Dhana, A;
Gupta, RK;
Hamada, Y;
Kengne, AP;
Kerkhoff, AD;
Yoon, C;
Cattamanchi, A;
... Barr, DA; + view all
(2023)
Clinical utility of WHO-recommended screening tools and development and validation of novel clinical prediction models for pulmonary tuberculosis screening among outpatients living with HIV: an individual participant data meta-analysis.
Clinical utility of WHO-recommended screening tools and development and validation of novel clinical prediction models for pulmonary tuberculosis screening among outpatients living with HIV: an individual participant data meta-analysis
, 32
(168)
, Article 230021. 10.1183/16000617.0021-2023.
Preview |
PDF
230021.full.pdf - Published Version Download (843kB) | Preview |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that outpatient people living with HIV (PLHIV) undergo tuberculosis screening with the WHO four-symptom screen (W4SS) or C-reactive protein (CRP) (5 mg·L-1 cut-off) followed by confirmatory testing if screen positive. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis to determine the performance of WHO-recommended screening tools and two newly developed clinical prediction models (CPMs). METHODS: Following a systematic review, we identified studies that recruited adult outpatient PLHIV irrespective of tuberculosis signs and symptoms or with a positive W4SS, evaluated CRP and collected sputum for culture. We used logistic regression to develop an extended CPM (which included CRP and other predictors) and a CRP-only CPM. We used internal-external cross-validation to evaluate performance. RESULTS: We pooled data from eight cohorts (n=4315 participants). The extended CPM had excellent discrimination (C-statistic 0.81); the CRP-only CPM had similar discrimination. The C-statistics for WHO-recommended tools were lower. Both CPMs had equivalent or higher net benefit compared with the WHO-recommended tools. Compared with both CPMs, CRP (5 mg·L-1 cut-off) had equivalent net benefit across a clinically useful range of threshold probabilities, while the W4SS had a lower net benefit. The W4SS would capture 91% of tuberculosis cases and require confirmatory testing for 78% of participants. CRP (5 mg·L-1 cut-off), the extended CPM (4.2% threshold) and the CRP-only CPM (3.6% threshold) would capture similar percentages of cases but reduce confirmatory tests required by 24, 27 and 36%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CRP sets the standard for tuberculosis screening among outpatient PLHIV. The choice between using CRP at 5 mg·L-1 cut-off or in a CPM depends on available resources.
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
