Improving measurement of tuberculosis care cascades to enhance people-centred care.

Care cascades represent the proportion of people reaching milestones in care for a disease and are widely used to track progress towards global targets for HIV and other diseases. Despite recent progress in estimating care cascades for tuberculosis (TB) disease, they have not been routinely applied at national and subnational levels, representing a lost opportunity for public health impact. As researchers who have estimated TB care cascades in high-incidence countries (India, Madagascar, Nigeria, Peru, South Africa, and Zambia), we describe the utility of care cascades and identify measurement challenges, including the lack of population-based disease burden data and electronic data capture, the under-reporting of people with TB navigating fragmented and privatised health systems, the heterogeneity of TB tests, and the lack of post-treatment follow-up. We outline an agenda for rectifying these gaps and argue that improving care cascade measurement is crucial to enhancing people-centred care and achieving the End TB goals.

Challenges in the management of depressive disorders comorbid with tuberculosis and type 2 diabetes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this study was to address the most relevant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges in the management of depressive disorders among patients with diabetes mellitus and tuberculosis (TB). RECENT FINDINGS: Depressive disorder, diabetes mellitus and TB are considered important contributors to the global burden of diseases with an emphasis on developing countries. Depressive disorder increases the chance of negative outcomes during the treatment of both diabetes mellitus and TB, while biological and adaptive changes due to diabetes mellitus and TB increase in turn the chance of depressive disorder. SUMMARY: In this review, we present major challenges in the management of depressive disorder among patients with TB and diabetes mellitus, from detection and clinical diagnosis using appropriate diagnostic tools, to selecting the best psychotherapeutic and/or pharmacological intervention, considering the potential, adverse events and interactions due to potential polypharmacy.

Diagnostic performance of four lateral flow immunoassays for COVID-19 antibodies in Peruvian population.

Serological assays have been used in seroprevalence studies to inform the dynamics of COVID-19. Lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) tests are a very practical technology to use for this objective; however, one of their challenges may be variable diagnostic performance. Given the numerous available LFIA tests, evaluation of their accuracy is critical before real-world implementation. We performed a retrospective diagnostic evaluation study to independently determine the diagnostic accuracy of 4 different antibody-detection LFIA tests: Now Check (Bionote), CareStart (Access bio), Covid-19 BSS (Biosynex) and OnSite (CTK Biotech). The sample panel was comprised of specimens collected and stored in biobanks; specifically, specimens that were RT-PCR positive for SARS-CoV-2 collected at various times throughout the COVID-19 disease course and those that were collected before the pandemic, during 2018 or earlier, from individuals with upper respiratory symptoms but were negative for tuberculosis. Clinical performance (sensitivity and specificity) was analyzed overall, and subset across individual antibody isotypes, and days from symptoms onset. A very high specificity (98% - 100%) was found for all four tests. Overall sensitivity was variable, ranging from 29% [95% CI: 21%-39%] to 64% [95% CI: 54%-73%]. When considering detection of IgM only, the highest sensitivity was 42% [95% CI: 32%-52%], compared to 57% [95% CI: 47%-66%] for IgG only. When the analysis was restricted to at least 15 days since symptom onset, across any isotype, the sensitivity reached 90% for all four brands. All four LFIA tests proved effective for identifying COVID-19 antibodies when two conditions were met: 1) at least 15 days have elapsed since symptom onset and 2) a sample is considered positive when either IgM or IgG is present. With these considerations, the use of this assays could help in seroprevalence studies or further exploration of its potential uses.