IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0216901.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of GeneXpert cycle threshold values with smear microscopy and culture as a measure of mycobacterial burden in five regional referral hospitals of Uganda- A cross-sectional study

Author

Listed:
  • Irene Najjingo
  • Winters Muttamba
  • Bruce J Kirenga
  • Joanitah Nalunjogi
  • Ritah Bakesiima
  • Francis Olweny
  • Pastan Lusiba
  • Achilles Katamba
  • Moses Joloba
  • Willy Ssengooba

Abstract

Background: Determining mycobacterial burden is important in assessing severity of disease, evaluating infectiousness and predicting patient treatment outcomes. Mycobacterial burden assessed by smear microscopy grade and time to culture positivity is clearly interpretable by most physicians. GeneXpert (Xpert) has been recommended by WHO as a first line tuberculosis (TB) diagnostic test as an alternative to smear microscopy. Xpert gives cycle threshold (Ct) values as a potential measure for mycobacterial burden. For physicians to clearly interpret Ct values as measures of mycobacterial burden, this study compared the Xpert quantification capabilities with those of smear microscopy and culture. The study also determined a linear relationship between Xpert Ct values and MGIT culture time to positivity (MGIT-TTP) and associated factors. A cut off Ct value which best predicts smear positivity was also determined using the Receiver Operator Curve analysis method. Results: Excluding missing results and rifampicin resistant TB cases, a moderately strong correlation of 0.55 between Xpert Ct value and smear grade was obtained. A weak correlation of 0.37 was obtained between Xpert Ct values and MGIT time to positivity while that between Xpert Ct values and LJ culture was 0.34. The Xpert Ct values were found to increase by 2.57 for every unit increase in days to positive and HIV status was significantly associated with this relationship. A cut off Ct value of 23.62 was found to best predict smear positivity regardless of HIV status. Conclusion: Our study findings show that GeneXpert Ct values are comparable to smear microscopy as a measure of M. tuberculosis burden and can be used to replace smear microscopy. However, given the low correlation between Xpert Ct value and culture positivity, Xpert Ct values cannot replace culture as a measure of M. tuberculosis burden among TB patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Irene Najjingo & Winters Muttamba & Bruce J Kirenga & Joanitah Nalunjogi & Ritah Bakesiima & Francis Olweny & Pastan Lusiba & Achilles Katamba & Moses Joloba & Willy Ssengooba, 2019. "Comparison of GeneXpert cycle threshold values with smear microscopy and culture as a measure of mycobacterial burden in five regional referral hospitals of Uganda- A cross-sectional study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-11, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0216901
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216901
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0216901
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0216901&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0216901?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0216901. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.