BACKGROUND: Current symptom screening algorithms for intensified tuberculosis case finding or prior to isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) were derived from antiretroviral-naive cohorts. There is a need to validate screening algorithms in patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART). METHODS: We performed cross-sectional evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of symptom screening, including the World Health Organization (WHO) algorithm, to rule out tuberculosis in HIV-infected individuals pre-ART and on ART undergoing screening prior to IPT. RESULTS: A total of 1429 participants, 54% on ART, had symptom screening and a sputum culture result available. Culture-positive tuberculosis was diagnosed in 126 patients (8.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.4%-10.4%). The WHO symptom screen in the on-ART compared with the pre-ART group had a lower sensitivity (23.8% vs 47.6%), but higher specificity (94.4% vs 79.8%). The effect of ART was independent of CD4(+) count in multivariable analyses. The posttest probability of tuberculosis following a negative WHO screen was 8.9% (95% CI, 7.4%-10.8%) and 4.4% (95% CI, 3.7%-5.2%) for the pre-ART and on-ART groups, respectively. Addition of body mass index to the WHO screen significantly improved discriminatory ability in both ART groups, which was further improved by adding CD4 count and ART duration. CONCLUSIONS: The WHO symptom screen has poor sensitivity, especially among patients on ART, in a clinic where regular tuberculosis screening is practiced. Consequently, a significant proportion of individuals with tuberculosis would inadvertently be placed on isoniazid monotherapy despite high negative predictive values. Until more sensitive methods of ruling out tuberculosis are established, it would be prudent to do a sputum culture prior to IPT where this is feasible.
BACKGROUND: Current symptom screening algorithms for intensified tuberculosis case finding or prior to isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) were derived from antiretroviral-naive cohorts. There is a need to validate screening algorithms in patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART). METHODS: We performed cross-sectional evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of symptom screening, including the World Health Organization (WHO) algorithm, to rule out tuberculosis in HIV-infected individuals pre-ART and on ART undergoing screening prior to IPT. RESULTS: A total of 1429 participants, 54% on ART, had symptom screening and a sputum culture result available. Culture-positive tuberculosis was diagnosed in 126 patients (8.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.4%-10.4%). The WHO symptom screen in the on-ART compared with the pre-ART group had a lower sensitivity (23.8% vs 47.6%), but higher specificity (94.4% vs 79.8%). The effect of ART was independent of CD4(+) count in multivariable analyses. The posttest probability of tuberculosis following a negative WHO screen was 8.9% (95% CI, 7.4%-10.8%) and 4.4% (95% CI, 3.7%-5.2%) for the pre-ART and on-ART groups, respectively. Addition of body mass index to the WHO screen significantly improved discriminatory ability in both ART groups, which was further improved by adding CD4 count and ART duration. CONCLUSIONS: The WHO symptom screen has poor sensitivity, especially among patients on ART, in a clinic where regular tuberculosis screening is practiced. Consequently, a significant proportion of individuals with tuberculosis would inadvertently be placed on isoniazid monotherapy despite high negative predictive values. Until more sensitive methods of ruling out tuberculosis are established, it would be prudent to do a sputum culture prior to IPT where this is feasible.
Authors: David W Dowdy; Richard E Chaisson; Gary Maartens; Elizabeth L Corbett; Susan E Dorman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-08-11 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: David Moore; Cheryl Liechty; Paul Ekwaru; Willy Were; Gerald Mwima; Peter Solberg; George Rutherford; Jonathan Mermin Journal: AIDS Date: 2007-03-30 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Elizabeth L Corbett; Tsitsi Bandason; Yin Bun Cheung; Shungu Munyati; Peter Godfrey-Faussett; Richard Hayes; Gavin Churchyard; Anthony Butterworth; Peter Mason Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Faiz Ahmad Khan; Sabine Verkuijl; Andrew Parrish; Fadzai Chikwava; Raphael Ntumy; Wafaa El-Sadr; Andrea A Howard Journal: AIDS Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Paul K Drain; Emily P Hyle; Farzad Noubary; Kenneth A Freedberg; Douglas Wilson; William R Bishai; William Rodriguez; Ingrid V Bassett Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2013-12-10 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: Paul K Drain; Kristina L Bajema; David Dowdy; Keertan Dheda; Kogieleum Naidoo; Samuel G Schumacher; Shuyi Ma; Erin Meermeier; David M Lewinsohn; David R Sherman Journal: Clin Microbiol Rev Date: 2018-07-18 Impact factor: 26.132
Authors: L M Cranmer; A Langat; K Ronen; C J McGrath; S LaCourse; J Pintye; B Odeny; B Singa; A Katana; L Nganga; J Kinuthia; G John-Stewart Journal: Int J Tuberc Lung Dis Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: Sylvia M LaCourse; Lisa M Cranmer; Daniel Matemo; John Kinuthia; Barbra A Richardson; Grace John-Stewart; David J Horne Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2016-02-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: T Agizew; D Surie; J E Oeltmann; M Letebele; S Pals; U Mathebula; A Mathoma; M Kassa; S Hamda; P Pono; G Rankgoane-Pono; R Boyd; A Auld; A Finlay Journal: Public Health Action Date: 2020-06-21
Authors: Molebogeng X Rangaka; Robert J Wilkinson; Andrew Boulle; Judith R Glynn; Katherine Fielding; Gilles van Cutsem; Katalin A Wilkinson; Rene Goliath; Shaheed Mathee; Eric Goemaere; Gary Maartens Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-05-13 Impact factor: 79.321