Background The global tuberculosis epidemic results in nearly 2 million deaths and 9 million new cases of the disease a year. The vast majority of tuberculosis patients live in developing countries, where the diagnosis of tuberculosis relies on the identification of acid-fast bacilli on unprocessed sputum smears using conventional light microscopy. Microscopy has high specificity in tuberculosis-endemic countries, but modest sensitivity which varies among laboratories (range 20% to 80%). Moreover, the sensitivity is poor for paucibacillary disease (e.g., pediatric and HIV-associated tuberculosis). Thus, the development of rapid and accurate new diagnostic tools is imperative. Immune-based tests are potentially suitable for use in low-income countries as some test formats can be performed at the point of care without laboratory equipment. Currently, dozens of distinct commercial antibody detection tests are sold in developing countries. The question is “do they work?” Methods and Findings We conducted a systematic review to assess the accuracy of commercial antibody detection tests for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. Studies from all countries using culture and/or microscopy smear for confirmation of pulmonary tuberculosis were eligible. Studies with fewer than 50 participants (25 patients and 25 control participants) were excluded. In a comprehensive search, we identified 68 studies. The results demonstrate that (1) overall, commercial tests vary widely in performance; (2) sensitivity is higher in smear-positive than smear-negative samples; (3) in studies of smear-positive patients, Anda-TB IgG by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay shows limited sensitivity (range 63% to 85%) and inconsistent specificity (range 73% to 100%); (4) specificity is higher in healthy volunteers than in patients in whom tuberculosis disease is initially suspected and subsequently ruled out; and (5) there are insufficient data to determine the accuracy of most commercial tests in smear microscopy–negative patients, as well as their performance in children or persons with HIV infection. Conclusions None of the commercial tests evaluated perform well enough to replace sputum smear microscopy. Thus, these tests have little or no role in the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. Lack of methodological rigor in these studies was identified as a concern. It will be important to review the basic science literature evaluating serological tests for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis to determine whether useful antigens have been described but their potential has not been
References
[1]
World Health Organization (2007) Global tuberculosis control: Surveillance, planning, financing. WHO report. Geneva: World Health Organization. WHO/HTM/TB/2007.376.
[2]
Dye C, Watt CJ, Bleed DM, Hosseini SM, Raviglione MC (2005) Evolution of tuberculosis control and prospects for reducing tuberculosis incidence, prevalence, and deaths globally. JAMA 293: 2767–2775.
[3]
Toman K (2004) What are the advantages and disadvantages of fluorescence microscopy? In: Frieden T, editor. Toman's tuberculosis: Case detection, treatment, and monitoring—questions and answers. 2nd edition. Geneva: World Health Organization. pp. 31–34.
[4]
Steingart KR, Ng V, Henry M, Hopewell PC, Ramsay A, et al. (2006) Sputum processing methods to improve the sensitivity of smear microscopy for tuberculosis: A systematic review. Lancet Infect Dis 6: 664–674.
[5]
Behr MA, Warren SA, Salamon H, Hopewell PC, Ponce de Leon A, et al. (1999) Transmission of from patients smear-negative for acid-fast bacilli. Lancet 353: 444–449.
[6]
Grzybowski S, Barnett GD, Styblo K (1975) Contacts of cases of active pulmonary tuberculosis. Bull Int Union Tuberc 50: 90–106.
[7]
Urbanczik R (1985) Present position of microscopy and of culture in diagnostic mycobacteriology. Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg [A] 260: 81–87.
[8]
Perkins MD, Roscigno G, Zumla A (2006) Progress towards improved tuberculosis diagnostics for developing countries. Lancet 367: 942–943.
[9]
Shingadia D, Novelli V (2003) Diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis in children. Lancet Infect Dis 3: 624–632.
[10]
Elliott AM, Namaambo K, Allen BW, Luo N, Hayes RJ, et al. (1993) Negative sputum smear results in HIV-positive patients with pulmonary tuberculosis in Lusaka, Zambia. Tuberc Lung Dis 74: 191–194.
[11]
Johnson JL, Vjecha MJ, Okwera A, Hatanga E, Byekwaso F, et al. (1998) Impact of human immunodeficiency virus type-1 infection on the initial bacteriologic and radiographic manifestations of pulmonary tuberculosis in Uganda. Makerere University-Case Western Reserve University Research Collaboration. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2: 397–404.
[12]
Menzies D (2004) What is the current and potential role of diagnostic tests other than sputum microscopy and culture? In: Frieden T, editor. Toman's tuberculosis: Case detection, treatment, and monitoring—Questions and answers. 2nd edition. Geneva: World Health Organization. pp. 87–91.
Chan ED, Heifets L, Iseman MD (2000) Immunologic diagnosis of tuberculosis: A review. Tuberc Lung Dis 80: 131–140.
[15]
Daniel TM (1989) Rapid diagnosis of tuberculosis: Laboratory techniques applicable in developing countries. Rev Infect Dis 11(Suppl 2): S471–S478.
[16]
Daniel TM (1990) The rapid diagnosis of tuberculosis: A selective review. J Lab Clin Med 116: 277–282.
[17]
Gennaro ML (2000) Immunologic diagnosis of tuberculosis. Clin Infect Dis 30(Suppl 3): S243–S246.
[18]
Iseman MD (2000) Immunity and pathogenesis. In: Iseman MD, editor. A clinician's guide to tuberculosis. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. pp. 63–96.
[19]
Laal S (2004) Immunodiagnosis. In: Rom WN, Garay SM, editors. Tuberculosis. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. pp. 185–191.
[20]
Laal S, Skeiky YA (2005) Immune-based methods. In: Cole ST, editor. Tuberculosis and the tubercle bacillus. Washington (D. C.): ASM Press. pp. 71–83.
[21]
Palomino JC (2005) Nonconventional and new methods in the diagnosis of tuberculosis: Feasibility and applicability in the field. Eur Respir J 26: 339–350.
[22]
Pai M, Kalantri S, Dheda K (2006) New tools and emerging technologies for the diagnosis of tuberculosis: Part II. Active tuberculosis and drug resistance. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 6: 423–432.
[23]
Boehme C, Molokova E, Minja F, Geis S, Loscher T, et al. (2005) Detection of mycobacterial lipoarabinomannan with an antigen-capture ELISA in unprocessed urine of Tanzanian patients with suspected tuberculosis. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 99: 893–900.
[24]
Tessema TA, Hamasur B, Bjun G, Svenson S, Bjorvatn B (2001) Diagnostic evaluation of urinary lipoarabinomannan at an Ethiopian tuberculosis centre. Scand J Infect Dis 33: 279–284.
[25]
Kunter E, Cerrahoglu K, Ilvan A, Isitmangil T, Turken O, et al. (2003) The value of pleural fluid anti-A60 IgM in BCG-vaccinated tuberculous pleurisy patients. Clin Microbiol Infect 9: 212–220.
[26]
Small PM, Perkins MD (2000) More rigour needed in trials of new diagnostic agents for tuberculosis. Lancet 356: 1048–1049.
[27]
Walsh A, McNerney R (2004) Guidelines for establishing trials of new tests to diagnose tuberculosis in endemic countries. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 8: 609–613.
[28]
Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases, Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (2006) Current TB diagnostics market. Diagnostics for tuberculosis: Global demand and market potential. Geneva: World Health Organization. pp. 49–72.
[29]
Janeway CA, Travers P, Walport M, Shlomchik M (2005) Appendix I, Immunologists' toolbox. Immunobiology, the immune system in health and disease. 6th edition. New York: Garland Science Publishing. pp. 683–729.
[30]
Bangs Laboratories Immunochromatographic, lateral flow or strip tests development ideas. Available: http://www.pall.com/34445_4154.asp#4166. Accessed 10 May 2007.
[31]
Pai M, McCulloch M, Enanoria W, Colford JM Jr (2004) Systematic reviews of diagnostic test evaluations: What's behind the scenes? ACP J Club 141: A11–A13.
[32]
Littenberg B, Moses LE (1993) Estimating diagnostic accuracy from multiple conflicting reports: A new meta-analytic method. Med Decis Making 13: 313–321.
[33]
SPSS (2006) SPSS for Windows. 14.0.1.366 edition. Chicago: SPSS.
[34]
Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan KS, Coomarasamy A (2006) Meta-DiSc: A software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol 6: 31.
[35]
Walter SD (2002) Properties of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for diagnostic test data. Stat Med 21: 1237–1256.
[36]
Jones CM, Athanasiou T (2005) Summary receiver operating characteristic curve analysis techniques in the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Ann Thorac Surg 79: 16–20.
[37]
Lijmer JG, Bossuyt PM, Heisterkamp SH (2002) Exploring sources of heterogeneity in systematic reviews of diagnostic tests. Stat Med 21: 1525–1537.
[38]
Al-Hajjaj MS, Gad-el-Rab MO, Al-Orainey IO, Al-Kassimi FA (1999) Improved sensitivity for detection of tuberculosis cases by a modified Anda-TB ELISA test. Tuberc Lung Dis 79: 181–185.
[39]
Alifano M, De Pascalis R, Sofia M, Faraone S, Del Pezzo M, et al. (1997) Evaluation of IgA-mediated humoral immune response against the mycobacterial antigen P-90 in diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. Chest 111: 601–605.
[40]
Alifano M, Del Pezzo M, Lamberti C, Faraone S, Covelli I (1994) ELISA method for evaluation of anti-A60 IgG in patients with pulmonary and extrapulmonary tuberculosis. New Microbiol 17: 37–43.
[41]
Alifano M, Sofia M, Mormile M, Micco A, Mormile AF, et al. (1996) IgA immune response against the mycobacterial antigen A60 in patients with active pulmonary tuberculosis. Respiration 63: 292–297.
[42]
Amicosante M, Houde M, Guaraldi G, Saltini C (1999) Sensitivity and specificity of a multi-antigen ELISA test for the serological diagnosis of tuberculosis. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 3: 736–740.
[43]
Antunes A, Nina J, David S (2002) Serological screening for tuberculosis in the community: An evaluation of the Mycodot procedure in an African population with high HIV-2 prevalence (Republic of Guinea-Bissau). Res Microbiol 153: 301–305.
[44]
Butt T, Malik HS, Abbassi SA, Ahmad RN, Mahmood A, et al. (2004) Genus and species-specific IgG and IgM antibodies for pulmonary tuberculosis. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 14: 105–107.
[45]
Chandrasekaran S, Gupta EVV, Chauhan MM, Baily GVJ, Chaudhuri K (1990) Serodiagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis by kaolin agglutination test. Indian J Tuberc 37: 11–15.
[46]
Conde MB, Suffys P, Silva J, Kritski AL, Dorman SE (2004) Immunoglobulin A (IgA) and IgG immune responses against P-90 antigen for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis and screening for infection. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 11: 94–97.
[47]
Iinuma Y, Senda K, Takakura S, Ichiyama S, Tano M, et al. (2002) Evaluation of a commercially available serologic assay for antibodies against tuberculosis-associated glycolipid antigen. Clin Chem Lab Med 40: 832–836.
[48]
Imaz MS, Comini MA, Zerbini E, Sequeira MD, Latini O, et al. (2004) Evaluation of commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits for detection of tuberculosis in Argentinean population. J Clin Microbiol 42: 884–887.
[49]
Julian E, Matas L, Alcaide J, Luquin M (2004) Comparison of antibody responses to a potential combination of specific glycolipids and proteins for test sensitivity improvement in tuberculosis serodiagnosis. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 11: 70–76.
[50]
Julian E, Matas L, Hernandez A, Alcaide J, Luquin M (2000) Evaluation of a new serodiagnostic tuberculosis test based on immunoglobulin A detection against Kp-90 antigen. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 4: 1082–1085.
[51]
Kalantri Y, Hemvani N, Bhatia GC, Chitnis DS (2005) ELISA kit evaluation for IgG and IgM antibodies to A-60 tubercular protein antigen. Indian J Med Sci 59: 337–346.
[52]
Luh KT, Yu CJ, Yang PC, Lee LN (1996) Tuberculosis antigen A60 serodiagnosis in tuberculous infection: Application in extrapulmonary and smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis. Respirology 1: 145–151.
[53]
Maekura R, Kohno H, Hirotani A, Okuda Y, Ito M, et al. (2003) Prospective clinical evaluation of the serologic tuberculous glycolipid test in combination with the nucleic acid amplification test. J Clin Microbiol 41: 1322–1325.
[54]
Maekura R, Okuda Y, Nakagawa M, Hiraga T, Yokota S, et al. (2001) Clinical evaluation of anti-tuberculous glycolipid immunoglobulin G antibody assay for rapid serodiagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. J Clin Microbiol 39: 3603–3608.
[55]
McConkey SJ, Youssef FG, Azem E, Frenck RW, Weil GJ (2002) Evaluation of a rapid-format antibody test and the tuberculin skin test for diagnosis of tuberculosis in two contrasting endemic settings. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 6: 246–252.
[56]
Okuda Y, Maekura R, Hirotani A, Kitada S, Yoshimura K, et al. (2004) Rapid serodiagnosis of active pulmonary by analysis of results from multiple antigen-specific tests. J Clin Microbiol 42: 1136–1141.
[57]
Ongut G, Ogunc D, Gunseren F, Ogus C, Donmez L, et al. (2006) Evaluation of the ICT tuberculosis test for the routine diagnosis of tuberculosis. BMC Infect Dis 6: 37.
[58]
Perkins MD, Conde MB, Martins A, Kritski AL (2003) Serologic diagnosis of tuberculosis using a simple commercial multiantigen assay. Chest 123: 107–112.
[59]
Sachan A, Gupta R, Gupta D, Gautam K, Gupta D (1994) Diagnostic significance of antigen A-60 by ELISA test in pulmonary tuberculosis. Indian J Tuberc 41: 239–243.
[60]
Somi GR, O'Brien RJ, Mfinanga GS, Ipuge YA (1999) Evaluation of the MycoDot (TM) test in patients with suspected tuberculosis in a field setting in Tanzania. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 3: 231–238.
[61]
Traunmuller F, Haslinger I, Lagler H, Wolfgang G, Zeitlinger MA, et al. (2005) Influence of the washing buffer composition on the sensitivity of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using mycobacterial glycolipids as capture antigens. J Immunoassay Immunochem 26: 179–188.
[62]
van der Werf TS, Das PK, van Soolingen D, Yong S, van der Mark TW, et al. (1992) Sero-diagnosis of tuberculosis with A60 antigen enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay: Failure in HIV-infected individuals in Ghana. Med Microbiol Immunol (Berl) 181: 71–76.
[63]
Wilkinson RJ, Haslov K, Rappuoli R, Giovannoni F, Narayanan PR, et al. (1997) Evaluation of the recombinant 38-kilodalton antigen of as a potential immunodiagnostic reagent. J Clin Microbiol 35: 553–557.
[64]
Wu HP, Shieh WB, Hsien FK, Hua CC (2004) The significance of antibody, antigen 60 IgG in patients with abnormal chest radiography. Chang Gung Med J 27: 869–876.
[65]
Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Bossuyt PM, et al. (2004) Sources of variation and bias in studies of diagnostic accuracy: A systematic review. Ann Intern Med 140: 189–202.
[66]
Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S, Bonsel GJ, Prins MH, et al. (1999) Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA 282: 1061–1066.
[67]
Tatsioni A, Zarin DA, Aronson N, Samson DJ, Flamm CR, et al. (2005) Challenges in systematic reviews of diagnostic technologies. Ann Intern Med 142: 1048–1055.
[68]
Samanich K, Belisle JT, Laal S (2001) Homogeneity of antibody responses in tuberculosis patients. Infect Immun 69: 4600–4609.
[69]
Sartain MJ, Slayden RA, Singh KK, Laal S, Belisle JT (2006) Disease state differentiation and identification of tuberculosis biomarkers via native antigen array profiling. Mol Cell Proteomics 5: 2102–2113.
[70]
Hendrickson RC, Douglass JF, Reynolds LD, McNeill PD, Carter D, et al. (2000) Mass spectrometric identification of Mtb81, a novel serological marker for tuberculosis. J Clin Microbiol 38: 2354–2361.
[71]
Houghton RL, Lodes MJ, Dillon DC, Reynolds LD, Day CH, et al. (2002) Use of multiepitope polyproteins in serodiagnosis of active tuberculosis. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 9: 883–891.
[72]
Weldingh K, Rosenkrands I, Okkels LM, Doherty TM, Andersen P (2005) Assessing the serodiagnostic potential of 35 proteins and identification of four novel serological antigens. J Clin Microbiol 43: 57–65.
[73]
Mukherjee S, Daifalla N, Zhang Y, Douglass J, Brooks L, et al. (2004) Potential serological use of a recombinant protein that is a replica of a protein found in the urine of infected mice. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 11: 280–286.
[74]
Samanich KM, Belisle JT, Sonnenberg MG, Keen MA, Zolla-Pazner S, et al. (1998) Delineation of human antibody responses to culture filtrate antigens of . J Infect Dis 178: 1534–1538.
[75]
Singh KK, Zhang X, Patibandla AS, Chien P Jr, Laal S (2001) Antigens of expressed during preclinical tuberculosis: Serological immunodominance of proteins with repetitive amino acid sequences. Infect Immun 69: 4185–4191.
[76]
Lyashchenko K, Colangeli R, Houde M, Al Jahdali H, Menzies D, et al. (1998) Heterogeneous antibody responses in tuberculosis. Infect Immun 66: 3936–3940.
[77]
Steingart KR, Henry M, Laal S, Hopewell PC, Ramsay A, et al. (2007) A systematic review of commercial serological antibody detection tests for the diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis. Thorax. In press.
[78]
Pai M, O'Brien R (2006) Tuberculosis diagnostics trials: Do they lack methodological rigor? Expert Rev Mol Diagn 6: 509–514.
[79]
Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, et al. (2003) Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative. Ann Intern Med 138: 40–44.
[80]
Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J (2003) The development of QUADAS: A tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 3: 25.
[81]
Banoo S, Bell D, Bossuyt P, Herring A, Mabey D, et al. (2006) Evaluation of diagnostic tests for infectious diseases: General principles. Nat Rev Microbiol 4: S21–S31.
