Richard N van Zyl-Smit1, Rannakoe J Lehloenya1, Richard Meldau1, Keertan Dheda1. 1. 1 Lung Infection and Immunity Unit, Division of Pulmonology & UCT Lung Institute, Department of Medicine, 2 Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, 3 Institute of Infectious Diseases and Molecular Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa ; 4 Department of Infection, University College London Medical School, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The standardized blood-based TB antigen-specific T cell assay, T-SPOT.(®)TB, is ~10% more sensitive than QuantiFERON(®)-TB-GIT (QFT-GIT) in detecting presumed latent TB infection (LTBI). Whilst T-SPOT.(®)TB uses a fixed number of lymphocytes per well, QFT-GIT uses a fixed volume of blood (~1 mL). However, the person-to-person lymphocyte count can vary by 2 to 3 fold. We hypothesized that this variability could explain the reduced sensitivity of QFT-GIT. The findings could have potential implications for improving case detection. METHODS: T-SPOT.(®)TB was compared to QFT-GIT readouts before and after normalization of lymphocyte count (by adjusting the blood volume or lymphocyte enrichment within a fixed 1 mL volume) to an arbitrary value of 2.5×10(6) cells/mL. Within-test variability was evaluated to meaningfully interpret results. RESULTS: In patient-specific optimization experiments IFN-γ concentrations significantly increased when QFT-GIT positive samples were enriched with increasing concentrations of lymphocytes (1×10(6) vs. 2.5×10(6) cells/mL). However, for the group as a whole lymphocyte enrichment whilst maintaining a ~1 mL volume, compared to un-enriched samples, did not significantly increase IFN-γ [median (range): 0.03 (0-4.41) vs. 0.20 (0-2.40) IU/mL; P=0.64]. There was also no increase in IFN-γ readouts when QFT-GIT lymphocyte numbers were corrected (to 2.5×10(6) lymphocytes/mL) using volume adjustment. Interestingly, adjusted values were significantly lower than unadjusted ones [median (range): 0.02 (0-12.93) vs. 0.09 (0-14.23) IU/mL; P=0.008]. CONCLUSIONS: In QFT-GIT negative subjects lymphocyte enrichment did not increase QFT-GIT positivity rates. The reduced clinical sensitivity of the QFT-GIT assay, compared to T-SPOT.(®)TB, is likely to be due to factors other than lymphocyte count alone. Further studies are required to clarify these findings.
BACKGROUND: The standardized blood-based TB antigen-specific T cell assay, T-SPOT.(®)TB, is ~10% more sensitive than QuantiFERON(®)-TB-GIT (QFT-GIT) in detecting presumed latent TB infection (LTBI). Whilst T-SPOT.(®)TB uses a fixed number of lymphocytes per well, QFT-GIT uses a fixed volume of blood (~1 mL). However, the person-to-person lymphocyte count can vary by 2 to 3 fold. We hypothesized that this variability could explain the reduced sensitivity of QFT-GIT. The findings could have potential implications for improving case detection. METHODS: T-SPOT.(®)TB was compared to QFT-GIT readouts before and after normalization of lymphocyte count (by adjusting the blood volume or lymphocyte enrichment within a fixed 1 mL volume) to an arbitrary value of 2.5×10(6) cells/mL. Within-test variability was evaluated to meaningfully interpret results. RESULTS: In patient-specific optimization experiments IFN-γ concentrations significantly increased when QFT-GIT positive samples were enriched with increasing concentrations of lymphocytes (1×10(6) vs. 2.5×10(6) cells/mL). However, for the group as a whole lymphocyte enrichment whilst maintaining a ~1 mL volume, compared to un-enriched samples, did not significantly increase IFN-γ [median (range): 0.03 (0-4.41) vs. 0.20 (0-2.40) IU/mL; P=0.64]. There was also no increase in IFN-γ readouts when QFT-GIT lymphocyte numbers were corrected (to 2.5×10(6) lymphocytes/mL) using volume adjustment. Interestingly, adjusted values were significantly lower than unadjusted ones [median (range): 0.02 (0-12.93) vs. 0.09 (0-14.23) IU/mL; P=0.008]. CONCLUSIONS: In QFT-GIT negative subjects lymphocyte enrichment did not increase QFT-GIT positivity rates. The reduced clinical sensitivity of the QFT-GIT assay, compared to T-SPOT.(®)TB, is likely to be due to factors other than lymphocyte count alone. Further studies are required to clarify these findings.
Authors: J Y Lee; H J Choi; I-N Park; S-B Hong; Y-M Oh; C-M Lim; S D Lee; Y Koh; W S Kim; D S Kim; W D Kim; T S Shim Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2006-04-12 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Keertan Dheda; Zarir F Udwadia; Jim F Huggett; Margaret A Johnson; Graham A W Rook Journal: Curr Opin Pulm Med Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 3.155
Authors: Donald J Goodwin; Gerald H Mazurek; Brandon H Campbell; Jamaria Bohanon; Kevin B West; James J Bell; Richard Powell; Sean Toney; John A Morris; Grover K Yamane; Paul A Sjoberg Journal: Mil Med Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 1.437
Authors: John Z Metcalfe; Adithya Cattamanchi; Charles E McCulloch; Justin D Lew; Ngan P Ha; Edward A Graviss Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2012-10-26 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Edward Raby; Maureen Moyo; Akash Devendra; Joseph Banda; Petra De Haas; Helen Ayles; Peter Godfrey-Faussett Journal: PLoS One Date: 2008-06-18 Impact factor: 3.240