Tuberculosis screening among ambulatory people living with HIV: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

Dhana, Ashar and Hamada, Yohhei and Kengne, Andre P. and Kerkhoff, Andrew D. and Rangaka, Molebogeng X. and Kredo, Tamara and Baddeley, Annabel and Miller, Cecily and Singh, Satvinder and Hanifa, Yasmeen and Grant, Alison D. and Fielding, Katherine and Affolabi, Dissou and Merle, Corinne S. and Wachinou, Ablo Prudence and Yoon, Christina and Cattamanchi, Adithya and Hoffmann, Christopher J. and Martinson, Neil and Mbu, Eyongetah Tabenyang and Sander, Melissa S. and Balcha, Taye T. and Skogmar, Sten and Reeve, Byron W. P. and Theron, Grant and Ndlangalavu, Gcobisa and Modi, Surbhi and Cavanaugh, Joseph and Swindells, Susan and Chaisson, Richard E. and Khan, Faiz Ahmad and Howard, Andrea A. and Wood, Robin and Thit, Swe Swe and Kyi, Mar Mar and Hanson, Josh and Drain, Paul K. and Shapiro, Adrienne E. and Kufa, Tendesayi and Churchyard, Gavin and Nguyen, Duc T. and Graviss, Edward A. and Bjerrum, Stephanie and Johansen, Isik S. and Gersh, Jill K. and Horne, David J. and LaCourse, Sylvia M. and Al-Darraji, Haider Abdulrazzaq Abed and Kamarulzaman, Adeeba and Kempker, Russell R. and Tukvadze, Nestani and Barr, David A. and Meintjes, Graeme and Maartens, Gary (2022) Tuberculosis screening among ambulatory people living with HIV: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 22 (4). pp. 507-518. ISSN 1473-3099, DOI

Full text not available from this repository.


Background The WHO-recommended tuberculosis screening and diagnostic algorithm in ambulatory people living with HIV is a four-symptom screen (known as the WHO-recommended four symptom screen W4SS]) followed by a WHO-recommended molecular rapid diagnostic test (eg Xpert MTB/RIF hereafter referred to as Xpert]) if W4SS is positive. To inform updated WHO guidelines, we aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of alternative screening tests and strategies for tuberculosis in this population. Methods In this systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, we updated a search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, the Cochrane Library, and conference abstracts for publications from Jan 1, 2011, to March 12, 2018, done in a previous systematic review to include the period up to Aug 2, 2019. We screened the reference lists of identified pieces and contacted experts in the field. We included prospective cross-sectional, observational studies and randomised trials among adult and adolescent (age =10 years) ambulatory people living with HIV, irrespective of signs and symptoms of tuberculosis. We extracted study-level data using a standardised data extraction form, and we requested individual participant data from study authors. We aimed to compare the W4SS with alternative screening tests and strategies and the WHO-recommended algorithm (ie, W4SS followed by Xpert) with Xpert for all in terms of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity), overall and in key subgroups (eg, by antiretroviral therapy ART] status). The reference standard was culture. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020155895. Findings We identified 25 studies, and obtained data from 22 studies (including 15 666 participants; 4347 27.7%] of 15 663 participants with data were on ART). W4SS sensitivity was 82% (95% CI 72-89) and specificity was 42% (29-57). C-reactive protein (>= 10 mg/L) had similar sensitivity to (77% 61-88]), but higher specificity (74% 61-83]; n=3571) than, W4SS. Cough (lasting >= 2 weeks), haemoglobin (<10 g/dL), body-mass index (<18.5 kg/m(2)), and lymphadenopathy had high specificities (80-90%) but low sensitivities (29-43%). The WHO-recommended algorithm had a sensitivity of 58% (50-66) and a specificity of 99% (98-100); Xpert for all had a sensitivity of 68% (57-76) and a specificity of 99% (98-99). In the one study that assessed both, the sensitivity of sputum Xpert Ultra was higher than sputum Xpert (73% 62-81] vs 57% 47-67]) and specificities were similar (98% 96-98] vs 99% 98-100]). Among outpatients on ART (4309 99.1%] of 4347 people on ART), W4SS sensitivity was 53% (35-71) and specificity was 71% (51-85). In this population, a parallel strategy (two tests done at the same time) of W4SS with any chest x-ray abnormality had higher sensitivity (89% 70-97]) and lower specificity (33% 17-54]; n=2670) than W4SS alone; at a tuberculosis prevalence of 5%, this strategy would require 379 more rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but detect 18 more tuberculosis cases. Among outpatients not on ART (11 160 71.8%] of 15 541 outpatients), W4SS sensitivity was 85% (76-91) and specificity was 37% (25-51). C-reactive protein (>= 10 mg/L) alone had a similar sensitivity to (83% 79-86]), but higher specificity (67% 60-73]; n=3187) than, W4SS and a sequential strategy (both test positive) of W4SS then C-reactive protein (>= 5 mg/L) had a similar sensitivity to (84% 75-90]), but higher specificity than (64% 57-71]; n=3187), W4SS alone; at 10% tuberculosis prevalence, these strategies would require 272 and 244 fewer rapid diagnostic tests per 1000 people living with HIV than W4SS but miss two and one more tuberculosis cases, respectively. Interpretation C-reactive protein reduces the need for further rapid diagnostic tests without compromising sensitivity and has been included in the updated WHO tuberculosis screening guidelines. However, C-reactive protein data were scarce for outpatients on ART, necessitating future research regarding the utility of C-reactive protein in this group. Chest x-ray can be useful in outpatients on ART when combined with W4SS. The WHO-recommended algorithm has suboptimal sensitivity; Xpert for all offers slight sensitivity gains and would have major resource implications. Copyright (C) 2021 World Health Organization; licensee Elsevier.

Item Type: Article
Funders: World Health Organization, United States Department of Health & Human Services National Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA NIH Fogarty International Center (FIC) [Grant No:D43 TW010559], National Research Foundation - South Africa, South African Medical Research Council UK Research & Innovation (UKRI) Medical Research Council UK (MRC) South Africa Medical Research Council (SAMRC) [Grant No:MRC-RFA-IFSP-01-2013], European Union (EU) [Grant No:SF1401], Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, South Africa Medical Research Council (SAMRC), South African National Treasury, Wellcome Trust [Grant No:203135/Z/16/Z], Wellcome Trust [Grant No:214321/Z/18/Z], South African Research Chairs Initiative of the Department of Science and Technology, NRF of South Africa [Grant No:64787]
Uncontrolled Keywords: Adolescent; Adult; Antibiotics, Antitubercular; Child; Cross-sectional studies; HIV infections; Humans; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Prospective studies; Rifampin; Sensitivity and specificity; Tuberculosis; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary
Subjects: Q Science > Q Science (General)
Divisions: Centre of Excellence for Research in AIDS (CERiA)
Depositing User: Ms. Juhaida Abd Rahim
Date Deposited: 16 Oct 2023 01:02
Last Modified: 16 Oct 2023 01:02

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item