Dhana, Ashar; Gupta, Rishi K; Hamada, Yohhei; Kengne, Andre P; Kerkhoff, Andrew D; Yoon, Christina; Cattamanchi, Adithya; Reeve, Byron WP; Theron, Grant; Ndlangalavu, Gcobisa; +8 more... Wood, Robin; Drain, Paul K; Calderwood, Claire J; Noursadeghi, Mahdad; Boyles, Tom; Meintjes, Graeme; Maartens, Gary; Barr, David A; (2023) Clinical utility of WHO-recommended screening tools and development and validation of novel clinical prediction models for pulmonary tuberculosis screening among outpatients living with HIV: an individual participant data meta-analysis. European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society, 32 (168). p. 230021. ISSN 0905-9180 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0021-2023
Permanent Identifier
Use this Digital Object Identifier when citing or linking to this resource.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that outpatient people living with HIV (PLHIV) undergo tuberculosis screening with the WHO four-symptom screen (W4SS) or C-reactive protein (CRP) (5 mg·L-1 cut-off) followed by confirmatory testing if screen positive. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis to determine the performance of WHO-recommended screening tools and two newly developed clinical prediction models (CPMs). METHODS: Following a systematic review, we identified studies that recruited adult outpatient PLHIV irrespective of tuberculosis signs and symptoms or with a positive W4SS, evaluated CRP and collected sputum for culture. We used logistic regression to develop an extended CPM (which included CRP and other predictors) and a CRP-only CPM. We used internal-external cross-validation to evaluate performance. RESULTS: We pooled data from eight cohorts (n=4315 participants). The extended CPM had excellent discrimination (C-statistic 0.81); the CRP-only CPM had similar discrimination. The C-statistics for WHO-recommended tools were lower. Both CPMs had equivalent or higher net benefit compared with the WHO-recommended tools. Compared with both CPMs, CRP (5 mg·L-1 cut-off) had equivalent net benefit across a clinically useful range of threshold probabilities, while the W4SS had a lower net benefit. The W4SS would capture 91% of tuberculosis cases and require confirmatory testing for 78% of participants. CRP (5 mg·L-1 cut-off), the extended CPM (4.2% threshold) and the CRP-only CPM (3.6% threshold) would capture similar percentages of cases but reduce confirmatory tests required by 24, 27 and 36%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CRP sets the standard for tuberculosis screening among outpatient PLHIV. The choice between using CRP at 5 mg·L-1 cut-off or in a CPM depends on available resources.
Item Type | Article |
---|---|
Faculty and Department | Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases > Dept of Clinical Research |
PubMed ID | 37286216 |
Elements ID | 204425 |
Official URL | http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0021-2023 |
Download
Filename: Dhana-etal-2023-Clinical-utility-of-WHO-recommended-screening-tools-and-development-and-validation-of-novel-clinical-prediction-models-for-pulmonary-tuberculosis-screening-among-outpatients-living-with-HIV.pdf
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0
Download