Abstract
The BACTEC Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) machine is the standard globally for detecting viable mycobacteria in patients’ sputum. Samples are observed for no longer than 42 days, at which point the sample is declared “negative” for tuberculosis (TB). This time to detection of bacterial growth, referred to as time-to-positivity (TTP), is increasingly of interest not solely as a diagnostic tool, but as a continuous biomarker wherein change in TTP over time can be used for comparing the bactericidal activity of different TB treatments. However, as a continuous measure, there are oddities in the distribution of TTP values observed, particularly at higher values. We explored whether there is evidence to suggest setting an upper limit of quantification (ULOQM) lower than the diagnostic limit of detection (LOD) using data from several TB-PACTS randomized clinical trials and PanACEA MAMS-TB. Across all trials, less than 7.1% of all weekly samples returned TTP measurements between 25 and 42 days. Further, the relative absolute prediction error (%) was highest in this range. When modeling with ULOQM s of 25 and 30 days, the precision in estimation improved for 23 of 25 regimen-level slopes as compared to models using the diagnostic LOD while also improving the discrimination between regimens based on Bayesian posteriors. While TTP measurements between 25 days and the diagnostic LOD may be important for diagnostic purposes, TTP values in this range may not contribute meaningfully to its use as a quantitative measure, particularly when assessing treatment response, and may lead to under-powered clinical trials.
Highlights
The BACTEC Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) machine is the STAND, PaMZard globally for the detection and diagnosis of tuberculosis.
As MGIT machine use becomes more ubiquitous, its time-to-positivity (TTP) measures are increasingly of interest as a continuous biomarker for evaluating bactericidal activity of TB treatment regimens.
Using data from seven previously published trials, this work highlights the evidence for setting a limit of quantification for quantitative analyses that is below the diagnostic limit of detection. TTP values near the upper limit of detection appear to be noisier and sparser, with precision improving for estimation of 23 of 25 regimen-specific rates of change in TTP when analyzed with a lower limit of quantification.
While TTP measurements between 25 days and the diagnostic LOD may be important for diagnostic purposes, TTP values in this range may not contribute meaningfully to its use as a quantitative measure, particularly when assessing early treatment response.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Suzanne M. Dufault has received funding from the UCSF Center for Tuberculosis and TB RAMP scholar program (NIH/NIAID R25AI147375). Elin M. Svensson was funded by the Veni project number 09150161910052 financed by the Dutch Research Council (NWO).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All datasets (with the exception of PanACEA MAMS-TB) analyzed during the current study are available in the TB-PACTS repository (https://c-path.org/programs/tb-pacts/). The MAMS-TB data can be requested from PanACEA executive group, reachable at: Postbus PanACEA secretariat (panacea{at}radboudumc.nl).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All datasets (with the exception of PanACEA MAMS-TB) analyzed during the current study are available in the TB-PACTS repository (https://c-path.org/programs/tb-pacts/). The MAMS-TB data can be requested from PanACEA executive group, reachable at: Postbus PanACEA secretariat (panacea{at}radboudumc.nl).