Automation of an interferon-γ release assay and comparison to the tuberculin skin test for screening basic military trainees for Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection.

We automated portions of the QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube test (QFT-GIT) and assessed its quality when performed concurrently with the tuberculin skin test (TST) among U.S. Air Force basic military trainees (BMTs). The volume of blood collected for QFT-GIT was monitored. At least one of the three tubes required for QFT-GIT had blood volume outside the recommended 0.8- to 1.2-mL range for 688 (29.0%) of 2,373 subjects who had their blood collected. Of the 2,124 subjects who had TST and QFT-GIT completed, TST was positive for 0.6%; QFT-GIT was positive for 0.3% and indeterminate for 2.0%. Among 2,081 subjects with completed TST and determinate QFT-GIT results, overall agreement was 99.5% but positive agreement was 5.6%. Specificity among the 1,546 low-risk BMTs was identical (99.7%). Indeterminate QFT-GIT results were 2.7 times more likely when mitogen tubes contained >1.2 mL blood than when containing 0.8- to 1.2-mL blood. Automation can facilitate QFT-GIT completion, especially if the recommended volume of blood is collected. Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection prevalence among BMTs based on TST and QFT-GIT is similar and low. Selectively testing those with significant risk may be more appropriate than universal testing of all recruits.

Variability of the QuantiFERON®-TB gold in-tube test using automated and manual methods.

BACKGROUND: The QuantiFERON®-TB Gold In-Tube test (QFT-GIT) detects Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) infection by measuring release of interferon gamma (IFN-γ) when T-cells (in heparinized whole blood) are stimulated with specific Mtb antigens. The amount of IFN-γ is determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Automation of the ELISA method may reduce variability. To assess the impact of ELISA automation, we compared QFT-GIT results and variability when ELISAs were performed manually and with automation. METHODS: Blood was collected into two sets of QFT-GIT tubes and processed at the same time. For each set, IFN-γ was measured in automated and manual ELISAs. Variability in interpretations and IFN-γ measurements was assessed between automated (A1 vs. A2) and manual (M1 vs. M2) ELISAs. Variability in IFN-γ measurements was also assessed on separate groups stratified by the mean of the four ELISAs. RESULTS: Subjects (N = 146) had two automated and two manual ELISAs completed. Overall, interpretations were discordant for 16 (11%) subjects. Excluding one subject with indeterminate results, 7 (4.8%) subjects had discordant automated interpretations and 10 (6.9%) subjects had discordant manual interpretations (p = 0.17). Quantitative variability was not uniform; within-subject variability was greater with higher IFN-γ measurements and with manual ELISAs. For subjects with mean TB Responses ±0.25 IU/mL of the 0.35 IU/mL cutoff, the within-subject standard deviation for two manual tests was 0.27 (CI95 = 0.22-0.37) IU/mL vs. 0.09 (CI95 = 0.07-0.12) IU/mL for two automated tests. CONCLUSION: QFT-GIT ELISA automation may reduce variability near the test cutoff. Methodological differences should be considered when interpreting and using IFN-γ release assays (IGRAs).

Tuberculosis among nonimmigrant visitors to US Military installations.

BACKGROUND: Nonimmigrant visitors are not required to be evaluated for tuberculosis (TB) before entering the country. Little literature exists describing the challenges of TB control among this demographic. This report reviews the challenges in managing TB in this population on U.S. military installations. METHODS: Six cases were identified from reportable medical event reports. Information was obtained from public health personnel via phone interviews. Verified cases from 2004 to 2011 were included. RESULTS: Challenges were congruent among locations including: lack of procedures to screen for infection and disease among individuals at time of entry allowing one case to be admitted with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome and another concurrently on treatment for active TB; delays in the diagnosis of active TB as median time from entry to diagnosis was 62 days; and the need to conduct an effective contact investigation as the mean contact index was 77 including 1 secondary case of active TB. CONCLUSIONS: These cases emphasize the need for screening for TB in visitors from high-risk countries at time of entry, prompt diagnosis and treatment if found, procedures for evaluation of contacts, and interjurisdictional cooperation in large contact investigations. These challenges are common to nonimmigrants in both military and civilian settings.

Within-subject interlaboratory variability of QuantiFERON-TB gold in-tube tests.

BACKGROUND: The QuantiFERON®-TB Gold In-Tube test (QFT-GIT) is a viable alternative to the tuberculin skin test (TST) for detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. However, within-subject variability may limit test utility. To assess variability, we compared results from the same subjects when QFT-GIT enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) were performed in different laboratories. METHODS: Subjects were recruited at two sites and blood was tested in three labs. Two labs used the same type of automated ELISA workstation, 8-point calibration curves, and electronic data transfer. The third lab used a different automated ELISA workstation, 4-point calibration curves, and manual data entry. Variability was assessed by interpretation agreement and comparison of interferon-γ (IFN-γ) measurements. Data for subjects with discordant interpretations or discrepancies in TB Response >0.05 IU/mL were verified or corrected, and variability was reassessed using a reconciled dataset. RESULTS: Ninety-seven subjects had results from three labs. Eleven (11.3%) had discordant interpretations and 72 (74.2%) had discrepancies >0.05 IU/mL using unreconciled results. After correction of manual data entry errors for 9 subjects, and exclusion of 6 subjects due to methodological errors, 7 (7.7%) subjects were discordant. Of these, 6 (85.7%) had all TB Responses within 0.25 IU/mL of the manufacturer's recommended cutoff. Non-uniform error of measurement was observed, with greater variation in higher IFN-γ measurements. Within-subject standard deviation for TB Response was as high as 0.16 IU/mL, and limits of agreement ranged from -0.46 to 0.43 IU/mL for subjects with mean TB Response within 0.25 IU/mL of the cutoff. CONCLUSION: Greater interlaboratory variability was associated with manual data entry and higher IFN-γ measurements. Manual data entry should be avoided. Because variability in measuring TB Response may affect interpretation, especially near the cutoff, consideration should be given to developing a range of values near the cutoff to be interpreted as "borderline," rather than negative or positive.