Abstract
Background The evolution of tuberculosis (TB) disease during the clinical latency period remains incompletely understood.
Methods 250 HIV-uninfected, adult household contacts of rifampicin-resistant TB with a negative symptom screen underwent baseline 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission and computed tomography (PET/CT), repeated in 112 after 5-15 months. Following South African and WHO guidelines, participants did not receive preventive therapy. All participants had intensive baseline screening with spontaneous, followed by induced, sputum sampling and were then observed for an average of 4.7 years for culture-positive disease. Baseline PET/CT abnormalities were evaluated in relation to culture-positive disease.
Results At baseline, 59 (23.6%) participants had lung PET/CT findings consistent with TB of which 29 (11.6%) were defined as Subclinical TB, and 30 (12%) Subclinical TB-inactive. A further 83 (33.2%) had other lung parenchymal abnormalities and 108 (43.2%) had normal lungs. Over 1107-person years of follow-up 14 cases of culture-positive TB were diagnosed. Six cases were detected by intensive baseline screening, all would have been missed by the South African symptom-based screening strategy and only one detected by a WHO-recommended chest X-Ray screening strategy. Those with baseline Subclinical TB lesions on PET/CT were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with culture-positive TB over the study period, compared to those with normal lung parenchyma (10/29 [34.5%] vs 2/108 [1.9%], Hazard Ratio 22.37 [4.89-102.47, p<0.001]).
Conclusions These findings challenge the latent/active TB paradigm demonstrating that subclinical disease exists up to 4 years prior to microbiological detection and/or symptom onset. There are important implications for screening and management of TB.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Funding for this study was provided by the South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC; SHIP-02- 2013), NIH (U19AI111276 and R01106804), Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (37822), Wellcome (203135Z/16/Z) and (BDO innovation fund and philanthropy). RJW is supported the Francis Crick Institute which receives funding from Wellcome (CC2012), Cancer Research UK (CC2012) and MRC (FCC2012); AKC is supported by the NHMRC (GNT2020750); MB is supported by the NHMRC (GNT1195236); LEV and CEB were supported by the Division of Intramural Research, NIAID, NIH.
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:
The study was approved by the human research ethics committees of the University of Cape Town (HREC 449/2014), Boston University (H- 115 35831), Rutgers University (Pro2018001966), and the Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases of NIH (DMID 16-0112).
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 data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
