Point-of-care C-reactive protein and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra for tuberculosis screening and diagnosis in unselected antiretroviral therapy initiators: a prospective diagnostic accuracy study

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundTuberculosis (TB), a major cause of death in people living with HIV (PLHIV), remains challenging to diagnose. Diagnostic accuracy data are lacking for promising triage tests, such as C-reactive protein (CRP), and confirmatory tests, such as sputum and urine Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Ultra), and urine LAM, without prior symptom selection.Methods897 PLHIV initiating antiretroviral therapy were consecutively recruited in settings with high TB incidence, irrespective of symptoms. Participants were offered sputum induction, with a liquid culture reference standard. First, we evaluated point-of-care CRP testing on blood, compared to the World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended four-symptom screen (W4SS) for triage (n=800). Second, we evaluated Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Ultra) versus Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) for sputum-based confirmatory testing (n=787), with or without sputum induction. Third, we evaluated Ultra and Determine LF-LAM for urine-based confirmatory testing (n=732).FindingsCRP and number of W4SS symptoms had areas under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.78 (95% confidence interval 0.73, 0.83) and 0.70 (0.64, 0.75), respectively. For triage, CRP (≥10 mg/l) has similar sensitivity to W4SS [77% (68, 85) vs. 77% (68, 85); p>0.999] but higher specificity [64% (61, 68) vs. 48% (45, 52); p<0.001]; reducing unnecessary confirmatory testing by 138 per 1000 people and the number-needed-to-test from 6.91 (6.25, 7.81) to 4.87 (4.41, 5.51). Using sputum, which required induction in 31% (24, 39) of people, Ultra had higher sensitivity than Xpert [71% (61, 80) vs. 56% (46, 66); p<0.001] but lower specificity [98% (96, 100) vs. 99% (98, 100); p<0.001]. The proportion of people with ≥1 positive confirmatory result detected by Ultra increased from 45% (26, 64) to 66% (46, 82) when induction was done. Programmatically-done haemoglobin, triage test combinations, and urine tests showed comparatively worse performance.InterpretationAmong ART-initiators in a high burden setting, CRP is a more specific triage test than W4SS. Sputum induction improves yield. Sputum Ultra is a more accurate confirmatory test than Xpert.FundingSAMRC (MRC-RFA-IFSP-01-2013), EDCTP2 (SF1401, OPTIMAL DIAGNOSIS), NIH/NIAD (U01AI152087).Research in contextEvidence before this studyNovel triage and confirmatory tests are urgently needed for TB, especially in key risk groups like PLHIV. Many TB cases do not meet World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended four-symptom screen (W4SS) criteria despite accounting for significant transmission and morbidity. W4SS also lacks specificity, which makes onward referral of triage-positive people for expensive confirmatory testing inefficient and hampers diagnostic scale-up. Alternative triage approaches like CRP have promise, but have comparatively little data in ART-initiators, especially when done without syndromic preselection and using point-of-care (POC) tools. After triage, confirmatory testing can be challenging due to sputum scarcity and paucibacillary early-stage disease. Next generation WHO-endorsed rapid molecular tests (including Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra; Ultra) are a standard-of-care for confirmatory testing. However, there are no supporting data in ART-initiators, among whom Ultra may offer large sensitivity gains over predecessors like Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert). The added value of sputum induction to augment diagnostic sampling for confirmatory testing is also unclear. Lastly, the performance of urine tests (Ultra, Determine LF-LAM) in this population requires more data.Added value of this studyWe evaluated repurposed and new tests for triage and confirmatory testing using a rigorous microbiological reference standard in a highly vulnerable high-priority patient population (ART-initiators) regardless of symptoms and ability to naturally expectorate sputum. We showed POC CRP triage is feasible, performs better than W4SS, and that combinations of different triage approaches offer no advantages over CRP alone. Sputum Ultra has superior sensitivity to Xpert; often detecting W4SS-negative TB. Furthermore, without induction, confirmatory sputum-based testing would not be possible in a third of people. Urine tests had poor performance. This study contributed unpublished data to systematic reviews and meta-analyses used by the WHO to inform global policy supporting use of CRP triage and Ultra in PLHIV.Implication of all the available evidencePOC CRP triage testing is feasible and superior to W4SS and, together with sputum induction in people who triage CRP-positive should, after appropriate cost and implementation research, be considered for roll-out in ART-initiators in high burden settings. Such people should be offered Ultra, which outperforms Xpert.