↓ Skip to main content

Accuracy of the interferon-γ release assay for the diagnosis of active tuberculosis among HIV-seropositive individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
Accuracy of the interferon-γ release assay for the diagnosis of active tuberculosis among HIV-seropositive individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1687-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhen-yu Huo, Li Peng

Abstract

Although the interferon-γ release assay (IGRA) has become a widely accepted means for the diagnosis of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), the role of the IGRA in diagnosing active tuberculosis (ATB) among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-seropositive individuals remains controversial. Previous analyses did not set up rational inclusive criteria for screening articles with strict control groups and a gold standard for ATB diagnosis. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of the latest evidence to evaluate the accuracy of IGRA for HIV-seropositive patients. Initially, we searched the EMBASE, Cochrane and MEDLINE databases to find research articles published from January 2000 to October 2015 that used the QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube assay (QFT-IT) or the T-SPOT.TB assay (T-SPOT) to diagnose ATB among HIV-seropositive individuals. We separately calculated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and proportion of indeterminate events and then summarized the results using forest plots to estimate the accuracy of the QFT-IT and T-SPOT assays. A total of 1,743 studies were discovered after searching; 11 studies met our selection standards and were included for meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the QFT-IT assay were 69 % (95 % CI, 50-84 %, I(2) = 85.22 %) and 76 % (95 % CI, 53-90 %, I(2) = 98.16 %), respectively, and the optimum area under the curve (AUC) was 0.78 (95 % CI, 0.74-0.82). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the T-SPOT assay were 89 % (95 % CI, 66-97 %, I(2) = 94.48 %) and 87 % (95 % CI, 38-99 %, I(2) = 97.92 %), respectively, and the AUC was 0.93 (95 % CI, 0.90-0.95). The pooled ratios of the indeterminate results of the QFT-IT and T-SPOT assays were 0.07 (95 % CI, 0.06-0.09, I(2) = 74.8 %) and 0.19 (95 % CI, 0.15-0.24, I(2) = 88.3 %), respectively, calculated using the fixed effect model, and 0.08 (95 % CI, 0.06-0.12, I(2) = 74.8 %) and 0.10 (95 % CI, 0.03-0.25, I(2) = 88.3 %), respectively, calculated using the random effects model. The IGRA does not appear to be optimal for the clinical confirmation of ATB cases in HIV-seropositive patients; however, the T-SPOT assay may have greater accuracy in distinguishing ATB cases among HIV-infected individuals than the QFT-IT assay, while the QFT-IT assay appears to reduce the occurrence of indeterminate results. Furthermore, modification and additional trial designs are required to improve diagnostic effectiveness.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 21%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Other 5 8%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 15 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 19 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,336,685
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#6,481
of 7,690 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#318,270
of 364,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#164
of 200 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,690 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,027 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 200 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.