The Second Zambian National Tuberculosis Drug Resistance survey - a comparison of conventional and molecular methods.

OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of MDR-TB in Zambia was estimated to be 1.8% in 2001. A second drug resistance survey was conducted in 2008 to determine trends; the use of the Genotype MTBDRplus assay was applied to compare results to the gold standard. METHOD: A two-stage cluster sampling, with health facilities as primary sampling units. Processed sputum specimens were inoculated on solid media for culture; heat-inactivated bacterial suspensions from sputum samples were tested on a commercial line probe assay for the identification of rifampicin and isoniazid resistance. RESULTS: A total of 917 patients with TB were enrolled and 883 (96.3%) analysed. A total of 574 (65%) had LJ results and 824 (93.3%) had results from MTBDRplus assay. The median age was 32, and 63.3% were males. MDR-TB according to LJ-based DST was 1.1% (CI 0.1-2.4) whereas according to MDTBDRplus assay was 1.6% (CI 0.6-2.6). Isoniazid monoresistance in new cases was 2.4% (CI 0.613-4.26) based on LJ results and 5.0% (CI 3.2-6.7) based on the MTBDRplus; in retreatment cases, it was 4.4% (CI 0.3-8.6) and 2.40% (CI <0.1-5.1) on LJ and MTBDRplus, respectively. Rifampicin monoresistance in new cases was 0.1% (CI <0.1-0.4) based on LJ and 0.6% (CI 0.01-1.1) based on the MTBDRplus; in retreatment cases, it was 0% (CI 0-3.8) and 1.8% (CI <0.1-4.0) on LJ and MTBDRplus, respectively. There were no XDR-TB cases found and no association between MDR-TB and HIV. CONCLUSION: There was no increase in MDR-TB prevalence in Zambia from 2001 to 2008; results from the two methods were similar. Molecular methods were quicker and simpler to use.

Sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility of the Capilia TB-Neo assay.

The performance of the Capilia TB-Neo assay, a new-generation assay, was assessed by determining its sensitivity, specificity, reproducibility, and cross-reaction with contaminating organisms. The sensitivity and specificity were 99.2 and 96.4% and 89.3 and 100% in pure and mixed-culture isolates, respectively. The kappa statistic was 95.0 and 77.9% in pure and mixed culture isolates, respectively. There was no cross-reaction with contaminating organisms.

Sensitivity and specificity of CRP and symptom screening as tuberculosis screening tools among HIV-positive and negative outpatients at a primary healthcare facility in Lusaka, Zambia: a prospective cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of point-of-care C-reactive protein (CRP) as a screening tool for tuberculosis (TB) using a threshold of 10 mg/L in both people living with HIV (PLHIV) and HIV-negative individuals and compare it to symptom screening using a composite reference for bacteriological confirmation of TB. METHODS: Prospective cross-sectional study. SETTING: A primary healthcare facility in Lusaka, Zambia. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive adults (≥18 years) presenting for routine outpatient healthcare were enrolled. Of the 816 individuals approached to participate in the study, 804 eligible consenting adults were enrolled into the study, of which 783 were included in the analysis. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value (NPV) of CRP and symptom screening. RESULTS: Overall, sensitivity of WHO-recommended four-symptom screen (W4SS) and CRP were 87.2% (80.0-92.5) and 86.6% (79.6-91.8) while specificity was 30.3% (26.7-34.1) and 34.8% (31.2-38.6), respectively. Among PLHIV, sensitivity of W4SS and CRP was 92.2% (81.1-97.8) and 94.8% (85.6-98.9) while specificity was 37.0% (31.3-43.0) and 27.5% (22.4-33.1), respectively. Among those with CD4≥350, the NPV for CRP was 100% (92.9-100). In the HIV negative, sensitivity of W4SS and CRP was 83.8% (73.4-91.3) and 80.3% (69.5-88.5) while specificity was 25.4% (20.9-30.2) and 40.5% (35.3-45.6), respectively. Parallel use of CRP and W4SS yielded a sensitivity and NPV of 100% (93.8-100) and 100% (91.6-100) among PLHIV and 93.3% (85.1-97.8) and 90.0% (78.2-96.7) among the HIV negatives, respectively. CONCLUSION: Sensitivity and specificity of CRP were similar to symptom screening in HIV-positive outpatients. Independent use of CRP offered limited additional benefit in the HIV negative. CRP can independently accurately rule out TB in PLHIV with CD4≥350. Parallel use of CRP and W4SS improves sensitivity irrespective of HIV status and can accurately rule out TB in PLHIV, irrespective of CD4 count.

Diagnosis of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis: Discordant results by diagnostic methods.

The performance of the Xpert© MTB/RIF and MTBDRplus assays for the detection of rifampicin resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis was compared to culture-based drug susceptibility testing in 30 specimens with rifampicin-resistant and rifampicin-indeterminate Xpert MTB/RIF results collected between March 2012 and March 2014. Xpert MTB/RIF and MTBDRplus were 100% sensitive and 100% concordant for rifampicin resistance detection, but 3 of 13 samples (23%) positive for rifampicin resistance on Xpert MTB/RIF and MTBDRplus were negative for rifampicin resistance on mycobacteria growth indicator tube drug susceptibility testing. Specificity was 72% for Xpert MTB/RIF and 80% for MTBDRplus. Positive predictive value for Xpert MTB/RIF for multidrug resistant tuberculosis was 47.8% for new patients and 77.8% for previously treated patients; negative predictive value was 100% for both new and previously treated patients. The discordant rifampicin resistance test results indicate a need to fully characterise circulating rifampicin resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains in Zambia and to inform the development of guidelines for decision-making in relation to diagnosis of drug-resistant tuberculosis.