| Literature DB >> 30288068 |
Biniam Wondale1,2, Girmay Medhin1, Gemeda Abebe3, Samuel Tolosa1, Temesgen Mohammed1, Takele Teklu1,4, Rembert Pieper5, Gobena Ameni1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Knowledge of drug-sensitivity patterns of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) strains isolated from patients is an important aspect of TB control strategy. This study was conducted to evaluate the drug sensitivity of MTBC isolates in South Omo, southern Ethiopia.Entities:
Keywords: MGIT 960; MTBDRplus; drug resistance
Year: 2018 PMID: 30288068 PMCID: PMC6161742 DOI: 10.2147/IDR.S165088
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Drug Resist ISSN: 1178-6973 Impact factor: 4.003
Demographic and clinical characteristics of study participants
| Characteristics | Total N (%) | Number (%) of study participants
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-pastoral | Pastoral | Unspecified | |||
| Sex | |||||
| Female | 64 (39.8) | 30 (42.9) | 26 (36.6) | 8 (40.0) | 0.751 |
| Male | 97 (60.2) | 40 (57.1) | 45 (63.4) | 12 (60.0) | |
| Age in years | |||||
| 15–29 | 72 (44.7) | 32 (45.7) | 34 (47.9) | 6 (30.0) | 0.017 |
| 30–44 | 60 (37.3) | 28 (40.0) | 19 (26.8) | 13 (65.0) | |
| 45+ | 29 (18.0) | 10 (14.3) | 18 (25.4) | 1 (5.0) | |
| Type of TB | |||||
| PTB+ | 110 (68.3) | 48 (68.6) | 49 (69.0) | 13 (65.0) | 0.005 |
| PTB− | 25 (15.5) | 5 (7.1) | 13 (18.3) | 7 (35.0) | |
| EPTB | 26 (16.1) | 17 (24.3) | 9 (12.7) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Treatment history | |||||
| New TB case | 153 (95.0) | 68 (97.1) | 65 (91.5) | 20 (100.0) | 0.171 |
| TB re-treatment case | 8 (5.0) | 2 (2.9) | 6 (8.5) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Total | 161 (100) | 70 (43.5) | 71 (44.1) | 20 (12.4) | |
Abbreviations: TB, tuberculosis; PTB+, smear-positive pulmonary TB; PTB–, smear-negative pulmonary; TB; EPTB, extra-pulmonary TB.
Phenotypic DST results for 126 MTBC isolates
| TB cases | No. of Isolates | First-line anti-TB drugs
| PZA | DR type | % | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| STR | INH | RIF | EMB | |||||
| S | S | S | S | S | Pan-S | 90.8 | ||
| R | S | S | S | S | Mono | 9.2 | ||
| S | S | S | R | S | ||||
| S | S | S | S | R | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| S | S | S | S | S | Pan-S | 57.1 | ||
| S | R | S | S | R | Poly | 28.6 | ||
| R | R | R | R | R | MDR | 14.3 | ||
|
| ||||||||
Abbreviations: DST, drug sensitivity test; MTBC, Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex; TB, tuberculosis; STR, streptomycin; INH, isoniazid; RIF, rifampicin; EMB, ethambutol; PZA, pyrazinamide; DR type, drug-resistance type; S, susceptible; Pan-S, pan-susceptible; R, resistant; MDR, multidrug resistance.
Figure 1Total numbers of MTBC isolates and number of isolates with phenotypic DST result.
Abbreviations: MTBC, Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex; DST, drug sensitivity test; NTM, nontuberculous mycobacteria; NTM, nontuberculous mycobacteria.
Demographic factors associated with phenotypic drug resistance of MTBC isolates
| Characteristics | Total N (%) | DR N (%) | Crude OR (95% CI) | Adjusted OR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | |||||
| Female | 48 (38.1) | 7 (14.6) | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| Male | 78 (61.9) | 7 (9.0) | 0.58 (0.19–1.76) | 0.55 (0.15–1.98) | 0.357 |
| Age in years | |||||
| 15–29 | 56 (44.4) | 6 (10.7) | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| 30–44 | 48 (38.1) | 4 (8.3) | 0.76 (0.20–2.86) | 0.68 (0.16–2.86) | 0.601 |
| >=45 | 22 (17.5) | 4 (18.2) | 1.85 (0.47–7.33) | 0.11 (3.95) | 0.643 |
| TB type | |||||
| PTB+ | 84 (66.7) | 10 (11.9) | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| PTB− | 19 (15.1) | 2 (10.5) | 0.87 (0.18–4.34) | 0.42 (0.04–4.77) | 0.483 |
| EPTB | 23 (18.3) | 2 (8.7) | 0.71 (0.14–3.47) | 0.50 (0.09–2.77) | 0.426 |
| Treatment history | |||||
| New TB cases | 119 (94.4) | 11 (9.2) | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| Re-treatment TB cases | 7 (5.6) | 3 (42.9) | 7.36 (1.46–37.22) | 11.60 (1.70–78.92) | 0.012 |
| Residential area | |||||
| Non-pastoral | 54 (42.9) | 8 (14.8) | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| Pastoral | 56 (44.4) | 5 (8.9) | 0.56 (0.17–1.85) | 0.46 (0.12–1.70) | 0.241 |
Note:
Participants with unknown residences were excluded from logistic regression analysis.
Abbreviations: MTBC, Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex; DR, drug resistance; TB, tuberculosis; PTB+, smear-positive pulmonary TB; PTB–, smear-negative pulmonary.
Figure 2Genotypic DST results of selected susceptible isolates and all resistant isolates.
Notes: Three isolates (SO-0025, SO-0130 and SO-0227) were resistant to RIF and/or INH and the rest 13 isolates were susceptible to both RIF and INH as representative for the 158 susceptible isolates to RIF and INH. In this illustration, isolate SO-0130 was from the re-treatment TB case and the remaining 15 isolates were from the new TB cases.
Abbreviations: DST, drug sensitivity test; RIF, rifampicin; INH, isoniazid; TB, tuberculosis; CC, conjugate control; AC, amplification control; WT, wild-type probe; MUT, mutation probe; TUB, M. tuberculosis complex.
GenoType MTBDRplus assay performance evaluation compared to MGIT 960 system
| MGIT 960 system
| Total | Diagnostic performance of GenoType MTBDR | Level of agreement
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R | S | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | k-value | ||||
| GenoType MTBDR | R | 1 | 0 | 1 | 33.3 | 100 | 100 | 98.4 | ||
| S | 2 | 123 | 125 | |||||||
| R | 1 | 1 | 2 | 100 | 99.2 | 50 | 100 | |||
| S | 0 | 124 | 124 | |||||||
| R | 1 | 0 | 1 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | |||
| S | 0 | 125 | 125 | |||||||
Abbreviations: R, resistant; S, susceptible; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; INH, isoniazid; RIF, rifampicin; MDR, multidrug resistance.