4.5 Article

Evaluation of CD8+ response in QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus as a marker of recent infection

期刊

RESPIRATORY MEDICINE
卷 185, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2021.106508

关键词

Latent tuberculosis infection; Interferon-gamma release assay; QuantiFERON-TB Gold plus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study evaluated CD8+ T-cell response as a marker for recent TB infection, showing a significant increase in CD8+ T-cell activity in patients recently exposed to TB, especially those with longer exposure time. This suggests that CD8+ T-cell activity may be a useful tool in identifying patients with recent LTBI.
Background: Diagnosis and treatment of latent tuberculosis (TB) infection (LTBI) is essential for the elimination of TB. Preventive therapy could be limited to those with recent TB contact. QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus), a new Interferon-gamma release assay, includes a new antigen tube (TB2), which elicits CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses. Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate CD8+ T-cell response as a marker of recent TB infection. Design: We retrospectively studied 1165 patients who were screened for LTBI. Patients were divided according to history of recent exposure to TB (contact with a confirmed index case in the previous year). CD8+ T-cell activity was measured as the difference between QFT-Plus tubes (TB2-TB1) using two cut-offs (>0.35 IU/mL and >0.60 IU/mL). Results: CD8+ T-cell activity was significantly higher in the exposed group for both cut-offs (96 - 13% vs 36 - 5% patients - OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.13-2.52 for >0.35 IU/mL and 77 vs 28 patients - OR 1.72 95% CI 1.10-2.70 for >0.60 IU/mL). CD8+ T-cell activity also showed an association with positive sputum smear of the index case and higher exposure time. Conclusion: CD8+ T-cell activity as measured with TB2-TB1 shows a significant association with recent exposure to TB, especially in patients with higher exposure and may prove to be a useful tool in identifying patients with recent LTBI.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据