Moon Hee-Won, Gaur Rajiv L, Tien Sara Shu-Hwa, Spangler Mary, Pai Madhukar, Banaei Niaz
Department of Pathology, Division of Infectious Diseases & Geographic Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Jun;55(6):1650-1657. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02498-16. Epub 2017 Mar 15.
Although launched in 2015, little is known about the accuracy of QuantiFERON-TB Gold-Plus (QFT-Plus) for diagnosis of latent infection (LTBI). Unlike its predecessor, QFT-Plus utilizes two antigen tubes to elicit an immune response from CD4 and CD8 T lymphocytes. We conducted a cross-sectional study in low-risk health care workers (HCWs) at a single U.S. center to compare QFT-Plus to QuantiFERON-TB Gold in-tube (QFT). A total of 989 HCWs were tested with both QFT and QFT-Plus. Risk factors for LTBI were obtained from a questionnaire. QFT-Plus was considered positive if either antigen tube 1 (TB1) or TB2 tested positive, per the manufacturer's recommendations, or if both TB1 and TB2 tested positive, using a conservative definition. Results were compared using Cohen's kappa and linear regression, respectively. Agreement of QFT with QFT-Plus was high, at 95.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.3 to 96.9; kappa, 0.57). The majority of discordant results between QFT and QFT-Plus TB1 (84.8%) and QFT and QFT-Plus TB2 (88.6%) fell within the range of 0.2 to 0.7 IU/ml. The positivity rate in 626 HCWs with no identifiable risk factors and no self-reported history of positive LTBI tests was 2.1% (CI, 1.0 to 3.2) and 3.0% (CI, 1.7 to 4.3) with QFT and QFT-Plus, respectively. A conservative definition of a QFT-Plus-positive result yielded a positivity rate of 1.0% (CI, 0.2 to 1.7; value of 0.0002 versus QFT-Plus and 0.07 versus QFT). On follow-up testing, of 11 HCWs with discordant QFT-Plus results, 90.9% (10/11) had a negative QFT result. The QFT-Plus assay showed a high degree of agreement with QFT in U.S. HCWs. A conservative interpretation of QFT-Plus eliminated nearly all nonreproducible positive results in low-risk HCWs. Larger studies are needed to validate the latter finding and to more clearly define conditions under which a conservative interpretation can be used to minimize nonreproducible positive results in low-risk populations.
尽管QuantiFERON-TB Gold-Plus(QFT-Plus)于2015年推出,但对于其诊断潜伏感染(LTBI)的准确性却知之甚少。与前身不同,QFT-Plus使用两个抗原管来激发CD4和CD8 T淋巴细胞的免疫反应。我们在美国一个单一中心对低风险医护人员(HCWs)进行了一项横断面研究,以比较QFT-Plus与管内QuantiFERON-TB Gold(QFT)。共有989名医护人员接受了QFT和QFT-Plus检测。通过问卷调查获取LTBI的危险因素。根据制造商的建议,如果抗原管1(TB1)或TB2检测呈阳性,或者使用保守定义,若TB1和TB2均检测呈阳性,则QFT-Plus被视为阳性。分别使用Cohen's kappa和线性回归比较结果。QFT与QFT-Plus的一致性很高,为95.6%(95%置信区间[CI],94.3至96.9;kappa值为0.57)。QFT与QFT-Plus的TB1之间(84.8%)以及QFT与QFT-Plus的TB2之间(88.6%)的大多数不一致结果落在0.2至0.7 IU/ml范围内。在626名无明确危险因素且无自我报告LTBI检测阳性史的医护人员中,QFT和QFT-Plus的阳性率分别为2.1%(CI,1.0至3.2)和3.0%(CI,1.7至4.3)。对QFT-Plus阳性结果的保守定义得出的阳性率为1.0%(CI,0.2至1.7;与QFT-Plus相比P值为0.0002,与QFT相比P值为0.07)。在后续检测中,1名QFT-Plus结果不一致的医护人员中,90.9%(10/11)的QFT结果为阴性。在美国医护人员中,QFT-Plus检测与QFT显示出高度一致性(95.6%)。对QFT-Plus的保守解释几乎消除了低风险医护人员中所有不可重复的阳性结果。需要进行更大规模的研究来验证后一发现,并更明确地界定在何种情况下可使用保守解释来尽量减少低风险人群中不可重复的阳性结果。