Performance of Kit-LPA for the detection of MDR-TB and XDR-TB#
| Kit-LPA versus LPA | ||||
| Drug¶ (No. of samples)+ | Gene target | Sensitivity % (95% CI)§ | Specificity % (95% CI) | Concordance % (κ)ƒ |
| RIF | rpoB (n=197) | 100 (85–100) | 98.8 (96–100) | 98.8 (0.95) |
| INH | katG (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) | |
| FLQ | gyrA (n =179) | 100 (80–100) | 98.7 (96–100) | 98.8 (0.94) |
| gyrB## (n=179) | Not estimable | 100 (98–100) | 100 (Not estimable) | |
| AMN | rrs (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.