Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Feb;7(2):e191-e199.
doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30458-3.

Effect of Xpert MTB/RIF on clinical outcomes in routine care settings: individual patient data meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Effect of Xpert MTB/RIF on clinical outcomes in routine care settings: individual patient data meta-analysis

Gian Luca Di Tanna et al. Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Feb.

Erratum in

  • Correction to Lancet Glob Health 2019; 7: e191-99.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Apr;7(4):e419. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30046-4. Epub 2019 Feb 19. Lancet Glob Health. 2019. PMID: 30796002 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Abstract

Background: Xpert MTB/RIF, the most widely used automated nucleic acid amplification test for tuberculosis, is available in more than 130 countries. Although diagnostic accuracy is well documented, anticipated improvements in patient outcomes have not been clearly identified. We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to examine improvements in patient outcomes associated with Xpert MTB/RIF.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry from inception to Feb 1, 2018, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of Xpert MTB/RIF with sputum smear microscopy as tests for tuberculosis diagnosis in adults (aged 18 years or older). We excluded studies of patients with extrapulmonary tuberculosis, and studies in which mortality was not assessed. We used a two-stage approach for our primary analysis and a one-stage approach for the sensitivity analysis. To assess the primary outcome of cumulative 6-month all-cause mortality, we first performed logistic regression models (random effects for cluster randomised trials, with robust SEs for multicentre studies) for each trial, and then pooled the odds ratio (OR) estimates by a fixed-effects (inverse variance) or random-effects (Der Simonian Laird) meta-analysis. We adjusted for age and gender, and stratified by HIV status and previous tuberculosis-treatment history. The study protocol has been registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42014013394.

Findings: Our search identified 387 studies, of which five RCTs were eligible for analysis. 8567 adult clinic attendees (4490 [63·5%] of 7074 participants for whom data were available were HIV-positive) were tested for tuberculosis with Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert group) versus sputum smear microscopy (sputum smear group), across five low-income and middle-income countries (South Africa, Brazil, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Tanzania). The primary outcome (reported in three studies) occurred in 182 (4·5%) of 4050 patients in the Xpert group and 217 (5·3%) of 4093 patients in the smear group (pooled adjusted OR 0·88, 95% CI 0·68-1·14 [p=0·34]; for HIV-positive individuals OR 0·83, 0·65-1·05 [p=0·12]). Kaplan-Meier estimates showed a lower rate of death (12·73 per 100 person-years in the Xpert group vs 16·38 per 100 person-years in the sputum smear group) for HIV-positive patients (hazard ratio 0·76, 95% CI 0·60-0·97; p=0·03). The risk of bias was assessed as reasonable and the statistical heterogeneity across studies was low (I2<20% for the primary outcome).

Interpretation: Despite individual patient data analysis from five RCTs, we were unable to confidently rule in nor rule out an Xpert MTB/RIF-associated reduction in mortality among outpatients tested for tuberculosis. Reduction in mortality among HIV-positive patients in a secondary analysis suggests the possibility of population-level impact.

Funding: US National Institutes of Health.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests

All other authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:. Study selection
RCT=randomised controlled trial. *The primary outcome was limited to three studies,, (n=8142), as Mupfumi and colleagues limited follow-up to 3 months.
Figure 2:
Figure 2:. Kaplan-Meier pooled survival estimates
Shaded areas represent 95% CIs.

Comment in

References

    1. WHO. Global tuberculosis report 2018 2018. http://www.who.int/tb/publications/global_report/en/ (accessed on Dec 1, 2018).
    1. WHO. Automated real-time nucleic acid amplification technology for rapid and simultaneous detection of tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance: Xpert MTB/RIF system. Policy statement Geneva: World Health Organization, 2011. - PubMed
    1. Albert H, Nathavitharana RR, Isaacs C, Pai M, Denkinger CM, Boehme CC. Development, roll-out and impact of Xpert MTB/RIF for tuberculosis: what lessons have we learnt and how can we do better? Eur Respir J 2016; 48: 516–25. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Creswell J, Codlin AJ, Andre E, et al. Results from early programmatic implementation of Xpert MTB/RIF testing in nine countries. BMC Infect Dis 2014; 14: 2. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hanrahan CF, Haguma P, Ochom E, et al. Implementation of Xpert MTB/RIF in Uganda: missed opportunities to improve diagnosis of tuberculosis. Open Forum Infect Dis 2016; 3: ofw068. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances