We present a field evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) and Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Ultra), using two cohorts in a high TB/HIV burden setting in Southern Mozambique. Single respiratory specimens from symptomatic adults accessing health care services (passive case finding (PCF) cohort), and from household and community close contacts (active case finding (ACF) cohort), were tested by smear microscopy, culture, Xpert and Ultra. Liquid and solid culture served as a composite reference standard. We explored trace results’ impact on specificity via their recategorisation to negative (in all and just among those previously treated individuals) A total of 1419 and 252 participants were enrolled in the PCF and ACF cohorts, respectively. For the PCF cohort, Ultra showed higher sensitivity than Xpert overall (0.95 (95% CI: 0.90, 0.98) versus 0.88 (0.82, 0.93); p<0.001) and among smear negative patients (0.63 (0.48, 0.76) and 0.84 (0.71, 0.93). Ultra's specificity was lower than Xpert's (0.98 (0.97, 0.99) versus 0.96 (0.95, 0.97); p=0.008). For ACF, sensitivities were the same (0.67 (95% CI: 0.22,0.96) for both tests), although Ultra detected a higher number of microbiologically confirmed samples than Xpert (4.7% (12/252) versus 2.7% (7/252)). Conditional recategorisation of trace results among previously treated participants maintained differences in specificity in the PCF cohort. These results add evidence on the improved sensitivity of Ultra and support its use in different case finding scenarios.
Challenges from Tuberculosis Diagnosis to Care in Community-Based Active Case Finding among the Urban Poor in Cambodia: A Mixed-Methods Study
