QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus Is a More Sensitive Screening Tool than QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube for Latent Tuberculosis Infection among Older Adults in Long-Term Care Facilities

We investigated the prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) among the residents in seven long-term care facilities (LTCFs) located in different regions of Taiwan and compared the performance of two interferon gamma release assays, i.e., QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-GIT) and QuantiFERO...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of clinical microbiology 2018-08, Vol.56 (8)
Hauptverfasser: Chien, Jung-Yien, Chiang, Hsiu-Tzy, Lu, Min-Chi, Ko, Wen-Chien, Yu, Chong-Jen, Chen, Yen-Hsu, Hsueh, Po-Ren
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We investigated the prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) among the residents in seven long-term care facilities (LTCFs) located in different regions of Taiwan and compared the performance of two interferon gamma release assays, i.e., QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-GIT) and QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) for screening LTBI. We also assessed the diagnostic performance against a composite reference standard (subjects with persistent-positive, transient-positive, and negative results from QFTs during reproducibility analysis were classified as definite, possible, and not LTBI, respectively). Two hundred forty-four residents were enrolled, and 229 subjects were included in the analysis. The median age was 80 years (range, 60 to 102 years old), and 117 (51.1%) were male. Among them, 66 (28.8%) and 74 (32.3%) subjects had positive results from QFT-GIT and QFT-Plus, respectively, and the results for 215 (93.9%) subjects showed agreement. Using the composite reference standard, 66 (28.8%), 11 (4.8%), and 152 (66.4%) were classified as definite, possible, and not LTBI, respectively. For definite LTBI, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of QFT-GIT were 89.4%, 95.7%, 89.4%, and 95.7%, respectively, and those for QFT-Plus were 100.0%, 95.1%, 89.2%, and 100.0%, respectively. The sensitivity of QFT-GIT decreased gradually with patient age. Compared to QFT-GIT, QFT-Plus displayed significantly higher sensitivity (100.0% versus 89.4%, = 0.013) and similar specificity (95.1% versus 95.7%). In conclusion, a high prevalence of LTBI was found among elders in LTCFs in Taiwan. The new QFT-Plus test demonstrated a higher sensitivity than QFT-GIT in the older adults in LTCFs.
ISSN:0095-1137
1098-660X
DOI:10.1128/JCM.00427-18