In house reverse membrane hybridisation assay versus GenoType MTBDRplus and their performance to detect mutations in the genes rpoB, katG and inhA

Multicenter evaluation of TB-SPRINT 59-Plex Beamedex®: accuracy and cost analysis

Background

Molecular tests can allow the rapid detection of tuberculosis (TB) and multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB). TB-SPRINT 59-Plex Beamedex® is a microbead-based assay developed for the simultaneous spoligotyping and detection of MDR-TB. The accuracy and cost evaluation of new assays and technologies are of great importance for their routine use in clinics and in research laboratories. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of TB-SPRINT at three laboratory research centers in Brazil and calculate its mean cost (MC) and activity-based costing (ABC).

Methods

TB-SPRINT data were compared with the phenotypic and genotypic profiles obtained using Bactec™ MGIT™ 960 system and Genotype® MTBDRplus, respectively.

Results

Compared with MGIT, the accuracies of TB-SPRINT for the detection of rifampicin and isoniazid resistance ranged from 81 to 92% and 91.3 to 93.9%, respectively. Compared with MTBDRplus, the accuracies of TB-SPRINT for rifampicin and isoniazid were 99 and 94.2%, respectively. Moreover, the MC and ABC of TB-SPRINT were USD 127.78 and USD 109.94, respectively.

Conclusion

TB-SPRINT showed good results for isoniazid and rifampicin resistance detection, but still needs improvement to achieve In Vitro Diagnostics standards.

Detection of tuberculosis drug resistance: a comparison by Mycobacterium tuberculosis MLPA assay versus Genotype®MTBDRplus

BACKGROUND

To cope with the emergence of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB), new molecular methods that can routinely be used to screen for a wide range of drug resistance related genetic markers in the Mycobacterium tuberculosis genome are urgently needed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the performance of multiplex ligaton-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) against Genotype® MTBDRplus to detect resistance to isoniazid (INHr) and rifampicin (RIFr).

METHOD

96 culture isolates characterised for identification, drug susceptibility testing (DST) and sequencing of rpoB, katG, and inhA genes were evaluated by the MLPA and Genotype®MTBDRplus assays.

RESULTS

With sequencing as a reference standard, sensitivity (SE) to detect INHr was 92.8% and 85.7%, and specificity (SP) was 100% and 97.5%, for MLPA and Genotype®MTBDRplus, respectively. In relation to RIFr, SE was 87.5% and 100%, and SP was 100% and 98.8%, respectively. Kappa value was identical between Genotype®MTBDRplus and MLPA compared with the standard DST and sequencing for detection of INHr [0.83 (0.75-0.91)] and RIFr [0.93 (0.88-0.98)].

CONCLUSION

Compared to Genotype®MTBDRplus, MLPA showed similar sensitivity to detect INH and RIF resistance. The results obtained by the MLPA and Genotype®MTBDRplus assays indicate that both molecular tests can be used for the rapid detection of drug-resistant TB with high accuracy. MLPA has the added value of providing information on the circulating M. tuberculosis lineages.