4.6 Article

Interferon-gamma release assays for diagnosing Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection in renal dialysis patients

Journal

Publisher

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.2215/CJN.01010208

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and objectives: End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are at high risk for tuberculosis (TB). IFN-gamma release assays that assess immune responses to specific TB antigens offer potential advantages over tuberculin skin testing (TST) in screening such patients for Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. This study sought to determine whether IFN-gamma release assay results are more closely associated with recent TB exposure than TST results. Design, setting, participants, and measures: Prospective cohort investigation of patients at a hemodialysis center with a smear-positive case of TB. Patients without a history of TB underwent initial and repeat testing with TST, and with the IFN-gamma assays QuantiFERON-TB Gold(R) (QFT-G) and ELISPOT test. Outcome measures included the prevalence of positive test results, identification of factors associated with positive results, and test result discordance. Results: A total of 100 (47% foreign born; median age, 55 yr, age range, 18 to 83 yr) of 124 eligible patients were enrolled. Twenty-six persons had positive TST results, 21 had positive QFT-G results, and 27 had positive ELISPOT results. Patients with TB case contact were likely to have a positive QFT-G result (P = 0.02) and ELISPOT results (P = 0.04), whereas TB case contact was not associated with positive TST results (P = 0.7). Positive TST results were associated with foreign birth (P = 0.04) and having had a TST in the previous year (P = 0.04). Conclusions: Positive IFN-gamma assay results were more closely associated with recent TB exposure than were positive TST results. QFT-G and ELISPOT might offer a better method for detecting TB infection in ESRD patients.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available