Evidence Hub

Exploratory study on detection of drug resistance of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in sputum specimens by next-generation sequencing

Liu YY, Shi J, Chu P, Wu TY, Li L, Pang Y, Lu J, Guo YL

Zhonghua jie he he hu xi za zhi = Zhonghua jiehe he huxi zazhi = Chinese journal of tuberculosis and respiratory diseases, 2022

50 participants

Abstract

Objective: To compare the diagnostic performance of next-generation sequencing (NGS) detection methods in sputum samples and Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains, in order to explore the feasibility of the NGS method to detect drug resistance in sputum specimens. Methods: In this retrospective study, the sputum specimens and corresponding clinical isolates of 50 pulmonary tuberculosis patients admitted to Beijing Chest Hospital from January 2017 to December 2017 were collected. The gene mutations of katG, inhA, rpoB, embA, embB, rpsL, rrs, gyrA, gyrB and tlyA in sputum specimens and corresponding clinical isolates were detected by NGS method. The phenotypic drug susceptibility test (DST) of the strains was carried out by the proportion method. Using DST results as a reference, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the NGS method for clinical strains and sputum specimens, as well as the consistency statistic (Kappa) with phenotype DST were calculated respectively. The Chi-square test was used to compare the accuracy of the NGS testing in sputum samples and strain samples. Results: The results showed that rpoB(63.83%, 30/47) and rrs(57.45%, 27/47) were the most common mutated genes, followed by katG(46.81%, 22/47), rpsL(29.79%, 14/47), gyrA(27.66%, 13/47), embB(21.28%, 10/47), tlyA(12.77%, 6/47), gyrB(8.51%, 4/47), and inhA promoter(19.15%, 9/47), embA promoter region (12.77%, 6/47) mutation. when the NGS method was compared…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 50 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free