The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Use in routine clinical practice of two commercial blood tests for diagnosis of infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a prospective study

Use in routine clinical practice of two commercial blood tests for diagnosis of infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a prospective study
Use in routine clinical practice of two commercial blood tests for diagnosis of infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a prospective study
Background

Two commercial blood assays for the diagnosis of latent tuberculosis infection—T-SPOT.TB and QuantiFERON-TB Gold—have been separately compared with the tuberculin skin test. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of all three tests in the same population sample.

Methods

We did a prospective study in 393 consecutively enrolled patients who were tested simultaneously with T-SPOT.TB and QuantiFERON-TB Gold because of suspected latent or active tuberculosis. 318 patients also had results available for a tuberculin skin test.

Findings

Overall agreement with the skin test was similar (T-SPOT.TB ?=0·508, QuantiFERON-TB Gold ?=0·460), but fewer BCG-vaccinated individuals were identified as positive by the two blood assays than by the tuberculin skin test (p=0·003 for T-SPOT.TB and p<0.0001 for QuantiFERON-TB Gold). Indeterminate results were significantly more frequent with QuantiFERON-TB Gold (11%, 43 of 383) than with T-SPOT.TB (3%, 12 of 383; p<0·0001) and were associated with immunosuppressive treatments for both tests. Age younger than 5 years was significantly associated with indeterminate results with QuantiFERON-TB Gold (p=0.003), but not with T-SPOT.TB. Overall, T-SPOT.TB produced significantly more positive results (38%, n=144, vs 26%, n=100, with QuantiFERON-TB Gold; p<0·0001), and close contacts of patients with active tuberculosis were more likely to be positive with T-SPOT.TB than with QuantiFERON-TB Gold (p=0·0010).

Interpretation

T-SPOT.TB and QuantiFERON-TB Gold have higher specificity than the tuberculin skin test. Rates of indeterminate and positive results, however, differ between the blood tests, suggesting that they might provide different results in routine clinical practice.
0140-6736
1328-34
Ferrara, Giovanni
6c18a55d-3d70-42c9-b342-c5628de2780b
Losi, Monica
6f2acb9f-04c8-45fc-9921-7b0a0f439129
D'Amico, Roberto
6bf14206-022d-4e7e-b3e5-080912dc6e42
Roversi, Pietro
bb4e8839-5d4e-436a-bec6-7a3f7cd47f8b
Piro, Roberto
c7a592f1-1219-4bc3-99c8-a51f5862997e
Meacci, Marisa
d3d2a4d9-b796-4f11-9633-cfd398e2ab17
Meccugni, Barbara
14347389-ddc4-4cd4-aeef-aeaea1b1cbc1
Dori, Ilaria Marchetti
8ca09e51-fe2c-41b2-8b79-74ad242ce918
Andreani, Alessandro
f93dc340-4285-4e4e-8550-9d73ebb67b21
Bergamini, Barbara Maria
534ef375-cc9c-4ec7-bcb2-a4db967a1620
Mussini, Cristina
1e3257ac-79eb-4d54-b72d-2a9de9ccf0cb
Rumpianesi, Fabio
a62c228d-61d7-4be3-85ba-abd445e595f9
Fabbri, Leonardo M.
0f4844a3-b97f-4c2d-9414-bd8d5bd383b7
Richeldi, Luca
47177d9c-731a-49a1-9cc6-4ac8f6bbbf26
Ferrara, Giovanni
6c18a55d-3d70-42c9-b342-c5628de2780b
Losi, Monica
6f2acb9f-04c8-45fc-9921-7b0a0f439129
D'Amico, Roberto
6bf14206-022d-4e7e-b3e5-080912dc6e42
Roversi, Pietro
bb4e8839-5d4e-436a-bec6-7a3f7cd47f8b
Piro, Roberto
c7a592f1-1219-4bc3-99c8-a51f5862997e
Meacci, Marisa
d3d2a4d9-b796-4f11-9633-cfd398e2ab17
Meccugni, Barbara
14347389-ddc4-4cd4-aeef-aeaea1b1cbc1
Dori, Ilaria Marchetti
8ca09e51-fe2c-41b2-8b79-74ad242ce918
Andreani, Alessandro
f93dc340-4285-4e4e-8550-9d73ebb67b21
Bergamini, Barbara Maria
534ef375-cc9c-4ec7-bcb2-a4db967a1620
Mussini, Cristina
1e3257ac-79eb-4d54-b72d-2a9de9ccf0cb
Rumpianesi, Fabio
a62c228d-61d7-4be3-85ba-abd445e595f9
Fabbri, Leonardo M.
0f4844a3-b97f-4c2d-9414-bd8d5bd383b7
Richeldi, Luca
47177d9c-731a-49a1-9cc6-4ac8f6bbbf26

Ferrara, Giovanni, Losi, Monica, D'Amico, Roberto, Roversi, Pietro, Piro, Roberto, Meacci, Marisa, Meccugni, Barbara, Dori, Ilaria Marchetti, Andreani, Alessandro, Bergamini, Barbara Maria, Mussini, Cristina, Rumpianesi, Fabio, Fabbri, Leonardo M. and Richeldi, Luca (2006) Use in routine clinical practice of two commercial blood tests for diagnosis of infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a prospective study. The Lancet, 367 (9519), 1328-34. (doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68579-6). (PMID:16631911)

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background

Two commercial blood assays for the diagnosis of latent tuberculosis infection—T-SPOT.TB and QuantiFERON-TB Gold—have been separately compared with the tuberculin skin test. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of all three tests in the same population sample.

Methods

We did a prospective study in 393 consecutively enrolled patients who were tested simultaneously with T-SPOT.TB and QuantiFERON-TB Gold because of suspected latent or active tuberculosis. 318 patients also had results available for a tuberculin skin test.

Findings

Overall agreement with the skin test was similar (T-SPOT.TB ?=0·508, QuantiFERON-TB Gold ?=0·460), but fewer BCG-vaccinated individuals were identified as positive by the two blood assays than by the tuberculin skin test (p=0·003 for T-SPOT.TB and p<0.0001 for QuantiFERON-TB Gold). Indeterminate results were significantly more frequent with QuantiFERON-TB Gold (11%, 43 of 383) than with T-SPOT.TB (3%, 12 of 383; p<0·0001) and were associated with immunosuppressive treatments for both tests. Age younger than 5 years was significantly associated with indeterminate results with QuantiFERON-TB Gold (p=0.003), but not with T-SPOT.TB. Overall, T-SPOT.TB produced significantly more positive results (38%, n=144, vs 26%, n=100, with QuantiFERON-TB Gold; p<0·0001), and close contacts of patients with active tuberculosis were more likely to be positive with T-SPOT.TB than with QuantiFERON-TB Gold (p=0·0010).

Interpretation

T-SPOT.TB and QuantiFERON-TB Gold have higher specificity than the tuberculin skin test. Rates of indeterminate and positive results, however, differ between the blood tests, suggesting that they might provide different results in routine clinical practice.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 22 April 2006
Organisations: Clinical & Experimental Sciences

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 368963
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/368963
ISSN: 0140-6736
PURE UUID: f23e2fd2-5254-49f2-8352-9451c0f73bf0

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 10 Oct 2014 13:07
Last modified: 15 Aug 2024 17:09

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Giovanni Ferrara
Author: Monica Losi
Author: Roberto D'Amico
Author: Pietro Roversi
Author: Roberto Piro
Author: Marisa Meacci
Author: Barbara Meccugni
Author: Ilaria Marchetti Dori
Author: Alessandro Andreani
Author: Barbara Maria Bergamini
Author: Cristina Mussini
Author: Fabio Rumpianesi
Author: Leonardo M. Fabbri
Author: Luca Richeldi

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×