Cost analysis of rapid diagnostics for drug-resistant tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: Growth-based drug susceptibility testing (DST) is the reference standard for diagnosing drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB), but standard time to result (TTR) is typically ≥ 3 weeks. Rapid tests can reduce that TTR to days or hours, but accuracy may be lowered. In addition to the TTR and test accuracy, the cost of a diagnostic test may affect whether it is adopted in clinical settings. We examine the cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostics for extremely drug-resistant TB (XDR-TB) in three different high-prevalence settings. METHODS: 1128 patients with confirmed TB were enrolled at clinics in Mumbai, India; Chisinau, Moldova; and Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Patient sputum samples underwent DST for first and second line TB drugs using 2 growth-based (MGIT, MODS) and 2 molecular (Pyrosequencing [PSQ], line-probe assays [LPA]) assays. TTR was the primary measure of effectiveness. Sensitivity and specificity were also evaluated. The cost to perform each test at each site was recorded and included test-specific materials, personnel, and equipment costs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated in terms of $/day saved. Sensitivity analyses examine the impact of batch size, equipment, and personnel costs. RESULTS: Our prior results indicated that the LPA and PSQ returned results in a little over 1 day. Mean cost per sample without equipment or overhead was $23, $28, $33, and $41 for the MODS, MGIT, PSQ, and LPA, respectively. For diagnosing XDR-TB, MODS was the most accurate, followed by PSQ, and LPA. MODS was quicker and less costly than MGIT. PSQ and LPA were considerably faster but cost more than MODS. Batch size and personnel costs were the main drivers of cost variation. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors must be weighed when selecting a test for diagnosis of XDR-TB. Rapid tests can greatly improve the time required to diagnose drug-resistant TB, potentially improving treatment success, and preventing the spread of XDR-TB. Faster time to result must be weighed against the potential for reduced accuracy, and increased costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02170441 .

Shedding light on the performance of a pyrosequencing assay for drug-resistant tuberculosis diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Rapid molecular diagnostics, with their ability to quickly identify genetic mutations associated with drug resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis clinical specimens, have great potential as tools to control multi- and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (M/XDR-TB). The Qiagen PyroMark Q96 ID system is a commercially available pyrosequencing (PSQ) platform that has been validated for rapid M/XDR-TB diagnosis. However, the details of the assay's diagnostic and technical performance have yet to be thoroughly investigated in diverse clinical environments. METHODS: This study evaluates the diagnostic performance of the PSQ assay for 1128 clinical specimens from patients from three areas of high TB burden. We report on the diagnostic performance of the PSQ assay between the three sites and identify variables associated with poor PSQ technical performance. RESULTS: In India, the sensitivity of the PSQ assay ranged from 89 to 98 % for the detection of phenotypic resistance to isoniazid, rifampicin, fluoroquinolones, and the injectables. In Moldova, assay sensitivity ranged from 7 to 94 %, and in South Africa, assay sensitivity ranged from 71 to 92 %. Specificity was high (94-100 %) across all sites. The addition of eis promoter sequencing information greatly improved the sensitivity of kanamycin resistance detection in Moldova (7 % to 79 %). Nearly all (89.4 %) sequencing reactions conducted on smear-positive, culture-positive specimens and most (70.8 %) reactions conducted on smear-negative, culture-positive specimens yielded valid PSQ reads. An investigation into the variables influencing sequencing failures indicated smear negativity, culture negativity, site (Moldova), and sequencing of the rpoB, gyrA, and rrs genes were highly associated with poor PSQ technical performance (adj. OR > 2.0). CONCLUSIONS: This study has important implications for the global implementation of PSQ as a molecular TB diagnostic, as it demonstrates how regional factors may impact PSQ diagnostic performance, while underscoring potential gene targets for optimization to improve overall PSQ assay technical performance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ( #NCT02170441 ). Registered 12 June 2014.

Performance Comparison of Three Rapid Tests for the Diagnosis of Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of several recently developed assays for the detection of multi- and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (M/XDR-TB) in a large, multinational field trial. METHODS: Samples from 1,128 M/XDR-TB suspects were examined by Line Probe Assay (LPA), Pyrosequencing (PSQ), and Microscopic Observation of Drug Susceptibility (MODS) and compared to the BACTEC MGIT960 reference standard to detect M/XDR-TB directly from patient sputum samples collected at TB clinics in India, Moldova, and South Africa. RESULTS: Specificity for all three assays was excellent: 97-100% for isoniazid (INH), rifampin (RIF), moxifloxacin (MOX) and ofloxacin (OFX) and 99-100% for amikacin (AMK), capreomycin (CAP) and kanamycin (KAN) resistance. Sensitivities were lower, but still very good: 94-100% for INH, RIF, MOX and OFX, and 84-90% for AMK and CAP, but only 48-62% for KAN. In terms of agreement, statistically significant differences were only found for detection of RIF (MODS outperformed PSQ) and KAN (MODS outperformed LPA and PSQ) resistance. Mean time-to-result was 1.1 days for LPA and PSQ, 14.3 days for MODS, and 24.7 days for MGIT. CONCLUSIONS: All three rapid assays evaluated provide clinicians with timely detection of resistance to the drugs tested; with molecular results available one day following laboratory receipt of samples. In particular, the very high specificity seen for detection of drug resistance means that clinicians can use the results of these rapid tests to avoid the use of toxic drugs to which the infecting organism is resistant and develop treatment regiments that have a higher likelihood of yielding a successful outcome.