Correcting drug-resistance prevalence in tuberculosis using a predictive model of diagnostic access

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

Drug resistance (DR) poses a major challenge to tuberculosis (TB) elimination. Incomplete access to diagnostic tests can lead to under detection and biased DR-TB prevalence indicators. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of DR-TB, identified through any available diagnostic method, while correcting for disparities in access to rapid molecular testing ( Xpert ® MTB/RIF ), used as a proxy for overall diagnostic capacity.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study of new TB cases in individuals aged over 18 (n=406,331), using 2015-2020 data from the Brazilian Information System on Notifiable Diseases (SINAN). We assumed that access to Xpert ® MTB/RIF was an indicator of better diagnostic conditions for detecting drug resistance in general, because patients who underwent this test had a higher prevalence of all forms of resistance (not just to rifampicin). We developed a multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression model, incorporating individual- and municipality-level variables, to predict access to Xpert ® MTB/RIF testing in a random sample of 81,027 observations. The model was validated using out-of-sample observations across geographic areas. We then used inverse probability weighting based on predicted access to calculate corrected estimates of DR-TB prevalence.

Results

The model showed good performance (AUC=80·93%, 95%CI: 80·71%-81·33%). The prevalence of DR-TB reported by the surveillance system was 1·54% (95%CI: 1·50%-1·57%). Among patients tested with Xpert ® MTB/RIF , DR-TB prevalence was 3·86% (95%CI: 3·75%-3·96%), and the corrected weighted prevalence was 5·95% (95%CI: 5·54%-6·38%).

Conclusions

The prevalence of DR-TB may be substantially underestimated due to uneven access to testing. Our approach highlights the importance of correcting for diagnostic access to improve surveillance indicators.

Article activity feed