| Literature DB >> 26381644 |
Zarko Grozdanovic1, Luis C Berrocal Almanza2, Surabhi Goyal3, Abid Hussain4, Tilman E Klassert5, Dominik Driesch6, Viktoriya Tokaryeva7, Yvonne Yi-Na Löschmann1, Gadamm Sumanlatha4, Niyaz Ahmed8, Vijayalakshmi Valluri9, Ralf R Schumann3, Birgit Lala10, Hortense Slevogt5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Existing reading schemes for chest X-ray (CXR) used to grade the extent of disease severity at diagnosis in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) are often based on numerical scores that summate specific radiographic features. However, since PTB is known to exhibit a wide heterogeneity in pathology, certain features might be differentially associated with clinical parameters of disease severity.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26381644 PMCID: PMC4575099 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138070
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Characteristics of study participants.
| Variable | n = 141 |
|---|---|
| Age mean (SD), (years) | 26.9 ± 11.4 |
| Gender n (%), male/female | 71 (50.4)/70 (49.6) |
| BMI mean (SD), (Kg/m2) | 16.3 ± 2.5 |
| Smoking mean (SD), pack-year | 0.20 ± 0.81 |
| Drinking n (%), (yes/no) | 27 (19.1)/114 (80.9) |
| Sputum smear grade at diagnosis n (%) | |
| Scanty | 12 (8.5) |
| 1+ | 47 (33.3) |
| 2+ | 35 (24.8) |
| 3+ | 47 (33.3) |
| 2 months sputum smear status n (%) | |
| Negative | 132 (93.6) |
| Positive | 9 (6.4) |
| 6 months outcome n (%) | |
| Cured | 134 (95) |
| Failed | 4 (2.8) |
| Default | 1 (0.7) |
| Transferred | 1 (0.7) |
| Died | 1 (0.7) |
(SD) standard deviation.
Specific Chest Radiograph (CXR) features of lung involvement.
| Variable | n = 141 |
|---|---|
|
| |
| None | 8 (5.7) |
| 1 quadrant | 41 (29.1) |
| 2 quadrants | 61 (43.3) |
| 3 quadrants | 21 (14.9) |
| 4 quadrants | 10 (7.1) |
|
| 59 (41.8)/82 (58.2) |
|
| |
| None | 100 (70.9) |
| 1 Cavity | 34 (24.1) |
| 2 Cavities | 7 (5) |
|
| 54.7 ± 23.3 |
|
| 23 (16.3)/118 (83.7) |
(SD) standard deviation.
Chest Radiograph (CXR) results according to the presence of alveolar infiltrates in the upper or lower lung lobe.
| Variable | n = 141 | Lower lobe infiltrate | Upper lobe infiltrate |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 15 (10.6) | 126 (89.4) | |
| None | 8 (5.7) | 7 (46.7) | 1 (0.8) |
| 1 quadrant | 41 (29.1) | 7 (46.7) | 34 (27) |
| 2 quadrants | 61 (43.3) | 1 (6.7) | 60 (47.6) |
| 3 quadrants | 21 (14.9) | 21 (16.7) | |
| 4 quadrants | 10 (7.1) | 10 (7.9) |
Inter-rater agreement on Chest Radiograph (CXR) findings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Alveolar infiltrates | 0.421 | 0.005 | 0.720 | Substantial |
| Lymphadenopathy | 0.285 | 0.060 | 0.348 | Fair |
| Cavitation | 0.480 | <0.0001 | 0.510 | Moderate |
| Pleural effusion | 0.448 | 0.002 | 0.636 | Substantial |
|
|
|
|
| |
| Affected lung area | 0.734 | <0.0001 | -50 to 31.4% |
Univariable linear regression: association of affected lung area with BMI
| Predictor | β | S.E | P value | 95%CI for β |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| - 0.620 | 0.229 | 0.008 | -1.073–-0.167 |
|
| - 0.034 | 0.009 | <0.0001 | -0.052–-0.016 |
|
| 0.044 | 0.359 | 0.903 | -0.666–0.753 |
| Affected lung area | - 0.035 | 0.015 | 0.019 | -0.065–-0.006 |
Model parameters dependent variable BMI: Model 1 Constant 17.53 ANOVA 0.008, R2 0.044. Model 2 Constant 18.22 ANOVA <0.0001, R2 0.087. Model 3 Constant 18.21 ANOVA 0.002, R2 0.076.
Univariable and multivariable ordinal regression: association of alveolar infiltrates and cavities with number of bacteria in sputum smear.
| Predictor | β | S.E | P value | Exp β (OR) | 95%CI for Exp β (OR) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| 1 quadrant | 1.395 | 0.736 | 0.058 | 4.04 | 0.95–17.06 |
| 2 quadrants | 1.573 | 0.719 | 0.029 | 4.82 | 1.82–19.76 |
| 3 quadrants | 2.436 | 0.803 | 0.002 | 11.43 | 2.37–55.21 |
| 4 quadrants | 2.659 | 0.923 | 0.004 | 14.29 | 2.34–87.21 |
|
| |||||
| No cavities | -1.760 | 0.845 | 0.037 | 0.17 | 0.03–0.90 |
| 1 cavity | -1.471 | 0.881 | 0.095 | 0.23 | 0.04–1.29 |
|
| 0.016 | 0.007 | 0.019 | 1.02 | 1.00–1.03 |
|
| |||||
| Alveolar infiltrates | |||||
| 1 quadrant | 1.345 | 0.743 | 0.070 | 3.84 | 0.90–16.45 |
| 2 quadrants | 1.465 | 0.772 | 0.058 | 4.33 | 0.95–19.63 |
| 3 quadrants | 2.382 | 0.952 | 0.012 | 10.83 | 1.68–70.01 |
| 4 quadrants | 2.552 | 1.221 | 0.037 | 12.83 | 1.17–140.5 |
| Cavitation | |||||
| No cavities | -1.727 | 0.874 | 0.048 | 0.18 | 0.03–0.99 |
| 1 cavity | -1.605 | 0.914 | 0.079 | 0.20 | 0.03–1.21 |
| Affected lung area | 0.001 | 0.012 | 0.997 | 1.00 | 0.98–1.02 |
|
| |||||
| Alveolar infiltrates | |||||
| 1 quadrant | 1.345 | 0.742 | 0.070 | 3.84 | 0.90–16.44 |
| 2 quadrants | 1.465 | 0.727 | 0.044 | 4.33 | 1.04–19.99 |
| 3 quadrants | 2.383 | 0.813 | 0.003 | 10.84 | 2.20–53.84 |
| 4 quadrants | 2.553 | 0.945 | 0.007 | 12.84 | 2.02–81.77 |
| Cavitation | |||||
| No cavities | -1.727 | 0.871 | 0.047 | 0.18 | 0.03–0.98 |
| 1 cavity | -1.605 | 0.907 | 0.077 | 0.20 | 0.03–1.19 |
Dependent ordinal variable sputum smear (<1+, 1+, 2+ and 3+). Model 1 -2Log 52, Chi2 0.015, Goodness of fit 0.88, Pseudo R2 (Cox and snell 0.084 and Nagelkerke 0.091), test of parallel lines 0.021. Model 2 -2Log 27.5, Chi2 0.068, Goodness of fit 0.98, Pseudo R2 (Cox and snell 0.037 and Nagelkerke 0.040), test of parallel lines 0.971. Model 3 -2Log 53, Chi2 0,020, Goodness of fit 0,083, Pseudo R2 (Cox and snell 0,067 and Nagelkerke 0,041), test of parallel lines 0,240. Model 4 -2Log 158, Chi2 0.08, Goodness of fit 0,012, Pseudo R2 (Cox and snell 0.11 and Nagelkerke 0.12), test of parallel lines 0.022. Model 5 -2Log 100, Chi2 0.009, Goodness of fit 0,080, Pseudo R2 (Cox and snell 0.11 and Nagelkerke 0.12), test of parallel lines 0.075. Reference categories: Sputum smear: 3+, Alveolar infiltrates: No infiltration, Cavities: 2 cavities.
Univariable logistic regression: association of CXR score based on the affected area of the lung and presence of cavitation with two-month sputum smear.
| Predictor | β | S.E | P value | Exp β (OR) | 95%CI for Exp β |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| - 0.720 | 0.698 | 0.303 | 0.487 | -0.046–-0.004 |
|
| 0.007 | 0.015 | 0.637 | 1.007 | 0.978–1.036 |
|
| 0.015 | 0.011 | 0.167 | 1.015 | 0.994–1.037 |
Model parameters: Model 1 constant:- 2.22, -2Log likelihood 65.9-Chi2 0.31, Hosmer and lemeshow test <0.0001, R2 (Cox 0.007 and Nagelkerke 0.019). Model 2 constant:- 3.07, -2Log likelihood 66.7-Chi2 6.37, Hosmer and lemeshow test 0.206, R2 (Cox 0.002 and Nagelkerke 0.004). Model 3 constant:- 3.77, -2Log likelihood 65-Chi2 1.67, Hosmer and lemeshow test 0.446, R2 (Cox 0.013 and Nagelkerke 0.036).
Changes in CXR specific features at diagnosis and after 6 months of DOTS therapy.
| Variable | At diagnosisn = 62 | 6 months therapyn = 62 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| No | 2 (3.2) | 46 (74.4) | |
| 1 quadrant | 16 (25.8) | 13 (21) | |
| 2 quadrants | 32 (51.6) | 2 (3.2) | <0.0001 |
| 3 quadrants | 7 (11.3) | 1 (1.6) | |
| 4 quadrants | 5 (8.1) | ||
|
| 29 (46.8)/33 (53.2) | 10 (16.1)/52 (83.9) | <0.0001 |
|
| |||
| No | 46 (74.2) | 61 (98.4) | |
| 1 Cavity | 15 (24.8) | 1 (1.6) | 0.002 |
| 2 Cavities | 1 (1.6) | ||
|
| 56 ± 21.5 | 31 ± 20 | <0.0001 |
|
| 12 (19.4)/50 (80.6) | 4 (6.5)/58 (93.5) | 0.008 |