centralized by strengthening and setting up quality national and regional infrastructure.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 144 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 20%
Researcher 20 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 11%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Student > Postgraduate 12 8%
Other 31 22%
Unknown 21 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 28%
Immunology and Microbiology 17 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 10%
Unspecified 10 7%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 29 20%

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 19 February 2016.
All research outputs
#6,221,124
of 7,214,390 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,539
of 1,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,082
of 283,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#95
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,214,390 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,864 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 283,779 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.