ABSTRACT
This study seeks to describe the rollout and current state of South Africa's GeneXpert molecular diagnostic program for tuberculosis (TB). Xpert MTB/RIF was introduced in 2011 with a subsequent expansion to include extra-pulmonary and paediatric testing, followed by Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra in 2017. Through a centralised laboratory information system and the use of a standardised platform for more than a decade, over 23 million tests were analysed, describing the numbers tested, Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex detection, rifampin resistance, and the unsuccessful test rates. The stratification by province, specimen type, age, and sex identified significant heterogeneity across the program and highlighted testing gaps for men, low detection yield for paediatric pulmonary TB, and the effects of inadequate specimen quality on the detection rate. The insights gained from these data can aid in the monitoring of interventions in support of the national TB program beyond laboratory operational aspects.
ABSTRACT
The high demand for SARS-CoV-2 tests but limited supply to South African laboratories early in the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a heterogenous diagnostic footprint of open and closed molecular testing platforms being implemented. Ongoing monitoring of the performance of these multiple and varied systems required novel approaches, especially during the circulation of variants. The National Health Laboratory Service centrally collected cycle threshold (Ct) values from 1,497,669 test results reported from 6 commonly used PCR assays in 36 months, and visually monitored changes in their median Ct within a 28-day centered moving average for each assays' gene targets. This continuous quality monitoring rapidly identified delayed hybridization of RdRp in the Allplex™ SARS-CoV-2 assay due to the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant; S-gene target failure in the TaqPath™ COVID-19 assay due to B.1.1.7 (Alpha) and the B.1.1.529 (Omicron); and recently E-gene delayed hybridization in the Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 due to XBB.1.5. This near "real-time" monitoring helped inform the need for sequencing and the importance of multiplex molecular nucleic acid amplification technology designs used in diagnostics for patient care. This continuous quality monitoring approach at the granularity of Ct values should be included in ongoing surveillance and with application to other disease use cases that rely on molecular diagnostics.
ABSTRACT
The Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV tests were rapidly developed and widely used during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. In response to emerging genetic variability, a new SARS-CoV-2 target (RNA-dependent RNA-polymerase) has been added to both tests: Xpert® Xpress CoV-2 plus and Xpert® Xpress CoV-2/Flu/RSV plus test. A rapid evaluation of both tests was performed in South Africa, using residual respiratory specimens. Residual respiratory specimens (n = 125) were used to evaluate the Xpert® Xpress CoV-2 plus test and included 50 genotyped specimens. The Xpert® Xpress CoV-2/Flu/RSV plus test was assessed using 45 genotyped SARS-CoV-2 specimens, 10 influenza A, 10 influenza B and 20 respiratory syncytial virus specimens. Results were compared to in-country standard-of-care tests. Genotyped specimens tested the performance of the test under pressure from circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. Reference material was included to assess the test limits and linearity. The Xpert® Xpress CoV-2 plus test performance compared to reference results across residual respiratory specimens was good (positive percentage agreement (PPA) = 95.2%, negative percentage agreement (NPA) = 95.0%) The Xpert® Xpress CoV-2/Flu/RSV plus test showed good performance across all residual respiratory specimens (PPA = 100%, NPA = 98.3%). All genotyped variants of concern were detected by both tests. The Xpert® Xpress CoV-2 plus and Xpert® Xpress CoV-2/Flu/RSV plus tests can be used to diagnose SARS-CoV-2, and to diagnose and differentiate SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, influenza B and respiratory syncytial virus, respectively. The NPA was lower than the recommended 99%, but was influenced by the low number of negative specimens tested. The variants of concern assessed did not affect test performance. It is recommended that sites perform their own assessments compared to in-country standard-of-care tests.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Estimating the incremental costs of scaling-up novel technologies in low-income and middle-income countries is a methodologically challenging and substantial empirical undertaking, in the absence of routine cost data collection. We demonstrate a best practice pragmatic approach to estimate the incremental costs of new technologies in low-income and middle-income countries, using the example of costing the scale-up of Xpert Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB)/resistance to riframpicin (RIF) in South Africa. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We estimate costs, by applying two distinct approaches of bottom-up and top-down costing, together with an assessment of processes and capacity. RESULTS: The unit costs measured using the different methods of bottom-up and top-down costing, respectively, are $US16.9 and $US33.5 for Xpert MTB/RIF, and $US6.3 and $US8.5 for microscopy. The incremental cost of Xpert MTB/RIF is estimated to be between $US14.7 and $US17.7. While the average cost of Xpert MTB/RIF was higher than previous studies using standard methods, the incremental cost of Xpert MTB/RIF was found to be lower. CONCLUSION: Costs estimates are highly dependent on the method used, so an approach, which clearly identifies resource-use data collected from a bottom-up or top-down perspective, together with capacity measurement, is recommended as a pragmatic approach to capture true incremental cost where routine cost data are scarce.
