Search

One quarter of the world's population is estimated to be infected with Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Identifying recent TB infection (TBI) offers an avenue to targeted TB preventative therapy provision, and prevention to disease progression. However, detecting recent TBI remains challenging. The QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus assay (QFT-Plus) claims to have improved sensitivity in detecting recent TBI, by the addition of the TB2 antigen tube to the TB1 tube used in previous tests. TB2 detects CD8-mediated interferon gamma response, a potential marker of recent infection. We compared QFT-Plus TB1 and TB2 responses in individuals with recent and remote infection in high-burden settings. The Tuberculosis Reduction through Expanded Antiretroviral Treatment and TB Screening (TREATS) Project followed a cohort of adolescents and young people (AYP) aged 15-24 years in Zambia and South Africa to determine TBI incidence measured by QFT-Plus over 24 months. We categorised individuals with QTF-Plus positive result into recent and remote infection. We compared their TB1 and TB2 responses and the antigen tube differential [TB2-TB1], an indicator of CD8-activity, using logistic regression. At baseline, 3876 AYP, 1852/3876 (47.8%) were QFT-Plus positive whilst 2024/3876 (52.2%) QFT-Plus negative. Of the QFT-Plus baseline positives, 1069/1852 (57.7%) tested positive at both 12 and 24 months-remote infection. Of the QFT-Plus baseline negatives, 274/2024(13.3%) converted within a 12-month period- recent infection. TB1 and TB2 responses were higher in remote than recent infection. In recent infection, TB2 responses were greater than TB1 responses. The mean differential was 0.01 IU/ml in recent and -0.22 IU/ml in remote infection, (p = 0.145). The quantitative QFT-Plus results did not appear to reflect a marked distinction between recent and remote infection. Further analysis of the responses of infected individuals who developed disease is required to determine whether any signal in QFT-Plus results may predict progression to disease., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Amofa-Sekyi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Introduction: The use of antigen rapid tests (Ag-RDTs) for self-testing is an important element of the COVID-19 control strategy and has been widely supported. However, scale-up of self-testing for COVID-19 in sub-Saharan Africa is still insufficient and there is limited evidence on the acceptability of self-testing and agreement between Ag-RDT self-testing and Ag-RDT testing by professional users. A joint collaboration (Botnar Research Centre for Child Health-European & Developing countries Clinical Trials Partnership)was established between Lesotho and Zambia to address these gaps in relation to Ag-RDT self-testing and contribute to increasing its use in the region., Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with qualitative and quantitative data analysis. Firstly, 14 in-depth cognitive interviews (5 in Zambia and 9 in Lesotho) were performed to assess the participants' understanding of the instructions for use (IFU) for self-testing. In a second step, evaluation of test agreement between Ag-RDT self-testing and Ag-RDT testing by professional user using SD Biosensor STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag-RDT was performed. In Zambia, usability and acceptability of self-testing were also assessed., Results: Cognitive interviews in Lesotho and Zambia showed overall good understanding of IFU. In Zambia, acceptability of self-testing was high, though some participants had difficulties in conducting certain steps in the IFU correctly. Agreement between Ag-RDT self-test and Ag-RDT by professional users in Lesotho (428 participants) and Zambia (1136 participants) was high, 97.3% (403/414, 95% CI: 95.3-98.7) and 99.8% (1116/1118, 95% CI: 99.4-100) respectively., Conclusion: Findings from this study support the use of Ag-RDT self-testing within COVID-19 control strategies in sub-Saharan Africa, contributing to increase the testing capacity and access in hard-to reach settings., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Bresser et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: From 2018-2021 the TB Reduction through Expanded Antiretroviral Treatment and TB Screening (TREATS) project took place in 21 Zambian and South African communities. The TREATS Incidence of TB Infection Cohort Study was conducted in adolescents and young people (AYP), aged 15-24 years in 14 communities. We describe the baseline prevalence and risk factors of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis) infection among this cohort and explore the quantitative QFT-Plus interferon gamma (IFN-γ) responses., Methods and Findings: A random sample of approximately 300 AYP per community were recruited and information on TB/HIV risk factors, TB symptoms and social mixing patterns collected. QuantiFERON TB Gold Plus assay (QFT-Plus) was used to detect M. tuberculosis infection, following manufacturer's instructions. Logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with infection. 5577 eligible AYP were invited to participate across both countries, with 4648 enrolled. QFT-Plus results were available for 4529: 2552(Zambia) and 1977(South Africa). Overall, 47.6% (2156/4529) AYP had positive QFT-Plus results, the prevalence of infection in South Africa being twice that in Zambia (64.7% (1280/1977) vs 34.3% (867/2552) p<0.001). Infection was associated with age, household contact with TB and alcohol in Zambia but showed no associations in South Africa. The antigen tube differential (TB2-TB1>0.6 IU/ml) of the assay at baseline showed no evidence of association with recent TB exposure., Conclusion: The high prevalence of infection in AYP warrants urgent action to address TB control, especially in South Africa. Further research is required to delineate antigen tube responses of the QFT-Plus assay more precisely to fully realise the benefit of the additional TB2 tube in high TB/HIV burden settings., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Amofa-Sekyi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Tuberculosis (TB) prevalence remains persistently high in many settings, with new or expanded interventions required to achieve substantial reductions. The HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 071 (PopART) community-randomised trial randomised 14 communities to receive the "PopART" intervention during 2014 to 2017 (7 arm A and 7 arm B communities) and 7 communities to receive standard-of-care (arm C). The intervention was delivered door-to-door by community HIV care providers (CHiPs) and included universal HIV testing, facilitated linkage to HIV care at government health clinics, and systematic TB symptom screening. The Tuberculosis Reduction through Expanded Anti-retroviral Treatment and Screening (TREATS) study aimed to measure the impact of delivering the PopART intervention on TB outcomes, in communities with high HIV and TB prevalence., Methods and Findings: The study population of the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial included individuals aged ≥15 years living in 21 urban and peri-urban communities in Zambia and South Africa, with a total population of approximately 1 million and an adult HIV prevalence of around 15% at the time of the trial. Two sputum samples for TB testing were provided to CHiPs by individuals who reported ≥1 TB suggestive symptom (a cough for ≥2 weeks, unintentional weight loss ≥1.5 kg in the last month, or current night sweats) or that a household member was currently on TB treatment. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) was offered universally at clinics in arm A and according to local guidelines in arms B and C. The TREATS study was conducted in the same 21 communities as the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial between 2017 and 2022, and TB prevalence was a co-primary endpoint of the TREATS study. The primary comparison was between the PopART intervention (arms A and B combined) and the standard-of-care (arm C). During 2019 to 2021, a TB prevalence survey was conducted among randomly selected individuals aged ≥15 years (approximately 1,750 per community in arms A and B, approximately 3,500 in arm C). Participants were screened on TB symptoms and chest X-ray, with diagnostic testing using Xpert-Ultra followed by culture for individuals who screened positive. Sputum eligibility was determined by the presence of a cough for ≥2 weeks, or ≥2 of 5 "TB suggestive" symptoms (cough, weight loss for ≥4 weeks, night sweats, chest pain, and fever for ≥2 weeks), or chest X-ray CAD4TBv5 score ≥50, or no available X-ray results. TB prevalence was compared between trial arms using standard methods for cluster-randomised trials, with adjustment for age, sex, and HIV status, and multiple imputation was used for missing data on prevalent TB. Among 83,092 individuals who were eligible for the survey, 49,556 (59.6%) participated, 8,083 (16.3%) screened positive, 90.8% (7,336/8,083) provided 2 sputum samples for Xpert-Ultra testing, and 308 (4.2%) required culture confirmation. Overall, estimated TB prevalence was 0.92% (457/49,556). The geometric means of 7 community-level prevalence estimates were 0.91%, 0.70%, and 0.69% in arms A, B, and C, respectively, with no evidence of a difference comparing arms A and B combined with arm C (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval, CI [0.67, 1.95], p = 0.60). TB prevalence was higher among people living with HIV than HIV-negative individuals, with an age-sex-community adjusted odds ratio of 2.29 [95% CI 1.54, 3.41] in Zambian communities and 1.61 [95% CI 1.13, 2.30] in South African communities. The primary limitations are that the study was powered to detect only large reductions in TB prevalence in the intervention arm compared with standard-of-care, and the between-community variation in TB prevalence was larger than anticipated., Conclusions: There was no evidence that the PopART intervention reduced TB prevalence. Systematic screening for TB that is based on symptom screening alone may not be sufficient to achieve a large reduction in TB prevalence over a period of several years. Including chest X-ray screening alongside TB symptom screening could substantially increase the sensitivity of systematic screening for TB., Trial Registration: The TREATS study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03739736 on November 14, 2018. The HPTN 071 (PopART) trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under number NCT01900977 on July 17, 2013., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Klinkenberg et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Chest X-rays (CXRs) have traditionally been used to aid the diagnosis of TB-suggestive abnormalities. Using Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) algorithms, TB risk is quantified to assist with diagnostics. However, CXRs capture all other structural abnormalities. Identification of non-TB abnormalities in individuals with CXRs that have high CAD scores but don't have bacteriologically confirmed TB is unknown. This presents a missed opportunity of extending novel CAD systems' potential to simultaneously provide information on other non-TB abnormalities alongside TB. This study aimed to characterize and estimate the prevalence of non-TB abnormalities on digital CXRs with high CAD4TB scores from a TB prevalence survey in Zambia and South Africa., Methodology: This was a cross-sectional analysis of clinical data of participants from the TREATS TB prevalence survey conducted in 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa. The study included individuals aged ≥ 15 years who had high CAD4TB scores (score ≥ 70), but had no bacteriologically confirmed TB in any of the samples submitted, were not on TB treatment, and had no history of TB. Two consultant radiologists reviewed the images for non-TB abnormalities., Results: Of the 525 CXRs reviewed, 46.7% (245/525) images were reported to have non-TB abnormalities. About 11.43% (28/245) images had multiple non-TB abnormalities, while 88.67% (217/245) had a single non-TB abnormality. The readers had a fair inter-rater agreement (r = 0.40). Based on anatomical location, non-TB abnormalities in the lung parenchyma (19%) were the most prevalent, followed by Pleura (15.4%), then heart & great vessels (6.1%) abnormalities. Pleural effusion/thickening/calcification (8.8%) and cardiomegaly (5%) were the most prevalent non-TB abnormalities. Prevalence of (2.7%) for pneumonia not typical of pulmonary TB and (2.1%) mass/nodules (benign/ malignant) were also reported., Conclusion: A wide range of non-TB abnormalities can be identified on digital CXRs among individuals with high CAD4TB scores but don't have bacteriologically confirmed TB. Adaptation of AI systems like CAD4TB as a tool to simultaneously identify other causes of abnormal CXRs alongside TB can be interesting and useful in non-faculty-based screening programs to better link cases to appropriate care., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic largely depends on the ability of the healthcare systems to develop effective and adaptable preparedness and mitigation strategies. A collaborative initiative (BRCCH-EDCTP COVID-19 Initiative) was set up between Lesotho and Zambia early on in the pandemic, to jointly conduct a project to investigate creating access to SARS-CoV-2 screening and testing through community-based COVID-19 case-finding., Methods: Two different community case-finding strategies were deployed. In Lesotho, an approach was implemented whereby a community (village) health worker screened community members at their home or during community gatherings for COVID-19 signs and symptoms. All community members who screened positive were then offered SARS-CoV-2 testing. In Zambia, so-called community hubs, staffed by community health care workers, were set up at different locations in the community for people to walk in and get tested for SARS-CoV-2. Hubs changed location from week-to-week and targeted transmission hotspots. All persons visiting the hubs were offered testing for SARS-CoV-2 irrespective of self-reported signs and symptoms of COVID-19 though information was collected on occurrence of these. Testing in both approaches was done using SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests., Results: Setting up testing in the community setting was feasible in both countries. In Lesotho in the village health worker approach, over a period of 46 weeks, 7221 persons were screened, and 49 (11.4%) SARS-COV-2 cases identified among 428 COVID-19 screen positive participants. In the community hubs among 3150 people tested, 166 (5.3%) SARS-CoV-2 cases were identified in a period of 26 weeks. From the community hubs approach, where all seen were offered COVID-19 testing it was learned that people screening positive for COVID-19 signs and symptoms were more likely to test SARS-COV-2 positive, especially those reporting classic COVID-19 symptoms like loss of sense/smell for a short period of time (1-3 days)., Conclusions: In conclusion, in this project we learned that implementing COVID-19 screening and testing by lay health workers in the community is possible. Characteristics of the population screened, tested, and identified to have SARS-CoV-2 are described to help guide development of future testing strategies., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: HPTN071 (PopART) was a cluster randomized trial conducted in Zambian and South African (SA) communities, between 2013-2018. The PopART intervention (universal HIV-testing and treatment (UTT) combined with population-level TB symptom screening) was implemented in 14 communities. The TREATS study (2017-2021) was conducted to evaluate the impact of the PopART intervention on TB outcomes. We report on the impact of the combined TB/HIV intervention on the incidence of TB infection in a cohort of adolescents and young adults (AYA) aged 15-24 years., Methods: A random sample of AYA was enrolled between July 2018 and July 2019 in 7 intervention vs 7 standard-of-care communities. We collected questionnaire data on risk factors for TB, and blood for measuring TB infection using QuantiFERON (QFT) Plus. AYA were seen at months 12 and 24 with all procedures repeated. Primary outcome was incidence of TB infection comparing intervention and standard-of-care communities. An incident case was defined as a participant with QFT interferon-gamma response of < 0.2 IU/ml plasma ('negative') at baseline and a QFT interferon-gamma response of > = 0.7 IU/ml ('positive') at follow up., Results: We enrolled 4,648 AYA, 2,223 (47.8%) had a negative QFT-plus result at baseline, 1,902 (85.6%) had a follow up blood sample taken at 12 months or 24 months. Among the 1,902 AYA, followed for 2,987 person-years, 213 had incident TB infection giving (7.1 per 100 person-years). TB infection incidence rates were 8.7 per 100 person-years in intervention communities compared to 6.0 per 100 person-years in standard-of-care communities. There was no evidence the intervention reduced the transmission of TB (incidence-rate-ratio of 1.45, 95%CI 0.97-2.15, p = 0.063)., Conclusion: In our trial setting, we found no evidence that UTT combined with TB active case finding reduced the incidence of TB infection at population level. Our data will inform future modelling work to better understand the population level dynamics of HIV and TB., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interest exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Shanaube et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: WHO recommends community-wide, systematic tuberculosis screening in high-prevalence settings. C-reactive protein has been proposed as a tuberculosis screening tool for people living with HIV. We aimed to assess the performance of a point-of-care C-reactive protein test for tuberculosis screening in the community in two countries with a high tuberculosis burden., Methods: We conducted a prospective, cross-sectional study in four communities in Zambia and South Africa, nested in a tuberculosis prevalence survey. We included adults (aged ≥15 years) who were sputum-eligible (tuberculosis-suggestive symptoms or computer-aided-detection score ≥40 on chest x-ray) and whose sputum was tested with Xpert Ultra and liquid culture. A 5% random sample of individuals who were non-sputum-eligible was also included. We calculated sensitivity and specificity of point-of-care C-reactive protein testing, alone and combined with symptom screening, to detect tuberculosis in participants who were sputum-eligible, compared with a microbiological reference standard (positive result in Xpert Ultra, culture, or both)., Findings: Between Feb 19 and Aug 11, 2019, 9588 participants were enrolled in the tuberculosis prevalence study, 1588 of whom had C-reactive protein testing and received results (875 [55·1%] were women and girls, 713 [44·9%] were men and boys, 1317 [82·9%] were sputum-eligible, and 271 [17·1%] were non-sputum-eligible). Among participants who were sputum-eligible, we identified 76 individuals with tuberculosis, of whom 25 were living with HIV. Sensitivity of point-of-care C-reactive protein testing with a cutoff point of 5 mg/L or more was 50·0% (38/76, 95% CI 38·3-61·7) and specificity was 72·3% (890/1231, 69·7-74·8). Point-of-care C-reactive protein combined in parallel with symptom screening had higher sensitivity than symptom screening alone (60·5% [46/76, 95% CI 48·6-71·6] vs 34·2% [26/76, 23·7-46·0]). Specificity of point-of-care C-reactive protein combined in parallel with symptom screening was 51·7% (636/1231, 95% CI 48·8-54·5) versus 70·5% (868/1231, 67·9-73·0) with symptom screening alone. Similarly, in people living with HIV, sensitivity of point-of-care C-reactive protein combined with symptom screening was 72·0% (18/25, 95% CI 50·6-87·9) and that of symptom screening alone was 36·0% (9/25, 18·0-57·5). Specificity of point-of-care C-reactive protein testing combined in parallel with symptom screening in people living with HIV was 47·0% (118/251, 95% CI 40·7-53·4) versus 72·1% (181/251, 66·1-77·6) with symptom screening alone., Interpretation: Point-of-care C-reactive protein testing alone does not meet the 90% sensitivity stipulated by WHO's target product profile for desirable characteristics for screening tests for detecting tuberculosis. However, combined with symptom screening, it might improve identification of individuals with tuberculosis in communities with high prevalence, and might be particularly useful where other recommended tools, such as chest x-ray, might not be readily available., Funding: European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Prevalence surveys remain the best way to assess the national tuberculosis (TB) burden in many countries. Challenges with using culture (the reference standard) for TB diagnosis in prevalence surveys have led to increasing use of molecular tests (Xpert assays), but discordance between these two tests has created problems for deciding which individuals have TB. We aimed to design an accurate diagnostic algorithm for TB prevalence surveys (TBPS) that limits the use of culture., Design: TBPS in four communities, conducted during 2019., Setting: Three Zambian communities and one South-African community included in the TBPS of the Tuberculosis Reduction through Expanded Anti-retroviral Treatment and Screening study., Participants: Randomly sampled individuals aged ≥15 years. Among those who screened positive on chest X-ray or symptoms, two sputum samples were collected for field Xpert-Ultra testing and a third for laboratory liquid-culture testing. Clinicians reviewed screening and test results; in Zambia, participants with Mycobacterium tuberculosis -positive results were followed up 6-13 months later. Among 10 984 participants, 2092 screened positive, 1852 provided two samples for Xpert-Ultra testing, and 1009 had valid culture results., Outcomes: Culture and Xpert-Ultra test results., Results: Among 946 culture-negative individuals, 917 were Xpert-negative, 12 Xpert-trace-positive and 17 Xpert-positive (grade very low, low, medium or high), with Xpert categorised as the highest grade of the two sample results. Among 63 culture-positive individuals, 8 were Xpert-negative, 9 Xpert-trace-positive and 46 Xpert-positive. Counting trace-positive results as positive, the sensitivity of Xpert-Ultra compared with culture was 87% (95% CI 76% to 94%) using two samples compared with 76% (95% CI 64% to 86%) using one. Specificity was 97% when trace-positive results were counted as positive and 98% when trace-positive results were counted as negative. Most Xpert-Ultra-positive/culture-negative discordance was among individuals whose Xpert-positive results were trace-positive or very low grade or they reported previous TB treatment. Among individuals with both Xpert-Ultra results grade low or above, the positive-predictive-value was 90% (27/30); 3/30 were plausibly false-negative culture results., Conclusion: Using Xpert-Ultra as the primary diagnostic test in TBPS, with culture only for confirmatory testing, would identify a high proportion of TB cases while massively reducing survey culture requirements., Trial Registration Number: NCT03739736., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

QIAreach QuantiFERON-TB is a portable IGRA with the potential to improve accessibility of TB infection diagnosis in low-resource settings https://bit.ly/3nTzolf., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: Some of the authors (C. Kaaba, M. Ruperez, B. Kosloff, K. Shanaube and H. Ayles) declare receiving a grant from EDCTP for TREATS and one author (N. Ndunda) is a former employee of QIAGEN. QIAGEN (Hilden, Germany) provided the QIAreachTM QuantiFERON-TB test kits free of charge., (Copyright ©The authors 2021.)

Community-based active case-finding (ACF) may have important impacts on routine TB case-detection and subsequent patient-initiated diagnosis pathways, contributing "indirectly" to infectious diseases prevention and care. We investigated the impact of ACF beyond directly diagnosed patients for TB, using routine case-notification rate (CNR) ratios as a measure of indirect effect. We systematically searched for publications 01-Jan-1980 to 13-Apr-2020 reporting on community-based ACF interventions compared to a comparison group, together with review of linked manuscripts reporting knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) outcomes or qualitative data on TB testing behaviour. We calculated CNR ratios of routine case-notifications (i.e. excluding cases identified directly through ACF) and compared proxy behavioural outcomes for both ACF and comparator communities. Full text manuscripts from 988 of 23,883 abstracts were screened for inclusion; 36 were eligible. Of these, 12 reported routine notification rates separately from ACF intervention-attributed rates, and one reported any proxy behavioural outcomes. Two further studies were identified from screening 1121 abstracts for linked KAP/qualitative manuscripts. 8/12 case-notification studies were considered at critical or serious risk of bias. 8/11 non-randomised studies reported bacteriologically-confirmed CNR ratios between 0.47 (95% CI:0.41-0.53) and 0.96 (95% CI:0.94-0.97), with 7/11 reporting all-form CNR ratios between 0.96 (95% CI:0.88-1.05) and 1.09 (95% CI:1.02-1.16). One high-quality randomised-controlled trial reported a ratio of 1.14 (95% CI 0.91-1.43). KAP/qualitative manuscripts provided insufficient evidence to establish the impact of ACF on subsequent TB testing behaviour. ACF interventions with routine CNR ratios >1 suggest an indirect effect on wider TB case-detection, potentially due to impact on subsequent TB testing behaviour through follow-up after a negative ACF test or increased TB knowledge. However, data on this type of impact are rarely collected. Evaluation of routine case-notification, testing and proxy behavioural outcomes in intervention and comparator communities should be included as standard methodology in future ACF campaign study designs., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: JEG, HA, and ELC are authors of trials included in this systematic review. HA and ELC are members of the WHO TB Screening Guideline Development Group, which CM co-ordinates. JEG, HA, ELC, and PM have received research grants to their institutions for projects evaluating community-based active case-finding. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright: © 2021 Feasey et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)