BACKGROUND Inadequate tuberculosis (TB) diagnostics are a major hurdle in the reduction of disease burden, and accurate point-of-care tests (POCTs) are urgently needed. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of Fujifilm SILVAMP TB lipoarabinomannan (FujiLAM) POCT for TB diagnosis in HIV-negative outpatients and compared it with Alere Determine TB LAM Ag (AlereLAM) POCT and a laboratory-based ultrasensitive electrochemiluminescence LAM research assay (EclLAM).METHODS In this multicenter diagnostic test accuracy study, we recruited HIV-negative adults with symptoms suggestive of pulmonary TB presenting to outpatient health care centers in Peru and South Africa. Urine samples were tested using FujiLAM, AlereLAM, and EclLAM, and the diagnostic accuracy was assessed against a microbiological reference standard (MRS) and a composite reference standard.RESULTS Three hundred seventy-two HIV-negative participants were included and the prevalence of microbiologically confirmed TB was 30%. Compared with the MRS, the sensitivities of AlereLAM, FujiLAM, and EclLAM were 10.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.3%–18.0%), 53.2% (95% CI 43.9%–62.1%), and 66.7% (95% CI 57.5%–74.7%), respectively. The specificities of AlereLAM, FujiLAM, and EclLAM were 92.3% (95% CI 88.5%–95.0%), 98.9% (95% CI 96.7%–99.6%), and 98.1% (95% CI 95.6%–99.2%), respectively. Positive likelihood ratios of AlereLAM, FujiLAM, and EclLAM were 1.4, 46.2, and 34.8, respectively, and positive predictive values were 37.5%, 95.2%, and 93.7%, respectively.CONCLUSION Compared with AlereLAM, FujiLAM detected 5 times more patients with TB in HIV-negative participants, had a high positive predictive value, and has the potential to improve rapid diagnosis of TB at the point-of-care. EclLAM demonstrated that additional sensitivity gains are possible, which highlights LAM’s potential as a biomarker. Additional research is required to assess FujiLAM’s performance in prospective cohorts, its cost-effectiveness, and its impact in real-world clinical settings.FUNDING Global Health Innovative Technology Fund, the UK Department for International Development, the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research through Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, and the NIH and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
Tobias Broger, Mark P. Nicol, George B. Sigal, Eduardo Gotuzzo, Alexandra J. Zimmer, Shireen Surtie, Tatiana Caceres-Nakiche, Anna Mantsoki, Elena Ivanova Reipold, Rita Székely, Michael Tsionsky, Judith van Heerden, Tatiana Plisova, Kinuyo Chikamatsu, Todd L. Lowary, Abraham Pinter, Satoshi Mitarai, Emmanuel Moreau, Samuel G. Schumacher, Claudia M. Denkinger
Usage data is cumulative from February 2024 through February 2025.
Usage | JCI | PMC |
---|---|---|
Text version | 989 | 393 |
150 | 155 | |
Figure | 180 | 1 |
Table | 88 | 0 |
Supplemental data | 136 | 11 |
Citation downloads | 60 | 0 |
Totals | 1,603 | 560 |
Total Views | 2,163 |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.