In-Depth Review

Diagnosis of Tuberculosis in Dialysis Patients: Current Strategy

Liviu Segall and Adrian Covic
Nephrology Department, Dr. C. I. Parhon Hospital, University of Medicine and Pharmacy Gr. T. Popa, Iasi, Romania
Patients with ESRD undergoing chronic dialysis are much more prone to develop tuberculosis (TB) than the general population. In these patients, the diagnosis of TB disease is often difficult because of prevailing extrapulmonary involvement and nonspecific symptoms. The prevalence of latent TB infection (LTBI) in ESRD patients is elevated, and those who become infected are at high risk of developing active disease. Therefore, screening for LTBI in this population is recommended, aiming to prevent progression to active TB and secondary contamination of others. The tuberculin skin test (TST), the classic diagnostic tool for LTBI, has several major drawbacks, including poor sensitivity (because of a high prevalence of anergy in dialysis patients) and specificity [with false-positive tests in those vaccinated with bacille CalmetteGuerin (BCG)]. In the past 10 years or so, new immunological tests using IFN- release assays (IGRAs) have become available and have shown superior sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of TB compared with the TST in several studies, some very recent ones including ESRD patients. Therefore, current strategy in dialysis patients should use these tests instead of TST for LTBI screening and as an aid for the diagnosis of active TB. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 5: 1114 1122, 2010. doi: 10.2215/CJN.09231209

atients with ESRD undergoing chronic dialysis are 6 to 25 times more likely to develop tuberculosis (TB) than the general population, mainly because of the impaired cellular immunity characteristic of this condition (13). Nosocomial transmission of TB has also been reported in hemodialysis (HD) centers (4). In a U.S. Renal Data System (USRDS) retrospective analysis, age, unemployment, Asian and Native American race, smoking, reduced body mass index, low serum albumin, ischemic heart disease, and anemia were all significant risk factors for HD patients to develop TB (5). The mortality rate of TB in dialysis patients is high, ranging from 17% to 75% (6). In the USRDS analysis mentioned above, TB was independently associated with a 42% increased mortality (5).

monly associated with fatigue, malnutrition, and other nonspecific complaints, possibly concealing the course of an underlying TB disease (7,11,12). This atypical presentation may often lead to a delay in accurate diagnosis and therapy, sometimes resulting in patients death. Therefore, nephrologists should always have a high degree of suspicion and consider the possibility of TB whenever confronted with an ESRD patient presenting with general symptoms such as fever, weight loss, and/or lymphadenopathy (10). The diagnosis would then require the isolation of acid-fast bacilli, the finding of typical caseating granuloma on biopsy, or the recovery of tubercle bacilli from the culture of the biopsy material (7).

Active TB in ESRD Patients: Atypical Clinical Presentation

In ESRD, the diagnosis of TB disease is often difficult because of prevailing extrapulmonary involvement and nonspecific symptoms. Extrapulmonary TB has been reported in as many as 60% to 80% of cases, either alone or associated with pulmonary TB. The most common forms of presentation are lymphadenitis, gastrointestinal, bone, genitourinary, peritonitis, pleural effusion, pericardial effusion, miliary TB, and pyrexia of unknown origin (710). On the other hand, uremia is com-

Difficulties in Diagnosing Latent TB Infection: The Limitations of the TST

According to several studies using different diagnostic approaches, the prevalence of latent TB infection (LTBI) in chronic dialysis patients is high, ranging between 20% and 70% (2,13,14), and those who become infected are at high risk of developing active disease (15,16). Therefore, screening for LTBI in this population is recommended, aiming to prevent progression to active TB and secondary contamination of other patients and healthcare workers (15). It has been shown that preventive treatment of latently infected people diminishes the risk of subsequent development of active TB by approximately 90% (17). In persons with LTBI, the very low bacterial burden makes it impossible to directly detect Mycobacterium tuberculosis: acidfast bacilli are rarely seen on sputum smear examination and tubercle bacilli are not found in cultures of respiratory speciISSN: 1555-9041/506 1114

Published online ahead of print. Publication date available at www.cjasn.org. Correspondence: Dr. Liviu Segall, Clinica a IV-a MedicalaNefrologie, Spitalul Dr C. I. Parhon, B-dul Carol I nr. 50, Iasi, Romania. Phone: 00-40-232-211834; Fax: 00-40-232-211752; E-mail: l_segall@yahoo.com Copyright 2010 by the American Society of Nephrology

Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 5: 1114 1122, 2010

Diagnosis of Tuberculosis in Dialysis Patients

1115

mens. Serologic testing is unreliable and the chest radiograph is usually normal (15,18). The classic diagnostic tool for LTBI is the tuberculin skin test (TST), which is based on the strong cell-mediated immune response induced by LTBI. The TST measures the delayed-type hypersensitivity response to intradermal inoculation of tuberculin purified protein derivative (PPD), a crude mixture of 200 M. tuberculosis proteins (18). In 1995, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended screening for LTBI with TST in persons with a medical condition that increases the risk of TB, including those with ESRD. A skin induration over 10 mm in diameter is considered positive (19). However, the high-risk groups that are targeted for screening and preventive therapy are also those in which the TST most often fails to detect LTBI (15,20). The prevalence of anergy to TST in the ESRD population is significantly higher than in the general population (44% versus 16%) (21). This same limitation of the skin test applies to its use as a diagnostic aid in the evaluation of patients with suspected active TB (when microbiological confirmation is awaited or not possible). In one study in HD patients diagnosed with active TB, anergy to TST was found in over 50% of patients (7). Thus, because of its poor sensitivity, a negative TST in these patients cannot be used to eliminate the possibility of latent or active TB (15). Various strategies to improve the sensitivity of the TST in dialysis patients have been advocated, including two-step testing to induce a booster phenomenon. In a study by Dogan et al. (22), 11.3% of 124 chronic HD patients showed a positive reaction with the first test, whereas the second test added 12.1% more. Multiple ( 2) testing does not seem to add significant benefit. Wauters et al. administered four consecutive TSTs (at 7-day intervals) to 224 HD patients (1): after the first test, 14.7% of the patients showed a positive reaction; the second test added 13.1% more TST-positive patients; and the third and the fourth TST only resulted in an additional 4.2% and 4.4% new positive patients, respectively. However, repeated testing most likely increases sensitivity at the expense of specificity. Also, repeated testing has operational limitations linked to the need of many return visits. Setting a lower TST threshold (e.g., 5-mm induration instead of 10) would also increase the sensitivity of the test, but again it would do so at the cost of a larger number of false-positive TST reactions, meaning many individuals possibly exposed to unnecessary preventive treatment (18). The second major drawback of TST is its low specificity. Because PPD is a culture filtrate of tubercle bacilli containing many antigens shared with the bacille CalmetteGuerin (BCG) vaccine and most nontuberculous mycobacteria (20), individuals vaccinated with BCG but not infected with M. tuberculosis can test falsely positive using the TST. However, in the study of Wauters et al., a history of BCG vaccination did not correlate with positive TST, and some guidelines recommend ignoring the effect of BCG on TST (15,23). The low sensitivity and specificity of the TST may explain the reported poor correlation of its results with the patients history and chest radiographs. In the aforementioned study of Wauters et al. (1), positive TST results were only weakly correlated with previous TB disease, and there was no significant correlation

between TST and chest radiograph results: patients with positive TST had negative chest x-rays and vice versa. The authors suggest that this lack of correlation could be due to the high anergy rate in HD patients, causing a false-negative TST with a positive chest x-ray. On the other hand, chest radiography could be false-negative in the presence of only small scars, or false positive due to sequel lesions of previous pulmonary diseases other than TB. Because they found no correlation between chest radiography and TST, the authors conclude that none of these methods can be used as the gold standard, and recommend that both of them should be performed in every HD patient at the start of dialysis and repeated every year or whenever active TB disease is diagnosed in the unit. An interesting new diagnostic approach was tried a few years ago by Sester et al. in 127 HD patients and 218 controls (24): in vitro quantitation of PPD-specific T cells using a rapid 6-hour assay. Specific T cells toward PPD were flow-cytometrically quantified from whole blood, and results were compared with skin testing. Whereas 85.7% of control patients with PPD reactivity in vitro were skin-test positive, the respective percentage among HD patients was significantly lower51.4%. The authors concluded that, unlike the skin test, measurement of PPD reactivity by in vitro quantitation of PPD-specific T cells was not affected by uremia-associated immunosuppression, and they suggested that this assay might thus be a valuable alternative to TST. However, the method did not receive further attention from researchers because other more specific blood assays for the diagnosis of LTBI have subsequently been developed and introduced in clinical practice.

The IFN- Release Assays: Advantages over the TST

These new tests use two proteins encoded by a unique genomic segment (stretch of DNA) termed Region of Difference 1, which is absent from all strains of Mycobacterium bovis, BCG, and most nontuberculous mycobacteria but is present in M. tuberculosis (25). These proteins, early secretory antigenic target-6 (ESAT-6) and culture filtrate protein-10 (CFP-10), are major targets of T-helper type 1 cells in patients with M. tuberculosis infection (26,27). Therefore, a T cell response to these antigens could serve as a specific marker of M. tuberculosis infection, avoiding the antigenic crossreactivity of PPD, the main cause of poor specificity of the TST. The T-SPOT.TB test (Oxford Immunotec, Abingdon, United Kingdom) was developed by A. Lalvani and co-workers in the late 1990s (28). T cells from individuals with M. tuberculosis infection become sensitized to ESAT-6 or CFP-10 in vivo; when the T cells re-encounter these antigens ex vivo in the overnight T-SPOT.TB assay, they release a cytokine, IFN- . By the next morning, each such T cell gives rise to a dark spot, which is the footprint of an individual M. tuberculosis-specific T cell (26). The readout is thus the number of spots that are counted using a magnifying lens or automated reader. The QuantiFERON-TB Gold (QFT-G) test (Cellestis, Carnegie, Australia) is a wholeblood ELISA that measures the IFN- concentration in the supernatant of a sample of diluted whole blood after 24 hours of incubation with ESAT-6 and CFP-10 (29). Originally devel-

1116

Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology

Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 5: 1114 1122, 2010

oped in the 1980s for detecting TB in cattle, the assay was adapted for human use in the 1990s. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved it for in vitro diagnostics, and a guideline from the CDC has been published (30). A newer version of the QuantiFERON-TB Gold assay, the so-called InTube test (QFT-GIT), uses tubes prefilled with antigens; this simplifies the laboratory procedures, making it more suitable for on-field usage in settings with limited resources (18). The three of these assay platforms are sometimes collectively referred to as T cell-based IFN- -release assays (IGRAs). A summary of the characteristics of the IGRAs in comparison with the TST is presented in Table 1. In theory, the T-SPOT.TB-based test should be more sensitive because it detects IFN- in the immediate vicinity of the T cell from which it is released (where it is still at a locally high concentration), whereas the ELISA detects IFN- after it has diffused into the supernatant and become diluted in the total volume of the test sample (18). Reviews of several studies in various populations (18,31) suggested similar levels of specificity for the two IGRAs and these were statistically higher than those for TST, particularly in subjects vaccinated by BCG. Four case-control studies on 127 BCG-vaccinated low-risk individuals in aggregate showed that T-SPOT.TB has a specificity of 100% (26,27,32

34). A case-control study on 216 Japanese BCG-vaccinated adults showed a 98% specificity of QFT-G, much higher than for TST (35%) (29). On the other hand, establishing the diagnostic accuracy for LTBI of the IGRAs is a major challenge because a gold standard is lacking. However, when testing patients with active TB, T-SPOT.TB showed sensitivity ranging from 83% to 97% in five studies on 266 cumulative patients, whereas in another five studies on 330 cumulative patients the sensitivity of QFT-G ranged from 70% to 89%. When these results were pooled, the sensitivity of T-SPOT.TB seemed to be significantly higher compared with QFT-G (18). The sensitivity of the IGRAs is at least equivalent to that of TST and, in certain studies, superior with T-SPOT.TB. Finally, several studies in contacts have been undertaken with the aim of measuring the concordance between these biologic tests and the TST. The essential finding was a very good correlation between positivity of the blood tests and the degree of exposure of the contacts (31). Studies in immunocompromised populations confirmed the superiority of IGRAs for the diagnosis of LTBI in comparison with TST, which has notoriously low sensitivity in these settings (35). In HIV-seropositive persons, it has been demonstrated that T-SPOT.TB has a higher sensitivity than the TST (27,36 39). However, the results with QFT-G seem to

Table 1. Characteristics of the TST and of the IGRAs (18)

T-SPOT.TB QFT-G TST

Antigens Positive internal control Uniformity of methods and reagents Potential for boosting effect in repeated tests Need for return visit Time required for results Setting of test Interpretation of test Readout units Technological platform Tests substrate Outcome measure

ESAT-6 and CFP-10 Yes Yes No

ESAT-6 and CFP10 Yes Yes No

PPD No Noa Yes

No 16 to 20 hours In vitro Objective (instrumentbased) IFN- spot-forming cells T-SPOT.TB PBMC Number of IFN- producing T cells Enumeration of spots by naked eye, magnifying lens, or automated counter

No 16 to 24 hours In vitro Objective (instrumentbased) International units of IFNELISA Whole blood Serum concentration of IFN- produced by T cells Measurement of optical density values using an automated reader

Yes 48 to 72 hours In vivo Subjective (operator-based) Millimeters of induration NA NA NA

Readout system

Palpable induration

NA, not applicable; PBMC, peripheral blood mononuclear cells. a Mantoux test versus Heaf test, induration versus erythema, PPD-S versus PPD RT-23.

Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 5: 1114 1122, 2010

Diagnosis of Tuberculosis in Dialysis Patients

1117

be less convincing. For example, Raby et al. (40) evaluated the QFT-G in a cross-sectional study of Zambian adults with smear-positive TB and found that the sensitivity of the QFT-G was significantly lower in HIV-positive than in HIV-negative individuals. Subsequent studies have also confirmed that with decreasing CD4 count, false-negative and indeterminate results are seen more frequently, which may affect the diagnostic utility of the QFT-G in this population (37,41,42). In patients with autoimmune diseases treated with immunosuppressive agents, the experience with IGRAs in diagnosing LTBI is rather limited and is mainly drawn from small-scale cross-sectional studies (35). In general, these studies have found that agreement between the TST and IGRAs is, at best, fair (43 45) and that, although false-negative IGRA results may occur, the diagnostic sensitivity of IGRAs is more robustly maintained than that of the TST (35). The IGRAs have an internal positive control (i.e., a sample well stimulated with a potent nonspecific stimulator of IFNproduction by T cells). Although a negative TST in immunosuppressed individuals can be a false negative, the failure of the positive control in the blood tests provides the important information that the tests result cannot be reliably interpreted because it may reflect an underlying in vivo immunosuppression, negatively affecting T cell function in the in vitro stimulation (18). Studies suggest that indeterminate results are relatively common with the ELISA, occurring in 5% to 40% of patients with QFT-G but less frequently with the newer QFTGIT (46 48). Indeterminate QFT results seem to be associated with extremes of age ( 5 and 80 years) and immunosuppression, especially HIV infection (41). In contrast, indeterminate results are more rare with the T-SPOT.TB, occurring in 0% to 5.4% (49). Other important advantages of the IGRAs compared with the TST include lack of boosting effect in repeated tests, no need for return visit, shorter time required for results (16 to 24 hours versus 48 to 72 hours), and objective (instrument-based) interpretation of the test (18). It is generally thought that the higher diagnostic accuracy together with the operational advantages of the IGRAs should improve the effectiveness of TB control programs. Higher specificity will reduce false-positive test results, thus avoiding unnecessary chemoprophylaxis. On the other hand, higher sensitivity would identify more infected persons

among those with a false-negative TST result. More truepositive results in infected people would increase the rate of diagnosis and treatment of LTBI before progression to active TB (18). Nevertheless, it is of paramount importance to also understand the limitations of the IGRAs: lower sensitivity in severe disease, unknown predictive value for future development of active TB (because no studies have been performed on this subject), and lack of distinction between LTBI and active TB (31). Limited availability of IGRAs (in contrast with the worldwide readily accessible TST) is another important issue. A 2008 survey of the Infectious Disease Society of Americas Emerging Infections Network (IDSA EIN) showed that QFT-G was available for use in only 63% of U.S. regions, with the lowest availability reported in the southern and eastern states (50). Most likely, the availability of these tests is even lower in low-income countries. However, the single major disadvantage of IGRAs is their high cost, which is approximately $30 for QFT-G, $25 for QFT-GIT, and $57 for T-SPOT.TB in the United States. Most of this cost is related to the laboratory, but other procedures, such as phlebotomy, specimen transport, and processing also count (51). In comparison, the PPD used in the TST is only about $10; however, additional costs of the follow-up visit for reading the TST reaction must be considered (52). The introduction of blood tests in clinical practice is expected to initially increase the cost of TB control. However, the fact that most of the costs for TB control are incurred during diagnosis and treatment of patients with active TB suggests that higher diagnostic sensitivity and higher specificity could induce cost savings in the medium and long term by reducing the future burden of cases of active TB and decreasing the number of uninfected BCG-vaccinated people inappropriately treated for LTBI (18). Studies in Switzerland and Germany have shown that the most cost-effective method for LTBI screening is the two-step strategy (TST followed by IGRA in TST-positive patients) (53,54). The cost-effectiveness of this strategy is probably related to low prevalence of LTBI and high prevalence of BCG history in these countries. IGRA testing alone is only cost-effective at LTBI rates 40% (55). Furthermore, the costs of IGRAs are likely to decline with increasing usage of these tests.

Table 2. Summary of studies on the value of IGRAs for the diagnosis of TB in ESRD patients
Study (Reference) n Objective IGRA Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%) Indeterminate Results (%)

Inoue et al. (56) Zoccali et al. (57) Passalent et al. (3) Triverio et al. (14) Chung et al. (58) Hoffmann et al. (59)

162 29 203 62

HD HD HD HD

Diagnosis Diagnosis Diagnosis Diagnosis

of of of of

active TB active TB LTBI LTBI

167 HD 39 HD

Diagnosis of LTBI Diagnosis of LTBI

QFT-G T-SPOT.TB T-SPOT.TB T-SPOT.TB QFT-G T-SPOT.TB QFT-G QFT-GIT

100 91.7 73.1 to 78.6 22 46 65.7 62.5 71.4

89.7 64.7 NA 61.2 75.5 41.9 63.5 100

24.1 NA 5.1 11.0 8.0 4.8 12.6 2.6

1118

Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology

Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 5: 1114 1122, 2010

Table 3. National guidelines on detection of LTBI

Country (Reference) Immunocompetent Individuals Immunocompromised Individuals

United States-CDC (30) QFT-G can be used in all circumstances in which the TST is used. QFT-G usually can be used in place of (and not in addition to) the TST. Canada (61) IGRA may be performed in TSTIn an immunocompromised person (adult or positive, immunocompetent adults child), the TST should be the initial test and children who are at relatively used to detect LTBI. If TST is negative, an low risk of being infected with TB IGRA test may be performed. and of progressing to active disease if infected. Australia (62) TST remains the preferred method of screening for LTBI. IGRAs may be used as a supplementary test in individualized clinical assessment. Japan (63) QFT is preferred over TST in adults (18 In high-risk groups QFT is preferred and to 49 years old) can be used for deciding on LTBI treatment. Even when QFT is preferred TST may be done first, followed by QFT in TST-positive patients, to be costeffective (especially in case of mass screening). United Kingdom NICE (64) A two-step strategy is currently recommended: using a TST, and those with positive results (or in whom TST may be less reliable) should then be considered for IGRA testing, if available. HPA (65) TST should generally be used as the IGRA testing, if available, can be considered first-line test for LTBI. as the sole test for LTBI in individuals in whom the result of TST may be falsely negative because immunocompromised. Switzerland (66) Confirm a positive TST with an IGRA. Use only an IGRA in immunocompromised subjects. Italy (67) TST should be carried out and when In immunosuppressed patients, an IGRA positive an IGRA should be should be carried out without a prior TST. performed. Netherlands (68) TST is the initial test, and if 5 mm or In subjects in whom the TST may be less more followed by IGRA. reliable perform an IGRA without a prior TST. France (69) IGRAs should be used instead of TST. Ireland (70) IGRAs can be used in conjunction with IGRAs, if available, can be considered as the a TST. sole test for LTBI when the TST may be falsely negative because of immunosuppression.
NICE, U.K. National Institute for Clinical Excellence; HPA, Health Protection Agency.

The Value of IGRAs in ESRD Patients

In recent years, only a few studies have been published that tried to assess the value of the blood assays for the diagnosis of TB in HD patients. A summary of these studies is presented in Table 2.

For the diagnosis of active TB, the sensitivity and the specificity of the IGRAs were found to be 100% and 89.7%, respectively, for QFT-G (56) and 91.7% and 64.7%, respectively, for T-SPOT.TB (57). On the other hand, the value of the IGRAs for the diagnosis

Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 5: 1114 1122, 2010

Diagnosis of Tuberculosis in Dialysis Patients

1119

of LTBI in dialysis patients, as well as in the general population, is difficult to estimate in the absence of a gold standard. In a study by Passalent et al. (3), LTBI was diagnosed by an expert panel of physicians on the basis of three elements: patient self-reported history of active TB, radiographic findings consistent with previous TB infection, and a TST of induration 10 mm. The T-SPOT.TB was positive in 78.6%, 72.7%, and 73.1% of patients, respectively, whereas TST was positive in only 21.4% of participants with positive history and in 18.2% of those with suggestive x-rays. Defining probable LTBI as chest radiography suggestive of prior infection and/or established at risk contact with a patient with contagious TB, Triverio et al. (14) found a higher sensitivity (46%) for QFT-G than for T-SPOT.TB (22%) and TST (25%). Similarly, Chung et al. (58) defined patients as being at high-risk for LTBI if they had a history of close contact with TB patients, old TB lesions on chest x-rays, or a history of TB infection. They showed that QFT was independently associated with the high-risk group (adjusted odds ratio 2.58; P 0.036), whereas TST and T-SPOT.TB were not. Finally, Hoffmann et al. (59) found that, in comparison with TST of induration 10 mm, QFT-GIT was more closely related to TB exposure (i.e., previous TB-disease, chest x-ray suggestive for LTBI, or origin from a medium TB-prevalence region) as a proxy for LTBI. Winthrop et al. (60) reported that patients in a dialysis center with TB case contact were likely to have a positive QFT-G (P 0.02) and T-SPOT.TB (P 0.04), but not a positive TST (P 0.7). Furthermore, Lee et al. (13) performed TST, T-SPOT.TB, and QFT-G in 32 ESRD patients that were subsequently followed up for 2 years. They found that only QFT-G but neither T-SPOT.TB nor TST predicted the development of active TB in these patients. When QFT-G and T-SPOT.TB were used, in three of the previously mentioned studies in HD patients the agreement between the two tests has been found to be fair or moderate ( 0.27 to 0.60), whereas the agreement between TST and IGRAs was only poor or fair ( 0.16 to 0.27 for QFT-G and 0.16 to 0.32 for T-SPOT.TB) (13,14,58). On the other hand, in the study of Winthrop et al. (60), the concordance between results was better, ranging from 71% (TST versus T-SPOT.TB) to 79% (TST versus QFT-G) to 87% (QFT-G versus T-SPOT.TB). The rate of indeterminate results in HD patients varies between 2% and 24% for QFT-G and 3% and 11% for T-SPOT.TB according to different studies (Table 2). In the study of Chung et al. (58), previous BCG vaccination significantly increased the rate of positive TST results, but did not affect the QFT and T-SPOT.TB results.

recommend a two-step approach (i.e., TST followed by IGRA to confirm TST-positive cases), which seems to be the most costeffective strategy. On the other hand, in immunocompromised individuals in whom the TST may be falsely negative, almost all existing guidelines recommend using IGRAs, if available, as the sole test for LTBI. Summarizing the findings in ESRD patients described above, we may point out that (1) these patients are at high risk for M. tuberculosis infection, and, once infected, they are very prone to develop active disease, which may be severe and difficult to diagnose; (2) screening for LTBI is therefore recommended, but the anergy rate to TST is high; (3) the IGRAs are more sensitive and specific than the TST for detecting LTBI; (4) the IGRAs also have operational advantages over the TST; and (5) the rate of indeterminate results of IGRA tests is rather low. Therefore, we suggest that chronic dialysis patients should be screened for LTBI by using an IGRA test, if available, instead of TST. Any of the three types of assays may be used, but QFTs are less expensive and probably more sensitive in these patients. However, cost-effective studies are desirable to support the implementation of this strategy in dialysis units. A positive IGRA test requires excluding active disease before affirming LTBI, and this should include checking for specific symptoms and signs, a chest radiograph, and sometimes examination of sputum or other clinical samples for the presence of M. tuberculosis. After TB has been excluded, treatment of LTBI should be considered. On the other hand, a negative test cannot exclude TB when suggestive history, symptoms, or physical signs are present. The high susceptibility to TB infection of dialysis patients must always be kept in mind, particularly in endemic areas. In symptomatic patients, further evaluation (including chest radiographs and microbiologic or pathologic exams) is necessary, and IGRAs may also be used in difficult situations as an aid for diagnosis. Indeterminate IGRA results cannot be interpreted; they may entail repeated testing in patients with a high probability of having TB, but not in those with a low probability (30).

Disclosures
None.

References
1. Wauters A, Peetermans WE, Van Den Brande P, De Moor B, Evenepoel P, Keuleers H, Kuypers D, Stas K, Vanwalleghem J, Vanrenterghem Y, Maes BD: The value of tuberculin skin testing in haemodialysis patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 19: 433 438, 2004 2. Habesoglu MA, Torun D, Demiroglu YZ, Karatasli M, Sen N, Ermis H, Ozdemir N, Eyuboglu FO: Value of the tuberculin skin test in screening for tuberculosis in dialysis patients. Transplant Proc 39: 883 886, 2007 3. Passalent L, Khan K, Richardson R, Wang J, Dedier H, Gardam M: Detecting latent tuberculosis infection in hemodialysis patients: A head-to-head comparison of the T-SPOT.TB test, and an expert physician panel. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2: 68 73, 2007 4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Tuberculosis

Screening for LTBI in Dialysis Patients: Current Strategy

With all of their limitations, the superiority of the new blood assays over the TST is indisputable and their introduction in clinical practice is certainly a major progress in the diagnosis of LTBI. Many countries (at least 17 so far) have developed new national guidelines for the detection of LTBI, including the place of IGRAs in this process (30,6170) (Table 3). In immunocompetent persons, the vast majority of these guidelines

1120

Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology

Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 5: 1114 1122, 2010

5.

6. 7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17. 18. 19.

20. 21.

transmission in a Renal Dialysis CenterNevada, 2003. MMWR 53: 873 875, 2004 Klote MM, Agodoa LY, Abbott KC: Risk factors for Mycobacterium tuberculosis in US chronic dialysis patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 21: 32873292, 2006 Hussein MM, Mooij JM, Roujouleh H: Tuberculosis and chronic renal disease. Semin Dial 16: 38 44, 2003 Abdelrahman M, Sinha AK, Karkar A: Tuberculosis in end-stage renal disease patients on hemodialysis. Hemodial Int 10: 360 364, 2006 Sen N, Turunc T, Karatasli M, Sezer S, Demiroglu YZ, Oner Eyuboglu F: Tuberculosis in patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing dialysis in an endemic region of Turkey. Transplant Proc 40: 81 84, 2008 Dervisoglu E, Yilmaz A, Sengul E: The spectrum of tuberculosis in dialysis patients. Scand J Infect Dis 38: 1040 1044, 2006 Kayabasi H, Sit D, Kadiroglu AK, Kara IH, Yilmaz ME: The prevalence and the characteristics of tuberculosis patients undergoing chronic dialysis treatment: Experience of a dialysis center in southeast Turkey. Ren Fail 30: 513519, 2008 Fang HC, Chou KJ, Chen CL, Lee PT, Chiou YH, Hung SY, Chung HM: Tuberculin skin test and anergy in dialysis patients of the tuberculosis endemic area. Nephron 91: 682 687, 2002 Ko YC, Lee CT, Cheng YF, Hung KH, Kuo CY, Huang CC, Chen JB: Hypercalcaemia and haemophagocytic syndrome: Rare concurrent presentations of disseminated tuberculosis in a dialysis patient. Int J Clin Pract 58: 723725, 2004 Lee SS, Chou KJ, Su IJ, Chen YS, Fang HC, Huang TS, Tsai HC, Wann SR, Lin HH, Liu YC: High prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection in patients in end-stage renal disease on hemodialysis: Comparison of QuantiFERON-TB GOLD, T-SPOT.TB, and tuberculin skin test. Infection 37: 96 102, 2009 Triverio PA, Bridevaux PO, Roux-Lombard P, Niksic L, Rochat T, Martin PY, Saudan P, Janssens JP: Interferongamma release assays versus tuberculin skin testing for detection of latent tuberculosis in chronic haemodialysis patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 24: 19521956, 2009 American Thoracic Society. Targeted tuberculin testing and treatment of latent tuberculosis infection. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 161: S221S247. 2000 Horsburgh CR Jr: Priorities for the treatment of latent tuberculosis infection in the United States. N Engl J Med 350: 2060 2067, 2004 Ferebee SH: Controlled chemoprophylaxis trials in tuberculosis: A general review. Adv Tuberc Res 17: 29 106, 1969 Richeldi L: An update on the diagnosis of tuberculosis infection. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 174: 736 742, 2006 Screening for tuberculosis and tuberculosis infection in high-risk populations. Recommendations of the Advisory Council for the Elimination of Tuberculosis. MMWR 44: 19 34, 1995 Huebner RE, Schein MF, Bass JB Jr: The tuberculin skin test. Clin Infect Dis 17: 968 975, 1993 Shankar MS, Aravindan AN, Sohal PM, Kohli HS, Sud K, Gupta KL, Sakhuja V, Jha V: The prevalence of tuberculin sensitivity and anergy in chronic renal failure in an en-

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

demic area: Tuberculin test and the risk of post-transplant tuberculosis. Nephrol Dial Transplant 20: 2720 2724, 2005 Dogan E, Erkoc R, Sayarlioglu H, Uzun K: Tuberculin skin test results and the booster phenomenon in two-step tuberculin skin testing in hemodialysis patients. Ren Fail 27: 425 428, 2005 Joint Tuberculosis Committee of the British Thoracic Society. Control and prevention of tuberculosis in the UK: Code of practice 2000. Thorax 55: 887901. 2000 Sester M, Sester U, Clauer P, Heine G, Mack U, Moll T, Sybrecht GW, Lalvani A, Kohler H: Tuberculin skin testing underestimates a high prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection in hemodialysis patients. Kidney Int 65: 1826 1834, 2004 Andersen P, Munk ME, Pollock JM, Doherty TM: Specific immune-based diagnosis of tuberculosis. Lancet 356: 1099 1104, 2000 Lalvani A, Pathan AA, McShane H, Wilkinson RJ, Latif M, Conlon CP, Pasvol G, Hill AV: Rapid detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection by enumeration of antigenspecific T cells. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 163: 824 828, 2001 Chapman AL, Munkanta M, Wilkinson KA, Pathan AA, Ewer K, Ayles H, Reece WH, Mwinga A, Godfrey-Faussett P, Lalvani A: Rapid detection of active and latent tuberculosis infection in HIV-positive individuals by enumeration of Mycobacterium tuberculosis-specific T cells. AIDS 16: 22852293, 2002 Lalvani A, Brookes R, Hambleton S, Britton WJ, Hill AV, McMichael AJ: Rapid effector function in CD8 memory T cells. J Exp Med 186: 859 865, 1997 Mori T, Sakatani M, Yamagishi F, Takashima T, Kawabe Y, Nagao K, Shigeto E, Harada N, Mitarai S, Okada M, Suzuki K, Inoue Y, Tsuyuguchi K, Sasaki Y, Mazurek GH, Tsuyuguchi K, Sasaki Y, Mazurek GH, Tsuyuguchi I: Specific detection of tuberculosis infection: An interferon-gammabased assay using new antigens. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 170: 59 64, 2004 Mazurek GH, Jereb J, Lobue P, Iademarco MF, Metchock B, Vernon A: Guidelines for using the QuantiFERON-TB Gold test for detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, United States. MMWR Recomm Rep 54: 49 55, 2005 Lagrange PH, Simonney N, Herrmann JL: New immunological tests in the diagnosis of tuberculosis. Rev Mal Respir 24: 453 472, 2007 Lalvani A, Nagvenkar P, Udwadia Z, Pathan AA, Wilkinson KA, Shastri JS, Ewer K, Hill AV, Mehta A, Rodrigues C: Enumeration of T cells specific for RD1-encoded antigens suggests a high prevalence of latent Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection in healthy urban Indians. J Infect Dis 183: 469 477, 2001 Pathan AA, Wilkinson KA, Klenerman P, McShane H, Davidson RN, Pasvol G, Hill AV, Lalvani A: Direct ex vivo analysis of antigen-specific IFN-gamma-secreting CD4 T cells in Mycobacterium tuberculosis-infected individuals: Associations with clinical disease state and effect of treatment. J Immunol 167: 52175225, 2001 Liu XQ, Dosanjh D, Varia H, Ewer K, Cockle P, Pasvol G, Lalvani A: Evaluation of T-cell responses to novel RD1and RD2-encoded Mycobacterium tuberculosis gene products for specific detection of human tuberculosis infection. Infect Immun 72: 2574 2581, 2004

Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 5: 1114 1122, 2010

Diagnosis of Tuberculosis in Dialysis Patients

1121

35. Lalvani A, Pareek M. A 100-year update on diagnosis of tuberculosis infection. Br Med Bull 93: 69 84, 2010 36. Liebeschuetz S, Bamber S, Ewer K, Deeks J, Pathan AA, Lalvani A: Diagnosis of tuberculosis in South African children with a T-cell-based assay: A prospective cohort study. Lancet 364: 2196 2203, 2004 37. Mandalakas AM, Hesseling AC, Chegou NN, Kirchner HL, Zhu X, Marais BJ, Black GF, Beyers N, Walzl G: High level of discordant IGRA results in HIV-infected adults and children. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 12: 417 423, 2008 38. Rangaka MX, Diwakar L, Seldon R, van Cutsem G, Meintjes GA, Morroni C, Mouton P, Shey MS, Maartens G, Wilkinson KA, Wilkinson RJ: Clinical, immunological, and epidemiological importance of antituberculosis T cell responses in HIV-infected Africans. Clin Infect Dis 44: 1639 1646, 2007 39. Stephan C, Wolf T, Goetsch U, Bellinger O, Nisius G, Oremek G, Rakus Z, Gottschalk R, Stark S, Brodt HR, Staszewski S: Comparing QuantiFERON-tuberculosis gold, T-SPOT tuberculosis and tuberculin skin test in HIVinfected individuals from a low prevalence tuberculosis country. AIDS 22: 24712479, 2008 40. Raby E, Moyo M, Devendra A, Banda J, De Haas P, Ayles H, Godfrey-Faussett P: The effects of HIV on the sensitivity of a whole blood IFN-gamma release assay in Zambian adults with active tuberculosis. PLoS ONE 3: e2489, 2008 41. Brock I, Ruhwald M, Lundgren B, Westh H, Mathiesen LR, Ravn P. Latent tuberculosis in HIV positive, diagnosed by the M. tuberculosis specific interferon-gamma test. Respir Res 7: 56, 2006 42. Luetkemeyer AF, Charlebois ED, Flores LL, Bangsberg DR, Deeks SG, Martin JN, Havlir DV: Comparison of an interferon-gamma release assay with tuberculin skin testing in HIV-infected individuals. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 175: 737742, 2007 43. Matulis G, Juni P, Villiger PM, Gadola SD: Detection of latent tuberculosis in immunosuppressed patients with autoimmune diseases: Performance of a Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigen-specific interferon gamma assay. Ann Rheum Dis 67: 84 90, 2008 44. Ponce de Leon D, Acevedo-Vasquez E, Alvizuri S, Cucho M, Alfaro J, Perich R, Sanchez-Torres A, Pastor C, SanchezSchwartz C, Medina M, Gamboa R, Ugarte M: Comparison of an interferon-gamma assay with tuberculin skin testing for detection of tuberculosis (TB) infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in a TB-endemic population. J Rheumatol 35: 776 781, 2008 45. Sellam J, Hamdi H, Roy C, Baron G, Lemann M, Puechal X, Breban M, Berenbaum F, Humbert M, Weldingh K, Salmon D, Ravaud P, Emilie D, Mariette X; RATIO (Research Axed on Tolerance of Biotherapies) Study Group: Comparison of in vitro-specific blood tests with tuberculin skin test for diagnosis of latent tuberculosis before anti-TNF therapy. Ann Rheum Dis 66: 1610 1615, 2007 46. Arend SM, Thijsen SF, Leyten EM, Bouwman JJ, Franken WP, Koster BF, Cobelens FG, van Houte AJ, Bossink AW: Comparison of two interferon-gamma assays and tuberculin skin test for tracing tuberculosis contacts. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 175: 618 627, 2007 47. Ferrara G, Losi M, DAmico R, Roversi P, Piro R, Meacci M, Meccugni B, Dori IM, Andreani A, Bergamini BM, Mussini C, Rumpianesi F, Fabbri LM, Richeldi L: Use in routine

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

clinical practice of two commercial blood tests for diagnosis of infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis: A prospective study. Lancet 367: 1328 1334, 2006 Lee JY, Choi HJ, Park IN, Hong SB, Oh YM, Lim CM, Lee SD, Koh Y, Kim WS, Kim DS, Kim WD, Shim TS: Comparison of two commercial interferon-gamma assays for diagnosing Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. Eur Respir J 28: 24 30, 2006 Beffa P, Zellweger A, Janssens JP, Wrighton-Smith P, Zellweger JP: Indeterminate test results of T-SPOT.TB performed under routine field conditions. Eur Respir J 31: 842 846, 2008 Herchline TE, Burdette SD, Beekmann SE, P.M. Polgreen PM. Diagnostic testing for Mycobacterium tuberculosisan IDSA EIN survey. 2008. Available at http://ein.idsociety .org. Accessed January 15, 2010 Kawamura LM. The cost effectiveness of IGRA diagnostics: Theoretical and practical perspectives. Epidemiology of tuberculosis infection. The First Global Symposium on Interferon-Gamma Assays. February 2122, 2007. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Available at http://www.finddiagnostics.org. Accessed January 15, 2010 Dewan PK, Grinsdale J, Liska S, Wong E, Fallstad R, Kawamura LM. Feasibility, acceptability, and cost of tuberculosis testing by whole-blood interferon-gamma assay. BMC Infect Dis 6: 47. 2006 Diel R, Loddenkemper R, Meywald-Walter K, Niemann S, Nienhaus A: Predictive value of a whole-blood IFN-y assay for the development of active tuberculosis disease after recent infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 177: 1164 1170, 2008 Wrighton-Smith P, Zellweger JP: Direct costs of three models for the screening of latent tuberculosis infection. Eur Respir J 28: 4550. 2006 Ormerod P. The current status of interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs). Available at http://www.tbalert.co.uk/ resources/documents/THECURRENTSTATUSOFInterferonGammaReleaseAssays.ppt. Accessed January 15, 2010 Inoue T, Nakamura T, Katsuma A, Masumoto S, Minami E, Katagiri D, Hoshino T, Shibata M, Tada M, Hinoshita F: The value of QuantiFERON TB-Gold in the diagnosis of tuberculosis among dialysis patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 24: 22522257, 2009 Zoccali C: Diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis among dialysis patients by enzyme-linked immunospot assay for interferon- . Nephrol Dial Transplant 24: 26052606, 2009 Chung WK, Zheng ZL, Sung JY, Kim S, Lee HH, Choi SJ, Yang J: Validity of interferon-gamma-release assays for the diagnosis of latent tuberculosis in haemodialysis patients. Clin Microbiol Infect 2009 [Epub ahead of print] Hoffmann M, Tsinalis D, Vernazza P, Fierz W, Binet I: Assessment of an interferon-gamma release assay for the diagnosis of latent tuberculosis infection in haemodialysis patients. Swiss Med Wkly 2010 [Epub ahead of print] Winthrop KL, Nyendak M, Calvet H, Oh P, Lo M, Swarbrick G, Johnson C, Lewinsohn DA, Mazurek GH: Interferon-gamma release assays for diagnosing Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection in renal dialysis patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 3: 13571363, 2008 Canadian Tuberculosis Committee: Updated recommendations on interferon gamma release assays for latent tu-

1122

Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology

Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 5: 1114 1122, 2010

62.

63.

64.

65.

66.

berculosis infection. An Advisory Committee Statement (ACS). Can Commun Dis Rep 34: 113. 2008 Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing. National Tuberculosis Advisory Committee: Position statement on interferon-gamma release immunoassays in the detection of latent tuberculosis infection. Available at http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/ Content/cdna-ntac-interferon.htm. Accessed January 15, 2010 Committee of TB Prevention; Japan Society for Tuberculosis: Guideline for the use of Quantiferon TB-2G. Kekkaku 81: 393397, 2006 U.K. National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE): National clinical guideline for diagnosis, management, prevention, and control of tuberculosis and measures for its prevention and control. London, Royal College of Physicians. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/ pdf/CG033FullGuideline.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2010 Health Protection Agency of UK: Position statement on the use of Interferon Gamma Release Assay (IGRA) tests for tuberculosis (TB). Available at http://www.hpa.org.uk/ web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1214808549127. Accessed January 15, 2010 Swiss Lung League: Detection of latent tuberculosis using a blood test (interferon-gamma) [in German]. Berne, Swiss Federal Office of Public Health. Available at http://www.

67.

68.

69.

70.

sgpp-schweiz.ch/downloads_cms/gamma-interferontest_ bag_7_11_05_.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2010 Infections and Tuberculosis Study Groups of the Italian Hospital Pulmonology Association and the Italian Society of Respiratory Medicine: Position statement on the use of the new immunological tests for the diagnosis of latent tuberculosis infection [in Italian]. Available at http://www. aiponet.it/download/1617.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2010 Dutch Committee for Practical Tuberculosis Control: Positioning of interferon gamma release assays in the diagnosis of tuberculosis [in Dutch]. Available at: http://www. nvmm.nl/nvmm/nvmmcms.nsf/uploads/16D33316B72BA199C12573FB0043D583/$FILE/251.101%20Plaatsbepaling%20IGRA%20oktober%202007.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2010 French National Authority for Health: Interferon gamma release assays for the diagnosis of Tuberculosis infection [in French]. Available at http://www.has-sante.fr/portail/ upload/docs/application/pdf/synthese_detection_de_ linterferon-gamma.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2010 National TB Advisory Committee: Guidelines on the prevention and control of tuberculosis in Ireland. Available at: http://www.hpsc.ie/hpsc/A-Z/VaccinePreventable/ TuberculosisTB/Publications/ConsultationDocuments/ File,2991,en.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2010