| Literature DB >> 24614179 |
Rajpal S Kashyap1, Amit R Nayak1, Hari M Gaherwar1, Aliabbas A Husain1, Seema D Shekhawat1, Ruchika K Jain1, Milind S Panchbhai1, Dhananjay V Raje2, Hemant J Purohit3, Girdhar M Taori1, Hatim F Daginawala1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present study was designed to investigate the utility of Quantiferon TB gold (QFT-G) and Tuberculin skin test (TST) for diagnosis of latent TB infection (LTBI) in high crowding TB endemic zone of Nagpur, India and their comparison with associated risk factors.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24614179 PMCID: PMC3948673 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089524
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Study flow diagram.
General characteristics of TB exposed cases (n = 162).
| Characteristics | Levels | No. (%) of cases |
| Age (years) | ||
|
| 59 (36.41) | |
|
| 58 (35.80) | |
|
| 45 (27.77) | |
| Sex | (M/F) | 58/104 |
| Occupation | ||
|
| 31 (19.13) | |
|
| 47 (29.01) | |
|
| 84 (51.85) | |
| Education |
| 125 (77.16) |
|
| 37 (22.8) | |
| BMI (kg/m2) |
| 58 (35.80) |
|
| 88 (54.32) | |
|
| 16 (00.09) | |
| Symptoms | ||
|
| 23 (14.19) | |
|
| 52 (32.09) | |
|
| 15 (09.25) | |
|
| 39 (24.07) | |
|
| 21 (12.96) | |
|
| 20 (12.34) | |
| Behavioural factors | ||
|
| 4 (02.46) | |
|
| 2 (01.23) | |
|
| 14 (08.64) | |
| BCG vaccinated | ||
|
| 67 (57.26) | |
|
| 50 (42.74) | |
| Duration of exposure | ||
|
| 112 (69.13) | |
|
| 50 (30.87) | |
| Contact | ||
|
| 100 (61.72) | |
|
| 62 (38.28) |
Out of 117.
Correlation between the QFT-G and TST assays in exposed population (n = 162).
| QFT result | Mantoux result | |||||
| ≥5 mm | ≥10 mm | ≥15 mm | ||||
| Positive | Negative | Positive | Negative | Positive | Negative | |
| Positive | 71 | 7 | 34 | 44 | 19 | 59 |
| Negative | 68 | 16 | 33 | 51 | 13 | 71 |
|
| 53.7% | 52.47% | 55.56% | |||
|
| 0.098 | 0.043 | 0.091 | |||
|
| [−0.008, 0.204] | [−0.113, 0.199] | [−0.037, 0.219] | |||
|
| 0.033 | 0.289 | 0.078 | |||
Correlation between patient characteristics and QFT results obtained through bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis (n = 162).
| Characteristic | Levels | QFT result (cut-off ≥0.35 IU/ml) | ||
| Positive cases/Total cases (%) | OR (95% CI) | |||
| Unadjusted | Adjusted | |||
| Age (years) | ||||
|
| 18/59 (30.50) | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
|
| 32/58 (55.17) | 2.77 (1.30–6.03) | 4.75 (1.94–11.62) | |
|
| 28/45 (62.22) | 3.68 (1.64–8.58) | 6.31 (2.43–16.34) | |
| Sex | ||||
|
| 30/58 (51.72) | 1.00 | ||
|
| 48/104 (46.15) | 0.80 (0.42–1.53) | ||
| Occupation | ||||
|
| 7/31 (22.58) | 1.00 | ||
|
| 28/47 (59.57) | 4.88 (1.81–14.63) | ||
|
| 43/84 (51.19) | 3.51 (1.41–9.76) | ||
| Education | ||||
|
| 23/40 (57.50) | 1.00 | ||
|
| 55/122 (45.08) | 0.61 (0.29–1.25) | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | ||||
|
| 43/88 (48.86) | 1.00 | ||
|
| 28/58 (48.27) | 0.97 (0.50–1.90) | ||
|
| 7/16 (43.75) | 0.82 (0.26–2.43) | ||
| BCG | ||||
|
| 31/50 (62.00) | 1.00 | ||
|
| 25/67 (37.31) | 0.37 (0.17–0.78) | ||
| Duration of exposure | ||||
|
| 43/112 (38.39) | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
|
| 35/50 (70.00) | 3.69 (1.83–7.76) | 6.28 (2.68–14.73) | |
| Contact | ||||
|
| 41/100 (41.00) | 1.00 | ||
|
| 37/62 (59.67) | 2.11 (1.11–4.08) | ||
*P<0.05;
**P<0.0001;
Bivariate analysis;
Parsimonious multivariate logistic regression model;
n = 117 (45 unknown).
Correlation between patient characteristics and Mantoux (TST) results obtained through bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis (n = 162).
| Characteristic | Levels | Mantoux test (cut-point ≥10 mm) | ||
| Positive case/Total cases (%) | OR (95% CI) | |||
| Unadjusted | Adjusted | |||
| Age (years) | ||||
|
| 24/59 (40.67) | 1.00 | ||
|
| 24/58 (41.38) | 1.03 (0.49–2.16) | ||
|
| 19/45 (42.22) | 1.06 (0.48–2.35) | ||
| Sex | ||||
|
| 25/58 (43.10) | 1.00 | ||
|
| 42/104 (40.38) | 0.89 (0.46–1.73) | ||
| Occupation | ||||
|
| 9/31 (29.03) | 1.00 | ||
|
| 17/47 (36.17) | 1.37 (0.52–3.80) | ||
|
| 41/84 (48.81) | 2.29 (0.96–5.85) | ||
| Education | ||||
|
| 13/40 (32.50) | 1.00 | ||
|
| 56/122 (45.90) | 1.89 (0.89–4.22) | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | ||||
|
| 33/88 (37.50) | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
|
| 31/58 (53.44) | 1.90 (0.97–3.76) | 2.10 (0.99–4.46) | |
|
| 3/16 (18.75) | 0.40 (0.08–1.38) | 0.42 (0.10–1.75) | |
| BCG | ||||
|
| 22/50 (44.00) | 1.00 | ||
|
| 17/67 (25.37) | 0.44 (0.19–0.95) | ||
| Duration of exposure | ||||
|
| 37/112 (33.03) | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
|
| 30/50 (60.00) | 3.01 (1.51–6.09) | 3.33 (1.61–6.88) | |
| Contact | ||||
|
| 38/100 (38.00) | 1 | ||
|
| 29/62 (46.77) | 1.43 (0.75–2.73) | ||
*P<0.05;
Bivariate analysis;
Parsimonious multivariate logistic regression model;
n = 117 (45 unknown).
Multinomial univariate logistic regression to determine the correlation of risk factors with concordant and discordant test results.
| Characteristics | Levels | Odds ratio (95% CI) | ||
| QFT−/TST+ ( | QFT+/TST− ( | QFT+/TST+ ( | ||
| Age (years) |
| 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
|
| 1.91 (0.71–5.26) | 5.46 (1.91–15.62) | 2.28 (0.77–6.75) | |
|
| 1.83 (0.52–6.45) | 1.18 (0.42–3.35) | 0.72 (0.23–2.22) | |
| Gender |
| 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
|
| 0.80 (0.32–2.01) | 0.73 (0.31–1.69) | 0.74 (0.29–1.83) | |
| Occupation |
| 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
|
| 1.07 (0.27–4.25) | 5.14 (1.40–18.58) | 5.15 (1.21–21.82) | |
|
| 3.47 (1.14–10.53) | 5.68 (1.64–19.63) | 6.00 (1.51–23.79) | |
| Education |
| 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
|
| 6.45 (1.37–30.30) | 0.99 (0.41–2.41) | 1.00 (0.38–2.59) | |
| BMI (kg/m2) |
| 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
|
| 3.32 (1.26–8.72) | 1.61 (0.64–4.08) | 1.77 (0.67–4.66) | |
|
| 0.28 (0.03–2.43) | 0.81 (0.23–2.78) | 0.41 (0.08–2.12) | |
| Duration |
| 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
|
| 0.50 (0.14–1.73) | 0.93 (0.35–2.52) | 11.82 (4.19–33.30) | |
| Contact |
| 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
|
| 0.64 (0.24–1.72) | 1.14 (0.49–2.66) | 3.23 (1.31–7.97) | |
*P<0.05;
**P<0.0001;
QFT−/TST – as reference level.
QFT and TST assay in initial and Follow studies and their correlation with Baseline characteristics.
| Case Details | Age (in years) | Sex | Occupation | Education | Baseline BMI | BCG | Exposure Duration | Contact type | QFT values | QFT Result | Follow up QFT values | Follow up QFT Result | TST values | TST Result | Follow up TST values | Follow up TST Result |
| Case-1 | 40–60 | Male | Labour | literate | Normal | NA | Moderate | Direct | 0 | Negative | 1.46 | Positive | 9 mm | Negative | 10 mm | Positive |
| Case-2 | <18 | Male | Student | literate | Underweight | NA | Moderate | Indirect | 12.63 | Positive | 18.27 | Positive | 5 mm | Negative | 11 mm | Positive |
| Case-3 | 18–40 | Female | House wife | literate | Underweight | NA | Moderate | Indirect | 0.27 | Negative | 0.04 | Negative | 24 mm | Positive | 11 mm | Positive |
| Case-4 | 18–40 | Female | House wife | literate | Underweight | Yes | Moderate | Direct | 6.35 | Positive | 15.84 | Positive | 9 mm | Negative | 11 mm | Positive |
| Case-5 | <18 | Female | Student | literate | Underweight | Yes | Moderate | Indirect | 0.3 | Negative | 0.14 | Negative | 10 mm | Positive | 11 mm | Positive |
| Case-6 | 18–40 | Female | House wife | literate | Underweight | NA | High | Direct | 1.46 | Positive | 2.95 | Positive | 11 mm | Positive | ND | ND |
| Case-7 | 40–60 | Male | Labour | illiterate | Underweight | NO | High | Direct | 9.28 | Positive | 3.22 | Positive | 22 mm | Positive | 18 mm | Positive |
| Case-8 | <18 | Female | Student | literate | Underweight | NO | High | Direct | 1.9 | Positive | 14.88 | Positive | 14 mm | Positive | ND | ND |
NA - Not Available.
ND - Not Done.
*Conversion of QFT Test into positive after follow up.
QFT Test still remains positive after follow up.
QFT Test still remains negative after follow up.
Conversion of TST Test into positive after follow up.
TST Test still remains positive after follow up.
TST was not done in follow up cases.