4.3 Article

Prevalence of pyrazinamide resistance and Wayne assay performance analysis in a tuberculosis cohort in Lima, Peru

Journal

Publisher

INT UNION AGAINST TUBERCULOSIS LUNG DISEASE (I U A T L D)
DOI: 10.5588/ijtld.16.0850

Keywords

PZA; drug resistance; multidrug-resistant tuberculosis; Wayne assay; pyrazinamidase assay; Peru

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH/NIAID
  2. Bethesda, MD, USA) [U19 AI076217, U19 AI109755, U01 A1057786, T32 AI007433, L30 AI120170]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) regimens often contain pyrazinamide (PZA) even if susceptibility to the drug has not been confirmed. This gap is due to the limited availability and reliability of PZA susceptibility testing. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of PZA resistance using the Wayne assay among TB patients in Lima, Peru, to describe characteristics associated with PZA resistance and to compare the performance of Wayne with that of BACTEC (TM) MGIT (TM) 960. METHODS: PZA susceptibility using the Wayne assay was tested in patients diagnosed with culture-positive pulmonary TB from September 2009 to August 2012. Factors associated with PZA resistance were evaluated. We compared the performance of the Wayne assay to that of MGIT 960 in a convenience sample. RESULTS: The prevalence of PZA resistance was 6.6% (95%CI 5.8-7.5) among 3277 patients, and 47.7% (95%CI 42.7-52.6) among a subset of 405 MDR-TB patients. In multivariable analysis, MDR-TB (OR 86.0, 95 %CI 54.0-136.9) and Latin American-Mediterranean lineage (OR 3.40, 95%CI 2.33-4.96) were associated with PZA resistance. The Wayne assay was in agreement with MGIT 960 in 83.9% of samples (kappa 0.66, 95%CI 0.56-0.76). CONCLUSION: PZA resistance was detected using the Wayne assay in nearly half of MDR-TB patients in Lima. This test can inform the selection and composition of regimens, especially those dependent on additional resistance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available