Performance of Kit-LPA for the detection of MDR-TB and XDR-TB#

Kit-LPA versus LPA
Drug (No. of samples)+Gene targetSensitivity % (95% CI)§Specificity % (95% CI)Concordance % (κ)ƒ
RIFrpoB (n=197)100 (85–100)98.8 (96–100)98.8 (0.95)
INHkatG (n=196)96.5 (82–100)100 (98–100)99.4 (0.98)
inhA (n=197)100 (40–100)100 (98–100)100 (1.0)
FLQgyrA (n =179)100 (80–100)98.7 (96–100)98.8 (0.94)
gyrB## (n=179)Not estimable100 (98–100)100 (Not estimable)
AMNrrs (n=179)100 (48–100)98.8 (96–100)98.8 (0.83)
eis (n=179)100 (2–100)100 (98–100)100 (1.0)

Kit-LPA: Kit-extracted DNA with line probe assay; LPA: line probe assay; MDR-TB: multidrug-resistant TB; XDR-TB: extensively drug-resistant TB. #Using LPA as a gold standard. RIF: rifampicin; INH: isoniazid; FLQ: fluoroquinolones; AMN: aminoglycosides. +The details of samples are provided in supplementary figure S4. §CI: confidence interval. ƒκ: Cohen’s kappa coefficient. ##There was no mutant sample in gyrB drug target; therefore sensitivity and κ value of concordance could not be estimated.