Evaluation of a serum-based antigen test for tuberculosis in HIV-exposed infants: a diagnostic accuracy study

Table 5 TB diagnostic performance of CFP-10pep, smear, culture, and TST

Comparison	Participants^a	CFP-10 Sensitivity	2^nd assay Sensitivity	p value^b	CFP-10 Specificity	2^nd assay Specificity	p value	CFP-10 Accuracy	2^nd assay Accuracy	p value
CFP-10pep vs X-ray	183	82.3% (81.9–82.7)	88.2% (87.9–88.5)	0.346	85.2% (85.0–85.4)	74.7% (74.4–75.1)	0.019	84.1% (84.0–84.2)	79.7% (79.6–79.9)	0.015
CFP-10pep vs smear	140	85.9% (85.5–86.3)	15.6% (15.2–16.0)	< 0.001	80.2% (79.8–80.6)	89.4% (89.2–89.7)	0.127	82.8% (82.6–83.0)	55.7% (55.3–56.0)	< 0.001
CFP-10pep vs culture	136	88.3% (87.9–88.6)	11.6% (11.3–12.0)	< 0.001	80.2% (79.8–80.6)	100% (95.3–100)	< 0.001	83.8% (83.6–84.0)	61.0% (60.6–61.37)	< 0.001
CFP-10pep vs TST	377	81.8% (81.3–82.2)	68.1% (67.5–68.8)	0.083	93.8% (93.8–93.9)	82.9% (82.8–83.0)	< 0.001	91.7% (91.7–91.8)	80.3% (80.2–80.4)	0.007

The results listed in this Table indicate percent diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and accuracy with an estimated 95% CI adjusted for sample size
^aParticipants who were conducted both CFP-10pep assay and secondary assay (X-ray, smear, culture, and TST, respectively)
^bListed p values indicate the probability for a significant difference between the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy of CFP-10 and the test listed in the first column of the matching row by McNemar’s test

ISSN: 1741-7015