Cox Samyra R, Erisa Kamoga Caleb, Kitonsa Peter James, Nalutaaya Annet, Nantale Mariam, Kayondo Francis, Mukiibi James, Mukiibi Michael, Nakasolya Olga, Dowdy David W, Katamba Achilles, Kendall Emily A
Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2024 Jun;21(6):875-883. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202308-752OC.
C-reactive protein (CRP) has demonstrated utility as a point-of-care triage test for tuberculosis (TB) in clinical settings, particularly among people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), but its performance for general-population TB screening is not well characterized. To assess the accuracy of CRP for detecting pulmonary TB disease among individuals undergoing community-based screening or presenting for evaluation of TB symptoms in Kampala, Uganda. We pooled data from two case-control studies conducted between May 2018 and December 2022 among adolescents and adults (⩾15 yr) in Kampala, Uganda. We conducted community-based screening for TB, regardless of symptoms. We enrolled people with Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra-positive (including trace) sputum results and a sample of people with Ultra-negative results. We also enrolled symptomatic patients diagnosed with TB and controls with negative TB evaluations from ambulatory care settings. Participants underwent further evaluation, including sputum culture, CRP, and HIV testing. We assessed the accuracy of CRP alone or with symptom screening against a bacteriologic reference standard. Our primary analysis evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of CRP at a cutoff of 5 mg/L. Diagnostic performance was summarized by calculating the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). In the community setting ( = 544), CRP ⩾ 5 mg/L had a sensitivity of 55.3% (95% confidence interval, 47.0-63.4%) and specificity of 84.7% (79.7-88.8%) for confirmed TB; AUC was 0.75 (0.70-0.79). Screening for CRP ⩾ 5 mg/L or positive symptoms increased sensitivity to 92.0% (86.4-95.8%) at the expense of specificity (57.1% [50.8-63.2%]). In the ambulatory care setting ( = 944), sensitivity of CRP ⩾ 5 mg/L was 86.7% (81.8-90.7%), specificity was 68.6% (64.8-72.2%), and AUC (0.84 [0.81-0.87]) did not differ significantly by HIV status. CRP ⩾ 5 mg/L was >90% sensitive among individuals with a medium or high semiquantitative Xpert result in both settings. Although CRP did not meet World Health Organization (WHO) TB screening benchmarks in the community, it demonstrated high specificity, and sensitivity was high among individuals with high sputum bacillary burden who are likely to be most infectious. In ambulatory care, estimated sensitivity and specificity were each within 4 percentage points of WHO benchmarks, with no meaningful difference in performance by HIV status.
C反应蛋白(CRP)已被证明可作为临床环境中结核病(TB)即时护理分诊检测手段,尤其是在人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)感染者中,但它在普通人群结核病筛查中的表现尚未得到充分描述。为评估CRP在乌干达坎帕拉接受社区筛查或因结核病症状前来评估的个体中检测肺结核病的准确性。我们汇总了2018年5月至2022年12月期间在乌干达坎帕拉针对青少年和成年人(≥15岁)开展的两项病例对照研究的数据。我们对结核病进行社区筛查,无论有无症状。我们纳入了Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra检测痰结果呈阳性(包括微量)的人群以及一部分Ultra检测结果呈阴性的人群。我们还纳入了被诊断为结核病的有症状患者以及来自门诊护理机构结核病评估为阴性的对照者。参与者接受了进一步评估,包括痰培养、CRP检测和HIV检测。我们评估了单独使用CRP或结合症状筛查相对于细菌学参考标准的准确性。我们的主要分析评估了CRP在截断值为5mg/L时的敏感性和特异性。通过计算受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)来总结诊断性能。在社区环境中(n = 544),对于确诊结核病,CRP≥5mg/L的敏感性为55.3%(95%置信区间,47.0 - 63.4%),特异性为84.7%(79.7 - 88.8%);AUC为0.75(0.70 - 0.79)。筛查CRP≥5mg/L或有阳性症状可将敏感性提高到92.0%(86.4 - 95.8%),但特异性降低(57.1% [50.8 - 63.2%])。在门诊护理环境中(n = 944),CRP≥5mg/L的敏感性为86.7%(81.8 - 90.7%),特异性为68.6%(64.8 - 72.2%),且AUC(0.84 [0.81 - 0.87])在不同HIV状态下无显著差异。在两种环境中,对于Xpert结果为中等或高度半定量的个体,CRP≥5mg/L的敏感性均>90%。尽管CRP在社区中未达到世界卫生组织(WHO)结核病筛查基准,但它显示出高特异性,并且在痰液细菌负荷高、可能具有最强传染性的个体中敏感性较高。在门诊护理中,估计的敏感性和特异性均在WHO基准的4个百分点以内,不同HIV状态下的性能无显著差异。