Performance of Tuberculosis Drug Susceptibility Testing in U.S. Laboratories from 1994 to 2008

Overview

Journal J Clin Microbiol

Specialty Microbiology

Date 2012 Feb 4

PMID 22301024

Citations 18

Authors

Pawan K Angra

Thomas H Taylor

Michael F Iademarco

Beverly Metchock

J Rex Astles

John C Ridderhof

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

We present a statistical summary of results from the Model Performance Evaluation Program (MPEP) for Mycobacterium tuberculosis Drug Susceptibility Testing, 1994 to 2008, implemented by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). During that period, a total of 57,733 test results for culture isolates were reported by 216 participating laboratories for the first-line antituberculosis drugs used in the United States-isoniazid (INH), rifampin (RMP), ethambutol (EMB), and pyrazinamide (PZA). Using Clinical Laboratory and Standards Institute (CLSI)-recommended concentrations for one or more of three methods, agar proportion (AP), BACTEC460 (Bactec), and MGIT-960 (MGIT), yielded overall agreement of 97.0% for first-line drugs. For susceptible strains, agreement was 98.4%; for resistant strains, agreement was 91.0%, with significantly lower accuracy (chi-square test, P < 0.0001). For resistant strains, overall agreement by methods was 91.3% for AP, 93.0% for Bactec, and 82.6% for MGIT and by drugs was 92.2% for INH, 91.5% for RMP, 79.0% for EMB, and 97.5% for PZA. For some strains, performance by method varied significantly. Use of duplicate strains in the same shipment and repeat strains over time revealed consistent performance even for strains with higher levels of interlaboratory discordance. No overall differences in performance between laboratories were observed based on volume of testing or type of facility (e.g., health department, hospital, independent). By all methods, decreased performance was observed for strains with low-level INH resistance, RMP resistance, and EMB-resistant strains. These results demonstrate a high level of performance in detection of drug-resistant M. tuberculosis in U.S. laboratories.

Citing Articles

Targeted next-generation sequencing - a promising approach in the diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and drug resistance.

Wu X, Tan G, Sun C, Wang Y, Yang J, Wu C Infection. 2024; .

PMID: 39419957 DOI: 10.1007/s15010-024-02411-w.

Utilization of whole genome sequencing for resolution of discrepant drug susceptibility results: A case report.

Realegeno S, Adeyiga O, Winston D, Beaird O, Garner O, Yang S IDCases. 2021; 26:e01308.

PMID: 34745885 PMC: 8551521. DOI: 10.1016/j.idcr.2021.e01308.

Treatment of Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis. An Official ATS/CDC/ERS/IDSA Clinical Practice Guideline.

Nahid P, Mase S, Migliori G, Sotgiu G, Bothamley G, Brozek J Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019; 200(10):e93-e142.

PMID: 31729908 PMC: 6857485. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201909-1874ST.

Rifampin-resistant Tuberculosis in the United States, 1998-2014.

Sharling L, Marks S, Goodman M, Chorba T, Mase S Clin Infect Dis. 2019; 70(8):1596-1605.

PMID: 31233131 PMC: 6925655. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciz491.

Beyond multidrug resistance: Leveraging rare variants with machine and statistical learning models in Mycobacterium tuberculosis resistance prediction.

Chen M, Doddi A, Royer J, Freschi L, Schito M, Ezewudo M EBioMedicine. 2019; 43:356-369.

PMID: 31047860 PMC: 6557804. DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2019.04.016.

References

. Trends in tuberculosis--United States, 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011; 60(11):333-7. View

. Trends in tuberculosis--United States, 2008. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009; 58(10):249-53. View

Stull T, Hearn T, Hancock J, Handsfield J, Collins C . Variation in proficiency testing performance by testing site. JAMA. 1998; 279(6):463-7. DOI: 10.1001/jama.279.6.463. View

Laszlo A, Rahman M, Raviglione M, Bustreo F . Quality assurance programme for drug susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the WHO/IUATLD Supranational Laboratory Network: first round of proficiency testing. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 1997; 1(3):231-8. View

Laszlo A, Helbecque D, Tostowaryk W . Proficiency testing of conventional drug susceptibility tests of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Can J Microbiol. 1987; 33(12):1064-8. DOI: 10.1139/m87-186. View

Fattorini L, Iona E, Cirillo D, Migliori G, Orefici G, Aziz M . External quality control of Mycobacterium tuberculosis drug susceptibility testing: results of two rounds in endemic countries. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2008; 12(2):214-7. View

Madison B, Siddiqi S, Heifets L, Gross W, Higgins M, Warren N . Identification of a Mycobacterium tuberculosis strain with stable, low-level resistance to isoniazid. J Clin Microbiol. 2004; 42(3):1294-5. PMC: 356860. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.3.1294-1295.2004. View

Madison B, Robinson-Dunn B, George I, Gross W, Lipman H, Metchock B . Multicenter evaluation of ethambutol susceptibility testing of mycobacterium tuberculosis by agar proportion and radiometric methods. J Clin Microbiol. 2002; 40(11):3976-9. PMC: 139676. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.40.11.3976-3979.2002. View

COHN M, Waggoner R, McClatchy J . The 7H11 medium for the cultivation of mycobacteria. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1968; 98(2):295-6. DOI: 10.1164/arrd.1968.98.2.295. View

10.

Schon T, Jureen P, Giske C, Chryssanthou E, Sturegard E, Werngren J . Evaluation of wild-type MIC distributions as a tool for determination of clinical breakpoints for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2009; 64(4):786-93. DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkp262. View

11.

Huebner R, Good R, Tokars J . Current practices in mycobacteriology: results of a survey of state public health laboratories. J Clin Microbiol. 1993; 31(4):771-5. PMC: 263558. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.31.4.771-775.1993. View

12.

Tenover F, Crawford J, Huebner R, Geiter L, Horsburgh Jr C, Good R . The resurgence of tuberculosis: is your laboratory ready?. J Clin Microbiol. 1993; 31(4):767-70. PMC: 263557. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.31.4.767-770.1993. View

13.

. National action plan to combat multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. MMWR Recomm Rep. 1992; 41(RR-11):5-48. View

14.

Laszlo A, Rahman M, Espinal M, Raviglione M . Quality assurance programme for drug susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the WHO/IUATLD Supranational Reference Laboratory Network: five rounds of proficiency testing, 1994-1998. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2002; 6(9):748-56. View

15.

Van Deun A, Barrera L, Bastian I, Fattorini L, Hoffmann H, Kam K . Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains with highly discordant rifampin susceptibility test results. J Clin Microbiol. 2009; 47(11):3501-6. PMC: 2772627. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01209-09. View

16.

Van Deun A, Martin A, Palomino J . Diagnosis of drug-resistant tuberculosis: reliability and rapidity of detection. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2010; 14(2):131-40. View

17.

Woods G, Witebsky F . Current status of mycobacterial testing in clinical laboratories. Results of a questionnaire completed by participants in the College of American Pathologists Mycobacteriology E survey. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1993; 117(9):876-84. View

18.

Bottger E . The ins and outs of Mycobacterium tuberculosis drug susceptibility testing. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2011; 17(8):1128-34. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03551.x. View

19.

CANETTI G, Froman S, Grosset J, HAUDUROY P, Langerova M, MAHLER H . MYCOBACTERIA: LABORATORY METHODS FOR TESTING DRUG SENSITIVITY AND RESISTANCE. Bull World Health Organ. 1963; 29:565-78. PMC: 2555065. View

20.

Li Q, Wang X, He H . [WHO sample survey on drug resistant tuberculosis in Zhejiang, China]. Zhonghua Jie He He Hu Xi Za Zhi. 2002; 23(12):718-21. View