Variability of the QuantiFERON®-TB gold in-tube test using automated and manual methods.

BACKGROUND: The QuantiFERON®-TB Gold In-Tube test (QFT-GIT) detects Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) infection by measuring release of interferon gamma (IFN-γ) when T-cells (in heparinized whole blood) are stimulated with specific Mtb antigens. The amount of IFN-γ is determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Automation of the ELISA method may reduce variability. To assess the impact of ELISA automation, we compared QFT-GIT results and variability when ELISAs were performed manually and with automation. METHODS: Blood was collected into two sets of QFT-GIT tubes and processed at the same time. For each set, IFN-γ was measured in automated and manual ELISAs. Variability in interpretations and IFN-γ measurements was assessed between automated (A1 vs. A2) and manual (M1 vs. M2) ELISAs. Variability in IFN-γ measurements was also assessed on separate groups stratified by the mean of the four ELISAs. RESULTS: Subjects (N = 146) had two automated and two manual ELISAs completed. Overall, interpretations were discordant for 16 (11%) subjects. Excluding one subject with indeterminate results, 7 (4.8%) subjects had discordant automated interpretations and 10 (6.9%) subjects had discordant manual interpretations (p = 0.17). Quantitative variability was not uniform; within-subject variability was greater with higher IFN-γ measurements and with manual ELISAs. For subjects with mean TB Responses ±0.25 IU/mL of the 0.35 IU/mL cutoff, the within-subject standard deviation for two manual tests was 0.27 (CI95 = 0.22-0.37) IU/mL vs. 0.09 (CI95 = 0.07-0.12) IU/mL for two automated tests. CONCLUSION: QFT-GIT ELISA automation may reduce variability near the test cutoff. Methodological differences should be considered when interpreting and using IFN-γ release assays (IGRAs).

Within-subject interlaboratory variability of QuantiFERON-TB gold in-tube tests.

BACKGROUND: The QuantiFERON®-TB Gold In-Tube test (QFT-GIT) is a viable alternative to the tuberculin skin test (TST) for detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. However, within-subject variability may limit test utility. To assess variability, we compared results from the same subjects when QFT-GIT enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) were performed in different laboratories. METHODS: Subjects were recruited at two sites and blood was tested in three labs. Two labs used the same type of automated ELISA workstation, 8-point calibration curves, and electronic data transfer. The third lab used a different automated ELISA workstation, 4-point calibration curves, and manual data entry. Variability was assessed by interpretation agreement and comparison of interferon-γ (IFN-γ) measurements. Data for subjects with discordant interpretations or discrepancies in TB Response >0.05 IU/mL were verified or corrected, and variability was reassessed using a reconciled dataset. RESULTS: Ninety-seven subjects had results from three labs. Eleven (11.3%) had discordant interpretations and 72 (74.2%) had discrepancies >0.05 IU/mL using unreconciled results. After correction of manual data entry errors for 9 subjects, and exclusion of 6 subjects due to methodological errors, 7 (7.7%) subjects were discordant. Of these, 6 (85.7%) had all TB Responses within 0.25 IU/mL of the manufacturer's recommended cutoff. Non-uniform error of measurement was observed, with greater variation in higher IFN-γ measurements. Within-subject standard deviation for TB Response was as high as 0.16 IU/mL, and limits of agreement ranged from -0.46 to 0.43 IU/mL for subjects with mean TB Response within 0.25 IU/mL of the cutoff. CONCLUSION: Greater interlaboratory variability was associated with manual data entry and higher IFN-γ measurements. Manual data entry should be avoided. Because variability in measuring TB Response may affect interpretation, especially near the cutoff, consideration should be given to developing a range of values near the cutoff to be interpreted as "borderline," rather than negative or positive.

Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection in United States Navy recruits using the tuberculin skin test or whole-blood interferon-gamma release assays.

BACKGROUND: Military personnel are at risk for acquiring Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection because of activities in close quarters and in regions with a high prevalence of tuberculosis (TB). Accurate tests are needed to avoid unnecessary treatment because of false-positive results and to avoid TB because of false-negative results and failure to diagnose and treat M. tuberculosis infection. We sought to estimate the specificity of the tuberculin skin test (TST) and 2 whole-blood interferon-gamma release assays (QuantiFERON-TB assay [QFT] and QuantiFERON-TB Gold assay [QFT-G]) and to identify factors associated with test discordance. METHODS: A cross-sectional comparison study was performed in which 856 US Navy recruits were tested for M. tuberculosis infection using the TST, QFT, and QFT-G. RESULTS: Among the study subjects, 5.1% of TSTs resulted in an induration > or = 10 mm, and 2.9% of TSTs resulted in an induration > or = 15 mm. Eleven percent of QFT results and 0.6% of QFT-G results were positive. Assuming recruits at low risk for M. tuberculosis exposure were not infected, estimates of TST specificity were 99.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 98.3%-99.9%) when a 15-mm cutoff value was used and 98.4% (95% CI, 97.3%-99.4%) when a 10-mm cutoff value was used. The estimated QFT specificity was 92.3% (95% CI, 90.0%-94.5%), and the estimated QFT-G specificity was 99.8% (95% CI, 99.5%-100%). Recruits who were born in countries with a high prevalence of TB were 26-40 times more likely to have discordant results involving a positive TST result and a negative QFT-G result than were recruits born in countries with a low prevalence of TB. Nineteen (50%) of 38 recruits with this type of discordant results had a TST induration > or = 15 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The QFT-G and TST are more specific than the QFT. No statistically significant difference in specificity between the QFT-G and TST was found using a 15-mm induration cutoff value. The discordant results observed among recruits with increased risk of M. tuberculosis infection may have been because of lower TST specificity or lower QFT-G sensitivity. Negative QFT-G results for recruits born in countries where TB is highly prevalent and whose TST induration was > or = 15 mm suggest that the QFT-G may be less sensitive than the TST. Additional studies are needed to determine the risk of TB when TST and QFT-G results are discordant.

Prospective comparison of the tuberculin skin test and 2 whole-blood interferon-gamma release assays in persons with suspected tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: Interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs) are attractive alternatives to the tuberculin skin test (TST) for detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. However, the inability to definitively confirm the presence of most M. tuberculosis infections hampers assessment of IGRA accuracy. Although IGRAs are primarily indicated for the detection of latent tuberculosis infection, we sought to determine the sensitivity of the TST and 2 whole-blood IGRAs (QuantiFERON-TB assay [QFT] and QuantiFERON-TB Gold assay [QFT-G]) in situations in which infection is confirmed by recovery of M. tuberculosis by culture. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, cross-sectional comparison study in which 148 persons suspected to have tuberculosis were tested simultaneously with the TST, QFT, and QFT-G. RESULTS: M. tuberculosis was cultured from samples from 69 (47%) of 148 persons suspected to have tuberculosis; the TST induration was > or = 5 mm for 51 (73.9%) of the 69 subjects (95% confidence interval [CI], 62.5%-82.8%). The QFT indicated tuberculosis infection for 48 (69.6%) of the 69 subjects (95% CI, 57.9%-79.2%) and was indeterminate for 7 (10.1%). The QFT-G yielded positive results for 46 (66.7%) of the 69 subjects (95% CI, 54.9%-76.7%) and indeterminate results for 9 subjects (13.0%). If subjects with indeterminate QFT-G results were excluded, 46 (76.7%) of 60 subjects (95% CI, 64.6%-85.6%) had positive TST results, and the same number of subjects had positive QFT-G results. HIV infection was associated with false-negative TST results but not with false-negative QFT-G results. CONCLUSIONS: The TST, QFT, and QFT-G have similar sensitivity in persons with culture-confirmed infection. As with the TST, negative QFT and QFT-G results should not be used to exclude the diagnosis of tuberculosis in persons with suggestive signs or symptoms.