P-2078. Performance of Anyplex and Xpert for the Detection of <i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i> complex in Respiratory and Non-Respiratory Samples

Abstract Background Tuberculosis diagnosis requires rapid and sensitive diagnostic methods. The aim was to evaluate the performance of Anyplex MTB/NTM and Xpert MTB/RIF assays for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTC) in respiratory and non-respiratory samples from patients suspected of having tuberculosis in a third-level hospital in Mexico. Methods Samples (n=436) from January 2020 to December 2023 in a hospital from Monterrey, Mexico underwent paired microbiological (MGIT or Lowenstein-Jensen culture) and molecular assays (Anyplex™ MTB/NTM Real-time Detection or Xpert MTB/RIF™) for mycobacterial detection. Results Of the 279 (63.8%) respiratory samples (bronchoalveolar lavage 71.3%, sputum 20.7% and tracheal aspirate 7.8%), positive culture and detected PCR were found in 26/201 samples by Anyplex and in 20/78 samples by Xpert whereas negative culture and detected PCR were found in 32 and 7 samples, respectively. Anyplex showed 65% sensitivity, 80.1% specificity, 26.5% positive predictive value (PPV), and 90.2% negative predictive value (NPV) whereas Xpert showed 100% sensitivity, 87.9% specificity, 74% PPV and 100% NPV. Of the 157 (36.1%) non-respiratory samples (cerebrospinal fluid 37.3%, soft tissues 21.5%, pleural 22.1%, lymph nodes 11.3%, and synovial 7.5%), positive culture and detected PCR were found in 14/118 samples by Anyplex and in 4/39 by Xpert whereas negative culture and detected PCR were found in 17 and 4 samples, respectively. Anyplex showed 73.6% sensitivity, 82.8% specificity, 45.1% PPV, 94.2% NPV whereas Xpert showed 66.6% sensitivity, 87.8% specificity, 50% PPV and 93.5% NPV. Conclusion Xpert assays showed higher sensitivity than Anyplex for the detection of MTC in respiratory samples and showed higher specificity compared to Anyplex in both respiratory and non- respiratory samples. Xpert showed higher PPV for respiratory samples, indicating its superiority disregarding true positive cases. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
Published
2025-01-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofae631.2234
Citations
1
Primary Topic
COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.36
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

P-2078. Performance of Anyplex and Xpert for the Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex in Respiratory and Non-Respiratory Samples

Paola Bocanegra Ibarías, Adrián Camacho-Ortíz, Samantha Flores-Treviño, Alina Gaxiola-Castro
1 citations
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
1.36
article

P-2078. Performance of Anyplex and Xpert for the Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex in Respiratory and Non-Respiratory Samples

Paola Bocanegra Ibarías, Adrián Camacho-Ortíz, Samantha Flores-Treviño, Alina Gaxiola-Castro
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Tuberculosis diagnosis requires rapid and sensitive diagnostic methods. The aim was to evaluate the performance of Anyplex MTB/NTM and Xpert MTB/RIF assays for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTC) in respiratory and non-respiratory samples from patients suspected of having tuberculosis in a third-level hospital in Mexico. Methods Samples (n=436) from January 2020 to December 2023 in a hospital from Monterrey, Mexico underwent paired microbiological (MGIT or Lowenstein-Jensen culture) and molecular assays (Anyplex™ MTB/NTM Real-time Detection or Xpert MTB/RIF™) for mycobacterial detection. Results Of the 279 (63.8%) respiratory samples (bronchoalveolar lavage 71.3%, sputum 20.7% and tracheal aspirate 7.8%), positive culture and detected PCR were found in 26/201 samples by Anyplex and in 20/78 samples by Xpert whereas negative culture and detected PCR were found in 32 and 7 samples, respectively. Anyplex showed 65% sensitivity, 80.1% specificity, 26.5% positive predictive value (PPV), and 90.2% negative predictive value (NPV) whereas Xpert showed 100% sensitivity, 87.9% specificity, 74% PPV and 100% NPV. Of the 157 (36.1%) non-respiratory samples (cerebrospinal fluid 37.3%, soft tissues 21.5%, pleural 22.1%, lymph nodes 11.3%, and synovial 7.5%), positive culture and detected PCR were found in 14/118 samples by Anyplex and in 4/39 by Xpert whereas negative culture and detected PCR were found in 17 and 4 samples, respectively. Anyplex showed 73.6% sensitivity, 82.8% specificity, 45.1% PPV, 94.2% NPV whereas Xpert showed 66.6% sensitivity, 87.8% specificity, 50% PPV and 93.5% NPV. Conclusion Xpert assays showed higher sensitivity than Anyplex for the detection of MTC in respiratory samples and showed higher specificity compared to Anyplex in both respiratory and non- respiratory samples. Xpert showed higher PPV for respiratory samples, indicating its superiority disregarding true positive cases. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Open Forum Infectious DiseasesVol. 12(Supplement_1)
Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León (MX), Hospital Universitario Dr José Eleuterio Gonzalez (MX)
Openalex Percentile: Top 24%
COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
1.36
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.