Summary Background WHO estimates that a third of the world's population has latent tuberculosis infection and that less than 5% of those infected are diagnosed and treated to prevent tuberculosis. We ...aimed to systematically review studies that report the steps from initial tuberculosis screening through to treatment for latent tuberculosis infection, which we call the latent tuberculosis cascade of care. We specifically aimed to assess the number of people lost at each stage of the cascade. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of study-level observational data. We searched MEDLINE (via OVID), Embase, and Health Star for observational studies, published between 1946 and April 12, 2015, that reported primary data for diagnosis and treatment of latent tuberculosis infection. We did meta-analyses using random and fixed effects analyses to identify percentages of patients with latent tuberculosis infection completing each step in the cascade. We also estimated pooled proportions in subgroups stratified by different characteristics of interest to assess risk factors for losses. Results We identified 58 studies, describing 70 distinct cohorts and 748 572 people. Steps in the cascade associated with greater losses included completion of testing (71·9% 95% CI 71·8–72·0 of people intended for screening), completion of medical evaluation (43·7% 42·5–44·9), recommendation for treatment (35·0% 33·8–36·4), and completion of treatment if started (18·8% 16·3–19·7). Steps with fewer losses included receiving test results, referral for evaluation if test positive, and accepting to start therapy if recommended. Factors associated with fewer losses were immune-compromising medical indications, being part of contact investigations, and use of rifamycin-based regimens. Interpretation We identify major losses at several steps in the cascade of care for latent tuberculosis infection. Improvements in management of latent tuberculosis will need programmatic approaches to address the losses at each step in the cascade. Funders Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
The study objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the proportion of asymptomatic infection among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) positive persons and their transmission ...potential.
We searched Embase, Medline, bioRxiv, and medRxiv up to 22 June 2020. We included cohorts or cross-sectional studies which systematically tested populations regardless of symptoms for COVID-19, or case series of any size reporting contact investigations of asymptomatic index patients. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality using pre-specified criteria. Only moderate/high quality studies were included. The main outcomes were proportion of asymptomatic infection among COVID-19 positive persons at testing and through follow-up, and secondary attack rate among close contacts of asymptomatic index patients. A qualitative synthesis was performed. Where appropriate, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis to estimate proportions and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).
Of 6,137 identified studies, 71 underwent quality assessment after full text review, and 28 were high/moderate quality and were included. In two general population studies, the proportion of asymptomatic COVID-19 infection at time of testing was 20% and 75%, respectively; among three studies in contacts it was 8.2% to 50%. In meta-analysis, the proportion (95% CI) of asymptomatic COVID-19 infection in obstetric patients was 95% (45% to 100%) of which 59% (49% to 68%) remained asymptomatic through follow-up; among nursing home residents, the proportion was 54% (42% to 65%) of which 28% (13% to 50%) remained asymptomatic through follow-up. Transmission studies were too heterogenous to meta-analyse. Among five transmission studies, 18 of 96 (18.8%) close contacts exposed to asymptomatic index patients were COVID-19 positive.
Despite study heterogeneity, the proportion of asymptomatic infection among COVID-19 positive persons appears high and transmission potential seems substantial. To further our understanding, high quality studies in representative general population samples are required.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Abstract Objective To determine the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for coronavirus disease-2019 (covid-19). Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, bioRxiv, and ...medRxiv from 1 January to 30 April 2020, using subject headings or subheadings combined with text words for the concepts of covid-19 and serological tests for covid-19. Eligibility criteria and data analysis Eligible studies measured sensitivity or specificity, or both of a covid-19 serological test compared with a reference standard of viral culture or reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Studies were excluded with fewer than five participants or samples. Risk of bias was assessed using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 (QUADAS-2). Pooled sensitivity and specificity were estimated using random effects bivariate meta-analyses. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was overall sensitivity and specificity, stratified by method of serological testing (enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs), or chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs)) and immunoglobulin class (IgG, IgM, or both). Secondary outcomes were stratum specific sensitivity and specificity within subgroups defined by study or participant characteristics, including time since symptom onset. Results 5016 references were identified and 40 studies included. 49 risk of bias assessments were carried out (one for each population and method evaluated). High risk of patient selection bias was found in 98% (48/49) of assessments and high or unclear risk of bias from performance or interpretation of the serological test in 73% (36/49). Only 10% (4/40) of studies included outpatients. Only two studies evaluated tests at the point of care. For each method of testing, pooled sensitivity and specificity were not associated with the immunoglobulin class measured. The pooled sensitivity of ELISAs measuring IgG or IgM was 84.3% (95% confidence interval 75.6% to 90.9%), of LFIAs was 66.0% (49.3% to 79.3%), and of CLIAs was 97.8% (46.2% to 100%). In all analyses, pooled sensitivity was lower for LFIAs, the potential point-of-care method. Pooled specificities ranged from 96.6% to 99.7%. Of the samples used for estimating specificity, 83% (10 465/12 547) were from populations tested before the epidemic or not suspected of having covid-19. Among LFIAs, pooled sensitivity of commercial kits (65.0%, 49.0% to 78.2%) was lower than that of non-commercial tests (88.2%, 83.6% to 91.3%). Heterogeneity was seen in all analyses. Sensitivity was higher at least three weeks after symptom onset (ranging from 69.9% to 98.9%) compared with within the first week (from 13.4% to 50.3%). Conclusion Higher quality clinical studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19 are urgently needed. Currently, available evidence does not support the continued use of existing point-of-care serological tests. Study registration PROSPERO CRD42020179452.
Until recently, the tuberculin skin test was the only test for detecting latent tuberculosis (TB) infection, but 2 ex vivo interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs) are now commercially licensed.
To ...estimate sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility of IGRAs (commercial or research versions of QuantiFERON QFT and Elispot) for diagnosing latent TB infection in healthy and immune-suppressed persons.
The authors searched MEDLINE and reviewed citations of all original articles and reviews for studies published in English.
Studies had evaluated IGRAs using Mycobacterium tuberculosis-specific antigens (RD1 antigens) and overnight (16- to 24-h) incubation times. Reference standards had to be clearly defined without knowledge of test results. DATA EXTRACTION AND QUALITY ASSESSMENT: Specific criteria for quality assessment were developed for sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility.
When newly diagnosed active TB was used as a surrogate for latent TB infection, sensitivity of all tests was suboptimal, although it was higher with Elispot. No test distinguishes active TB from latent TB. Sensitivity of the tuberculin skin test and IGRAs was similar in persons who were categorized into clinical gradients of exposure. Pooled specificity was 97.7% (95% CI, 96% to 99%) and 92.5% (CI, 86% to 99%) for QFT and for Elispot, respectively. Both assays were more specific than the tuberculin skin test in samples vaccinated with bacille Calmette-Guérin. Elispot was more sensitive than the tuberculin skin test in 3 studies of immune-compromised samples. Discordant tuberculin skin test and IGRA reactions were frequent and largely unexplained, although some may be related to varied definitions of positive test results. Reversion of IGRA results from positive to negative was common in 2 studies in which it was assessed.
Most studies used cross-sectional designs with the inherent limitation of no gold standard for latent TB infection, and most involved small samples with a widely varying likelihood of true-positive and false-positive test results. There is insufficient evidence on IGRA performance in children, immune-compromised persons, and the elderly.
New IGRAs show considerable promise and have excellent specificity. Additional studies are needed to better define their performance in high-risk populations and in serial testing. Longitudinal studies are needed to define the predictive value of IGRAs.
Summary Background The results of some reports have suggested that treatment of isoniazid-resistant tuberculosis with the recommended regimens of first-line drugs might be suboptimal. We updated a ...previous systematic review of treatment outcomes associated with use of first-line drugs in patients with tuberculosis resistant to isoniazid but not rifampicin. Methods In this systematic review, we updated the results of a previous review to include randomised trials and cohort studies published in English, French, or Spanish to March 31, 2015, containing results of standardised treatment of patients with bacteriologically confirmed isoniazid-resistant tuberculosis (but not multidrug-resistant tuberculosis—ie, not resistant to rifampicin) in whom failure and relapse were bacteriologically confirmed. Results in patients with drug-sensitive tuberculosis included in the same studies were also analysed. We pooled treatment outcomes with random-effects meta-analysis. Findings We identified 19 cohort studies and 33 trials with 3744 patients with isoniazid-resistant tuberculosis and 19 012 patients with drug-sensitive disease. The pooled rates of failure or relapse, or both, and acquired drug resistance with all drug regimens were 15% (95% CI 12–18) and 3·6% (2–5), respectively, in patients with isoniazid-resistant tuberculosis and 4% (3–5) and 0·6% (0·3–0·9) in those with drug-sensitive tuberculosis. Of patients with initial isoniazid-resistant tuberculosis with acquired drug resistance, 96% (93–99) had acquired multidrug-resistant disease. Treatment of isoniazid-resistant tuberculosis with the WHO standard regimen for new patients resulted in treatment failure, relapse, and acquired multidrug resistance in 11% (6–17), 10% (5–15) and 8% (3–13), respectively; treatment with the standard WHO regimen for previously treated patients resulted in treatment failure in 6% (2–10), relapse in 5% (2–8), and acquisition of multidrug resistance in 3% (0–6). For patients with drug-sensitive disease treated with the standard retreatment regimen the rates were 1% (0–2), 5% (4–7), and 0·3% (0–0·6). Interpretation Treatment of isoniazid-resistant tuberculosis with first-line drugs resulted in suboptimal outcomes, supporting the need for better regimens. Standardised empirical treatment of new cases could be contributing substantially to the multidrug-resistant epidemic, particularly in settings where the prevalence of isoniazid resistance is high. Funding Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
We undertook a systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence-based software for identification of radiologic abnormalities (computer-aided detection, or CAD) compatible with ...pulmonary tuberculosis on chest x-rays (CXRs). We searched four databases for articles published between January 2005-February 2019. We summarized data on CAD type, study design, and diagnostic accuracy. We assessed risk of bias with QUADAS-2. We included 53 of the 4712 articles reviewed: 40 focused on CAD design methods ("Development" studies) and 13 focused on evaluation of CAD ("Clinical" studies). Meta-analyses were not performed due to methodological differences. Development studies were more likely to use CXR databases with greater potential for bias as compared to Clinical studies. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (median AUC IQR) were significantly higher: in Development studies AUC: 0.88 0.82-0.90) versus Clinical studies (0.75 0.66-0.87; p-value 0.004); and with deep-learning (0.91 0.88-0.99) versus machine-learning (0.82 0.75-0.89; p = 0.001). We conclude that CAD programs are promising, but the majority of work thus far has been on development rather than clinical evaluation. We provide concrete suggestions on what study design elements should be improved.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Nearly one quarter of the global population has been infected with
Mycobacterium tuberculosis
, and there are more than 10 million new infections per year. In an open-label trial, 9 months of ...isoniazid was compared with 4 months of rifampin as therapy for latent tuberculosis infection.
Madhu Pai and colleagues introduce the BCG World Atlas, an open access, user
friendly Web site for TB clinicians to discern global BCG vaccination policies
and practices and improve the care of their ...patients.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
The American Thoracic Society, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, European Respiratory Society, and Infectious Diseases Society of America jointly sponsored this new practice guideline ...on the treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB). The document includes recommendations on the treatment of multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) as well as isoniazid-resistant but rifampin-susceptible TB.
Published systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and a new individual patient data meta-analysis from 12,030 patients, in 50 studies, across 25 countries with confirmed pulmonary rifampin-resistant TB were used for this guideline. Meta-analytic approaches included propensity score matching to reduce confounding. Each recommendation was discussed by an expert committee, screened for conflicts of interest, according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.
Twenty-one Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcomes questions were addressed, generating 25 GRADE-based recommendations. Certainty in the evidence was judged to be very low, because the data came from observational studies with significant loss to follow-up and imbalance in background regimens between comparator groups. Good practices in the management of MDR-TB are described. On the basis of the evidence review, a clinical strategy tool for building a treatment regimen for MDR-TB is also provided.
New recommendations are made for the choice and number of drugs in a regimen, the duration of intensive and continuation phases, and the role of injectable drugs for MDR-TB. On the basis of these recommendations, an effective all-oral regimen for MDR-TB can be assembled. Recommendations are also provided on the role of surgery in treatment of MDR-TB and for treatment of contacts exposed to MDR-TB and treatment of isoniazid-resistant TB.
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is the strongest known risk factor for tuberculosis (TB) through its impairment of T-cell immunity. Tuberculosis preventive treatment (TPT) is recommended for ...people living with HIV (PLHIV) by the World Health Organization, as it significantly reduces the risk of developing TB disease. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of modeling studies to summarize projected costs, risks, benefits, and impacts of TPT use among PLHIV on TB-related outcomes. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science from inception until December 31, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts; extracted data; and assessed quality. Extracted data were summarized using descriptive analysis. We performed quantile regression and random effects meta-analysis to describe trends in cost, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness outcomes across studies and identified key determinants of these outcomes. Our search identified 6,615 titles; 61 full texts were included in the final review. Of the 61 included studies, 31 reported both cost and effectiveness outcomes. A total of 41 were set in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), while 12 were set in high-income countries (HICs); 2 were set in both. Most studies considered isoniazid (INH)-based regimens 6 to 2 months long (n = 45), or longer than 12 months (n = 11). Model parameters and assumptions varied widely between studies. Despite this, all studies found that providing TPT to PLHIV was predicted to be effective at averting TB disease. No TPT regimen was substantially more effective at averting TB disease than any other. The cost of providing TPT and subsequent downstream costs (e.g. post-TPT health systems costs) were estimated to be less than $1,500 (2020 USD) per person in 85% of studies that reported cost outcomes (n = 36), regardless of study setting. All cost-effectiveness analyses concluded that providing TPT to PLHIV was potentially cost-effective compared to not providing TPT. In quantitative analyses, country income classification, consideration of antiretroviral therapy (ART) use, and TPT regimen use significantly impacted cost-effectiveness. Studies evaluating TPT in HICs suggested that TPT may be more effective at preventing TB disease than studies evaluating TPT in LMICs; pooled incremental net monetary benefit, given a willingness-to-pay threshold of country-level per capita gross domestic product (GDP), was $271 in LMICs (95% confidence interval CI -$81 to $622, p = 0.12) and was $2,568 in HICs (-$32,115 to $37,251, p = 0.52). Similarly, TPT appeared to be more effective at averting TB disease in HICs; pooled percent reduction in active TB incidence was 20% (13% to 27%, p < 0.001) in LMICs and 37% (-34% to 100%, p = 0.13) in HICs. Key limitations of this review included the heterogeneity of input parameters and assumptions from included studies, which limited pooling of effect estimates, inconsistent reporting of model parameters, which limited sample sizes of quantitative analyses, and database bias toward English publications. The body of literature related to modeling TPT among PLHIV is large and heterogeneous, making comparisons across studies difficult. Despite this variability, all studies in all settings concluded that providing TPT to PLHIV is potentially effective and cost-effective for preventing TB disease.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
