Yingda L Xie1, Wendy A Cronin2, Michael Proschan3, Richard Oatis2, Silvia Cohn4, Scott R Curry5, Jonathan E Golub4, Clifton E Barry1, Susan E Dorman4,5. 1. Tuberculosis Research Section, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda. 2. Maryland Department of Health, Baltimore. 3. Biostatistics Research Branch, NIAID, NIH, Bethesda. 4. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 5. Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.
Abstract
Background: Among adults with signs and symptoms of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB), recognition of transmissible TB has implications for airborne infection isolation and public health activities. Sputum smear-negative TB patients account for around one-fifth of tuberculosis transmission. The tuberculosis transmission risk of TB patients with negative results on nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) of respiratory specimens has not been established. We sought to estimate the tuberculosis transmission risk of NAAT-negative TB patients. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed Maryland TB program data collected from 2004 to 2009, during which time NAAT using the Mycobacterium Tuberculosis Direct Test (MTD) was performed routinely. Patients with sputum Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M.tb) isolates having matching genotypes were assigned to clusters. Transmission sequence was approximated by collection order of individuals' first culture-positive specimens. Minimum transmission risks of NAAT (MTD)-negative TB patients and of smear-negative TB patients were estimated based on individuals' positions within clusters. Results: Among 809 patients with culture-confirmed TB, M.tb genotypes were available for 782 (96.7%). For NAA-negative TB patients, the minimum transmission risk estimate was 5.1% (95% CI 0-11.4). For smear-negative TB patients, the minimum transmission risk estimate was 11.2% (95% CI 7.2-15.3). Conclusions: Minimum transmission risk of NAAT-negative TB patients was lower than that of smear-negative TB patients. However, transmission risk of NAA-negative TB patients appears to not be negligible.
Background: Among adults with signs and symptoms of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB), recognition of transmissible TB has implications for airborne infection isolation and public health activities. Sputum smear-negative TB patients account for around one-fifth of tuberculosis transmission. The tuberculosis transmission risk of TB patients with negative results on nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) of respiratory specimens has not been established. We sought to estimate the tuberculosis transmission risk of NAAT-negative TB patients. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed Maryland TB program data collected from 2004 to 2009, during which time NAAT using the Mycobacterium Tuberculosis Direct Test (MTD) was performed routinely. Patients with sputum Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M.tb) isolates having matching genotypes were assigned to clusters. Transmission sequence was approximated by collection order of individuals' first culture-positive specimens. Minimum transmission risks of NAAT (MTD)-negative TB patients and of smear-negative TB patients were estimated based on individuals' positions within clusters. Results: Among 809 patients with culture-confirmed TB, M.tb genotypes were available for 782 (96.7%). For NAA-negative TB patients, the minimum transmission risk estimate was 5.1% (95% CI 0-11.4). For smear-negative TB patients, the minimum transmission risk estimate was 11.2% (95% CI 7.2-15.3). Conclusions: Minimum transmission risk of NAAT-negative TB patients was lower than that of smear-negative TB patients. However, transmission risk of NAA-negative TB patients appears to not be negligible.
Authors: Renata L Guerra; James F Baker; Roya Alborz; Derek T Armstrong; Julia A Kiehlbauch; Marcus B Conde; Susan E Dorman; Nancy M Hooper Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2007-10-31 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: J Kamerbeek; L Schouls; A Kolk; M van Agterveld; D van Soolingen; S Kuijper; A Bunschoten; H Molhuizen; R Shaw; M Goyal; J van Embden Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 1997-04 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Renata L Guerra; Nancy M Hooper; James F Baker; Roya Alborz; Derek T Armstrong; Gina Maltas; Julia A Kiehlbauch; Susan E Dorman Journal: Chest Date: 2007-06-15 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Michael Campos; Andrew Quartin; Eliana Mendes; Alexandre Abreu; Samuel Gurevich; Luis Echarte; Tanira Ferreira; Timothy Cleary; Elena Hollender; David Ashkin Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2008-05-08 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Anne F Luetkemeyer; Cynthia Firnhaber; Michelle A Kendall; Xingye Wu; Gerald H Mazurek; Debra A Benator; Roberto Arduino; Michel Fernandez; Elizabeth Guy; Pamela Johnson; Beverly Metchock; Fred Sattler; Edward Telzak; Yun F Wang; Marc Weiner; Susan Swindells; Ian M Sanne; Diane V Havlir; Beatriz Grinsztejn; David Alland Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2016-02-02 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Hai Viet Nguyen; Petra de Haas; Hoa Binh Nguyen; Nhung Viet Nguyen; Frank G J Cobelens; Veriko Mirtskhulava; Alyssa Finlay; Hung Van Nguyen; Pham T T Huyen; Edine W Tiemersma Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2022-05-31 Impact factor: 3.667
Authors: Fatehi E Elzein; Nisreen Alsherbeeni; Mohammed Mursi; Shoug F Algoblan; Abuzaid A Abuzaid; Ali M Albarrak Journal: Saudi Med J Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 1.484
Authors: Beatrice Frascella; Alexandra S Richards; Bianca Sossen; Jon C Emery; Anna Odone; Irwin Law; Ikushi Onozaki; Hanif Esmail; Rein M G J Houben Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 9.079