UCL  IRIS
Institutional Research Information Service
UCL Logo
Please report any queries concerning the funding data grouped in the sections named "Externally Awarded" or "Internally Disbursed" (shown on the profile page) to your Research Finance Administrator. Your can find your Research Finance Administrator at https://www.ucl.ac.uk/finance/research/rs-contacts.php by entering your department
Please report any queries concerning the student data shown on the profile page to:

Email: portico-services@ucl.ac.uk

Help Desk: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ras/portico/helpdesk
Publication Detail
Tuberculosis screening among HIV-positive inpatients: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis
  • Publication Type:
    Journal article
  • Authors:
    Dhana A, Hamada Y, Kengne AP, Kerkhoff AD, Rangaka MX, Kredo T, Baddeley A, Miller C, Gupta-Wright A, Fielding K, Wood R, Huerga H, Rücker SCM, Heidebrecht C, Wilson D, Bjerrum S, Johansen IS, Thit SS, Kyi MM, Hanson J, Barr DA, Meintjes G, Maartens G
  • Publisher:
    Elsevier BV
  • Publication date:
    04/2022
  • Pagination:
    e233, e241
  • Journal:
    Lancet HIV
  • Volume:
    9
  • Issue:
    4
  • Medium:
    Print-Electronic
  • Status:
    Published
  • Country:
    Netherlands
  • PII:
    S2352-3018(22)00002-9
  • Language:
    English
  • Notes:
    © 2022 World Health Organization; licensee Elsevier. This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products, or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article’s original URL.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since 2011, WHO has recommended that HIV-positive inpatients be routinely screened for tuberculosis with the WHO four-symptom screen (W4SS) and, if screened positive, receive a molecular WHO-recommended rapid diagnostic test (eg, Xpert MTB/RIF [Xpert] assay). To inform updated WHO tuberculosis screening guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis to assess the performance of W4SS and alternative screening tests to guide Xpert testing and compare the diagnostic accuracy of the WHO Xpert algorithm (ie, W4SS followed by Xpert) with Xpert for all HIV-positive inpatients. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library from Jan 1, 2011, to March 1, 2020, for studies of adult and adolescent HIV-positive inpatients enrolled regardless of tuberculosis signs and symptoms. The separate reference standards were culture and Xpert. Xpert was selected since it is most likely to be the confirmatory test used in practice. We assessed the proportion of inpatients eligible for Xpert testing using the WHO algorithm; assessed the accuracy of W4SS and alternative screening tests or strategies to guide diagnostic testing; and compared the accuracy of the WHO Xpert algorithm (W4SS followed by Xpert) with Xpert for all. We obtained pooled proportion estimates with a random-effects model, assessed diagnostic accuracy by fitting random-effects bivariate models, and assessed diagnostic yield descriptively. This systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020155895). FINDINGS: Of 6162 potentially eligible publications, six were eligible and we obtained data for all of the six publications (n=3660 participants). The pooled proportion of inpatients eligible for an Xpert was 90% (95% CI 89-91; n=3658). Among screening tests to guide diagnostic testing, W4SS and C-reactive protein (≥5 mg/L) had highest sensitivities (≥96%) but low specificities (≤12%); cough (≥2 weeks), haemoglobin concentration (<8 g/dL), body-mass index (<18·5 kg/m2), and lymphadenopathy had higher specificities (61-90%) but suboptimal sensitivities (12-57%). The WHO Xpert algorithm (W4SS followed by Xpert) had a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 67-84) and specificity of 93% (88-96; n=637). Xpert for all had similar accuracy to the WHO Xpert algorithm: sensitivity was 78% (95% CI 69-85) and specificity was 93% (87-96; n=639). In two cohorts that had sputum and non-sputum samples collected for culture or Xpert, diagnostic yield of sputum Xpert was 41-70% and 61-64% for urine Xpert. INTERPRETATION: The W4SS and other potential screening tests to guide Xpert testing have suboptimal accuracy in HIV-positive inpatients. On the basis of these findings, WHO now strongly recommends molecular rapid diagnostic testing in all medical HIV-positive inpatients in settings where tuberculosis prevalence is higher than 10%. FUNDING: World Health Organization.
Publication data is maintained in RPS. Visit https://rps.ucl.ac.uk
 More search options
UCL Researchers
Author
Institute for Global Health
Author
Infection & Population Health
Author
Institute for Global Health
University College London - Gower Street - London - WC1E 6BT Tel:+44 (0)20 7679 2000

© UCL 1999–2011

Search by