Comparison of the COBAS AMPLICOR MTB and BDProbeTec ET assays for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in respiratory specimens

Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Dept. of Medical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Journal of Clinical Microbiology (Impact Factor: 3.99). 07/2005; 43(6):2563-6. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.43.6.2563-2566.2005
Source: PubMed


The performances of the BDProbeTec ET (Becton Dickinson) and COBAS AMPLICOR MTB (Roche) were retrospectively evaluated for detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex in various respiratory specimens. The BACTEC and MGIT liquid culture system (Becton Dickinson) was used as a reference method. A total of 824 respiratory specimens, comprised of sputa, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, and bronchial and tracheal aspirates from 580 patients, were evaluated. Out of 824 clinical specimens, 109 specimens from 43 patients were culture positive for M. tuberculosis. Of these 109 specimens, 67 were smear positive, 85 were positive by the COBAS AMPLICOR MTB test, and 94 were positive by the BDProbeTec ET. Of the 715 culture-negative specimens, 17 were positive by the auramine staining, 11 were positive by the COBAS AMPLICOR MTB test, and 12 were positive by the BDProbeTec ET. After discrepancy analysis and review of the patients' clinical data, 130 specimens from 50 patients were considered "true-positive" specimens. This resulted in the following sensitivities: microscopy, 61.5%; COBAS AMPLICOR MTB test, 78.0%; and BDProbeTec ET, 86.2%. The specificities of each system, based on the clinical diagnosis, were 99.7% for microscopy, 99.9% for the COBAS AMPLICOR MTB test, and 99.9% for the BDProbeTec ET. The data presented represent a considerable number of specimens evaluated with a considerable number of culture- and auramine-positive and culture-positive and auramine-negative results and therefore give a realistic view of how the data should be interpreted in a daily routine situation. Specifically, the data with regard to the culture-positive and auramine-negative specimens are useful, because in a routine situation, auramine-negative specimens are sometimes accepted, on clinical indications, to be analyzed by an amplification method.

Download full-text


Available from: Hubert P Endtz,
  • Source
    • "The overall sensitivity of FT MTB reached 88.1% being in the upper range (63.2 – 95.0%, mean 84.2%) of levels reported for other commercial NAATs like BD ProbeTec ET (63.2-86.2%) [6,11], COBAS Taqman MTB (81.1-91.5%) [4,5], GeneProbe AMTD (95%) [12], Speed-oligo direct MTB (76%) [17] or Xpert MTB/RIF (88.0-92.2%) "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: With Fluorotype MTB (FT MTB, HAIN Lifesciences, Germany) a new semi-automated assay for detection of M. tuberculosis complex (MTBC) in clinical specimens has been introduced. In a prospective study, we evaluated the diagnostic performance of FT MTB in a routine diagnostic setting in a low-incidence country. A total of 1039 respiratory specimens received for routine mycobacteriology diagnostics were analysed by FT MTB. Results were compared to those of culture, microscopy and clinical diagnosis. 61 specimens were excluded from further analysis due to bacterial contamination of cultures. FT MTB detected 52 of 59 TB specimens (45 culture-positive with MTBC, 7 with clinical diagnosis of TB). With 902 of 912 non-TB specimens (884 culture-negative, 18 with growth of non-tuberculous mycobacteria) FT MTB was negative; discrepant positive FT MTB results were found with 10 specimens. Overall sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 88.1%, 98.9%, 83.8% and 99.2%. Sensitivity rates for smear-positive and smear-negative TB specimens were 100% and 56.3%, respectively. Seven of 978 samples (0.7%) yielded invalid FT MTB results. FT MTB is a new accurate, half automated assay for rapidly diagnosing TB and suitable for larger series of samples. Performance characteristics were found to be similar to those of other commercial NAATs. Its sensitivity in paucibacillary, smear-negative specimens and its utility for TB diagnostics in high-incidence settings needs to be addressed in further studies.
    BMC Infectious Diseases 02/2014; 14(1):59. DOI:10.1186/1471-2334-14-59 · 2.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Both, a first multi-country evaluation study [1] as well as a consecutive multi-centre implementation study [3] showed good specificity (99.2%) and excellent sensitivity values (92.2% and 90.3%, respectively), in particular for smear-negative TB specimens (72.5% and 76.9%, respectively). These data suggested that sensitivity might be superior to that of other commercial assays [4-7]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nucleic acid amplification assays allow for the rapid and accurate detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) directly in clinical specimens thereby facilitating diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB). With the fully automated Xpert MTB/RIF system (Cepheid) an innovative solution of TB diagnostics has been launched. We performed a direct head-to-head comparison of Xpert MTB/RIF with two widely used commercial assays, ProbeTec ET DTB (DTB) (Becton-Dickinson) and COBAS TaqMan MTB (CTM-MTB) (Roche). 121 pre-characterized respiratory specimens (68 culture-positive for MTB complex, 24 culture-positive for non-tuberculous mycobacteria and 29 culture-negative) taken from our frozen specimen bank were tested for the presence of MTB complex by the three assays. Among culture-positive samples (n = 68), overall sensitivity for detection of MTB complex was 74.6%, 73.8%, and 79.1% for Xpert MTB/RIF, CTM-MTB, and DTB, respectively. Within the subgroup of smear-negative TB samples (n = 51) sensitivity was 68% for Xpert MTB/RIF and CTM-MTB and 72% for DTB. Among smear-positive TB samples (n = 17), all (100%) were detected by DTB and 94.1% and 93.3% by Xpert MTB/RIF and CTM-MTB, respectively. Specificity was best for CTM-MTB (100%) and lowest for Xpert MTB/RIF (96.2%) due to misidentification of two NTM samples as MTB complex. CTM-MTB yielded the highest rate of invalid results (4.1%) (0.8% by Xpert MTB/RIF and DTB, respectively). The direct comparison of Xpert MTB/RIF with CTM-MTB and DTB yielded similar overall performance data. Whereas DTB was slightly superior to Xpert MTB/RIF in terms of sensitivity, at least in the sample collection tested here, CTM-MTB performed best in terms of specificity.
    BMC Infectious Diseases 06/2013; 13(1):280. DOI:10.1186/1471-2334-13-280 · 2.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Therefore, it is highly possible that one of the causes for the different estimates of sensitivity and specificity is the difference in the sample composition. In particular, PCR inhibitory materials in non-respiratory samples can result in a lower sensitivity when performing real-time PCR on those samples.15,16 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PCR is widely used for rapidly and accurately detecting Mycobacterium species. The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of three real-time PCR kits and evaluate the concordance with two older PCR methods. Using 128 samples, the five PCR methods were assessed, including an in-house PCR protocol, the COBAS Amplicor MTB, the COBAS TaqMan MTB, the AdvanSure TB/NTM real-time PCR, and the Real-Q M. tuberculosis kit. The discrepant results were further examined by DNA sequencing and using the AdvanSure Mycobacteria Genotyping Chip for complete analysis. For Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) detection, all five kits showed 100% matching results (positive; N = 11 and negative; N = 80). In non-tuberculous mycobacterium (NTM) discrimination, the AdvanSure yielded two true-positive outcomes from M. intracellulare and one false positive outcome, while the Real-Q resulted in one true-positive outcome and one false negative outcome for each case and another false negative result using the provided DNA samples. Real-time PCR, yielded results that were comparable to those of the older PCR methods for detecting MTB. However, there were disagreements among the applied kits in regard to the sample test results for detecting NTM. Therefore, we recommend that additional confirmatory measures such as DNA sequencing should be implemented in such cases, and further research with using a larger numbers of samples is warranted to improve the detection of NTM.
    Yonsei medical journal 03/2011; 52(2):301-6. DOI:10.3349/ymj.2011.52.2.301 · 1.29 Impact Factor
Show more