Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
10/10/2018
1
L. Masae Kawamura, M.D.Senior Director, Medical and Scientific Affairs, TuberculosisClinician, San Francisco TB Clinic
October, 2018
IGRA update
QuantiFERON®-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus)
DISCLAIMER
I am employed by QIAGEN, manufacturer of QFT and other diagnostics, however the views expressed are my
own and not necessarily the views of QIAGEN
Global Tuberculosis Report 2017, WHO
10/10/2018
2
3
Tuberculin skin test (TST) IGRA: ELISA IGRA example
Can be fully automated (QFT-Plus)
Highly specific, not affected by BCG
Results with one patient visit
No inter-reader variability (QFT-Plus)
Electronic results (straight to EMR)
Quality-assured laboratory
NO boosting from serial IGRAs
Manual placement, reading and data entry
Results affected by BCG vaccine and NTM
Two patient visits required, high no-show rate
Significant inter-reader variability
Poor surveillance tool
Often no quality control after initial training
Boosted reactions confound serial testing
TST is a not patient or program centered assay, especially in the populations relevant to TB control
4
1st generationQuantiFERON®-TB
2nd generationQuantiFERON®-TB Gold
(liquid antigen)
3rd generationQuantiFERON®-TB Gold
(QFT® in tube)
2001: FDA approval 2004: FDA approval 2007: FDA approval
4th generationQuantiFERON®-TB Gold Plus
(QFT®-Plus)
Q4 2014: CE-IVD 2017: FDA approved
• Measured cell-mediated immunity to tuberculin purified protein derivative (PPD)
• Breakthrough: TST becomes a blood test
•
• “Liquid antigen” version• Antigens specific for
M.tb with 99% specificity
• New benchmark: No cross reactivity with BCG
• Logistical advantage –remote incubation
• New benchmark: Scalable and easily automated
• >1500 peer reviewed publicatoins
• >30 million tests sold
• New benchmark: Addition of patented CD8 antigens –potential biomarker of intracellular TB burden
• New flexible blood draw options
Evolution of ELISA IGRA Technology
10/10/2018
3
5
QFT Publications prior to QFT-Plus
BCG-vaccinated
Gao L et al, Lancet Infect Dis. 2015 Mar; 15(3):310-9. Epub 2015 FebHowley MM et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2014 Aug 4.Painter JA et al. PLoS One. 2013 Dec 19;8(12):e82727.Riazi S et al. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2012 May-Jun;33(3):217-26.
Migrants to US Howley MM et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2014 Aug 4.Painter JA et al. PLoS One. 2013 Dec 19;8(12):e82727.
HIVSorborg C et al. Eur Respir J. 2014 Aug;44(2):540-3Cheallaigh CN et al. PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e53330.Aichelburg MC et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2009 Apr 1;48(7):954-62.Raby E et al. PLoS One. 2008 Jun 18;3(6):e2489.
BiologicsHsia EC et al. Arthritis Rheum. 2012 Jul;64(7):2068-77.Ponce De Leon D et al. J Rheumatol. 2008 May;35(5):776-81.Matulis G et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008 Jan;67(1):84-90.
Pediatrics
Jason Andrews et al, Lancet Respir Med. 2017 Apr;5(4):282-290Mandalakas A et al, AJRCCM, Vol 191: 7 2015
. Garazzino S et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2014 Sep;33(9):e226-31Howley MM et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2014 Aug 4.Sollai et al. BMC Infectious Diseases 2014, 14 (Suppl 1):S6
PregnancyLaCourse SM et al. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2017 Jan 30. doi: 10.1097Mathad JS et al. AJRCCM online.Published on 14-January-2016, 10.1164/rccm.201508-1595OCMathad JS et al. PLoS One. 2014 Mar 21;9(3):e92308.Lighter-Fisher J, Surette AM. Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Jun;119(6):1088-95.
Contacts
Matsumoto K et al, Kekkaku Vol 91, No.2:45-48, 2016Li CY et al, Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection (2015) 48, 263e268Zellweger et al, Loddenkemper et al., AJRCCM, 12 March 2015Diel R et al. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011 Jan 1;183(1):88-95.Arend SM et al. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007 Mar 15;175(6):618-27.
Risk of Progression
Gao L et al, Lancet Infect Dis. 2017 Jul 14. pii: S1473-3099(17)30402-4. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30402-4 Jason Andrews et al, Lancet Respir Med. 2017 Apr;5(4):282-290Altet N et al, Ann Am Thorac Soc 2015 May;12(5):680-8Soborg C et al. Eur Respir J. 2014 Aug;44(2):540-3.Diel R et al. Chest. 2012 Jul;142(1):63-75.
End Stage Renal Rogerson TE et al. Am J Kidney Dis. 2013 Jan;61(1):33-43.
~1500 published studies with key articles showing important utility in testing high risk groups
What we know from >decade of IGRA use: .
IGRAs = Replacing most TST use in TB programs in the US, many countries of W. Europe, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, andKorea
IGRAs are superior to TST in BCG vaccinated populations in both children and adults (sensitivity, specificity and PPV)
QFT performs consistently in high risk populations and correlate better to risk than the TST
IGRAs = cost effective compared to TST → eliminate unnecessary radiation exposure, medical exams, and ↓medical error from unnecessary treatment
IGRA operational advantages = convenience for patients and higher quality care
10/10/2018
4
There is no gold standard for LTBI (no direct evidence) LEVELS OF PROOF for test accuracy
7
Efficacy of preventive therapy
Predictive value for active TB
Correlation to exposure gradient
Sensitivity/spec for active TB
Concordance with TST
Weakest
Stronger
QFT+(n=4455)
TST+(n=6404)
TST+/QFT-(n=3050)
TST-/QFT+(n=1101)
TST+/QFT+(n=3354)
Incidence n 75 62 9 22 53
Cumulative incidence*(95% CI)
1.68%(1.31-2.06)
0.97%(0.73-1.21)
0.30%(0.10-0.49)
2.0%(1.17-2.82)
1.58%(1.16-2.00)
Incidence/100 person years* (95% CI)
0.87(0.68– 1.07)
0.50(0.38–0.63)
0.16(0.05–0.26)
1.03(0.60–1.48)
0.82(0.60–1.04)
*P=<0.0001
8
*P=<0.0001
Gao L et al, Lancet Infect Dis 2017; 17: 1053–61
Key study: Incidence of active tuberculosis in individuals with latenttuberculosis infection in rural China (Gao et al, Lancet ID 2017)
2 year follow up study on multi-center cohort: QFT+ or TST+ (≥10mm) 2013: Baseline LTBI prevalence (n=21,022)
• QFT 18% (13-20%)• TST 28% (15-42%)
2014-2015: tracked disease progression by test positivity n=7505
“key populations in communities in rural China…could be targeted for latent infection screening and treatment with an IGRA rather than the TST.”
10/10/2018
5
4th Generation: QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus
9
SAME test principle-procedure …..SAME technology of QFT
QFT-Plus is an improved version of QFT that is replacing QFT-GIT :• Sensitivity of ~94% in registration trials
• Specificity of >97%
• Innovative CD8+ T-cell stimulating antigens added
– Optimized for CD4+ and CD8+ response
• Improvements in test formulation and manufacturing
Flexible blood draw options• NEW: One Li-heparin tube draw approved for transfer
into QFT-Plus tubes
• NEW: 2 day time limit for blood collection to incubation if
Li-heparin tube stored between 2-8 degrees C
QFT-Plus: potential test evolution – CD8 Antigens
10
Studies using single tube collection followed by blood transfer to QFT-tubes and immediate incubation
Indeterminate rates when using single tube Lithium-heparin blood draw
Study N Indeterminate rate
Siegel, JCM 2018QFT-Plus
263Oregon US low riskspecificity trial including 51pts with NTM
1/263 0.4%
QIAGEN clinical trialsPackage insert 2018QFT-Plus
733 212 USA, 322 Japan and 199 from Australia (all no risk for TB)
0/733 Zero
Gallagher David, Synlab publication 2015, QFT-GIT
4615 UK migrant clinics study, multiple sites
10/4615 0.2%
10/10/2018
6
New CD8+ antigens: WHY?
11
CD8+ T cells and role in TB immunity:
MTB-specific CD8+ T cells secrete IFN- and other soluble factors to (1–3):• Suppress MTB growth• Kill infected cells • Directly lyse intracellular MTB
BIOMARKER for intracellular burden
TB-specific CD8+ T cells that produce IFN- have been:• More frequently detected in those with active TB disease vs. latent infection (4, 5)• Associated with recent exposure to TB (6)• Detectable in active TB subjects with HIV co-infection and young children (7, 8)• Observed to decline when patients are exposed to anti-tuberculosis treatment (9)
References: 1. Turner, J. et al. (1996) Immunology 87, 339. 2. Brookes, R.H. et al. (2003) Eur. J. Immunol. 33, 3293. 3. Stenger, S. et al. (1998) Science 282, 121. 4. Day, C.L. et al. (2011) J. Immunol. 187, 2222. 5. Rozot, V. et al. (2013) Eur. J. Immunol. 43, 1568. 6. Nikolova, M. et al. (2013) Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 75, 277. 7. Chiacchio, T. et al. (2014) J. Infect. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2014.06.009. 8. Lanicioni, C. et al. (2012) Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 185, 206. 9. Nyendak M. Et al. (2014) PLoS ONE 8, e81564. Epub.
QuantiFERON® TB Gold In tube QuantiFERON® TB Gold Plus
Title, Location, Date 12
Cells stimulated
Nilcontrol
Mitogen control
Nil control
Mitogen control
noneCD4+ andCD8+ T-Cells
CD4+T-Cells
TBAntigen
TB 1Antigen
TB2Antigen
CD4+T-Cells
none AllAll
Long peptides (MHC class II)•ESAT-6 •CFP-10 •TB7.7+Additional short peptides(MHC class I)
Long peptides (MHC class II)•ESAT-6 •CFP-10 •TB7.7
Long peptides (MHC class II)•ESAT-6 •CFP-10 •TB7.7
Polypeptide
Antigens
2 Antigen tubes:• More information: 2 data points instead of 1• Allows the calculation of CD8 response
10/10/2018
7
QFT-Plus: Can it differentiate patients in the spectrum of TB?
13
Infection eliminatedLatent TB infection
Subclinical TB disease
Active TB disease
With innate immune response
With acquiredimmune response
TST Negative Positive Positive Positive Usually positive
IGRA Negative Positive Positive Positive Usually positive
Culture Negative Negative Negative Intermittently positive
Positive
Sputum smear Negative Negative Negative Usually negative
Positive or negative
Infectious No No No Sporadically Yes
Symptoms None None None Mild or non Mild to severe
Preferred treatment
None None Preventative therapy
Multidrug therapy
Multidrug therapy
Pai, M. et al. (2016) Tuberculosis Nat. Rev. Dis. Primers doi:10.1038/nrdp.2016.76
The CD8 signal of QFT-Plus, if present, can provide an expanded picture of TB immunity
• MTB specific CD4 T cells produce interferon gamma at all stages• MTB specific CD8 T cells more readily detected as bacterial burden increases
Additional analysis of TB Antigen Tube values – Package Insert data
TB2 Minus TB1 (i.e. CD8/CD4 – CD4)
14
TB2 – TB1 (Nil subtracted)Surrogate for isolated CD8 response
Potential for additional valuable information for risk stratification?
Does this information help inform clinical practice?
Is this is recent infection?
Are they more likely to progress?
n=733 n=588 n=357
10/10/2018
8
Horne D, Narita M et al, IJTLD, 22(6):617–621, 2018
PowerPoint Style Guide 15
Multicenter study of QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus in patients with active tuberculosis
QFT-GIT Sensitivity 94.3% (vs. 93.02%) (P=0.16)• No statistical difference in sensitivity • Agreement was 98.7%, Kappa 0.89 (CI .75–1.00)• QFT-GIT quantitative values higher than QFT-Plus
Other findings: • TB2 greater than TB1: 99/157 or 63%• TB1 greater than TB2: 39/157 or 25%• TB1 and TB2 equal: 16/157 or 10.2%• Median difference between TB2 and TB1
(nil subtracted): 0.14 IU/ml
WARNING: Lack of a CD8 response does not rule out TB disease or subclinical TB or TB that will progress
However, the presence and strength of the CD8 response may help determine risk of progression or
disease in the context of the patient scenario
16
Note: There is no currently validated quantitative cut point or threshold for a
significant CD8 response
10/10/2018
9
17
Independent evidence:Sensitivity-Specificity
Sensitivity of QFT-Plus – Published data (culture confirmed TB)
18
Publication Indeterminate Sensitivity
BARCELLINI et al, ERJ 2016 2.6% (3/116) 87.93% (102/116)Includes 4/4 HIV infected
HOFFMAN et al, CMI 2016 0 % (0/24) 95.8% (23/24)
YI et al, Scientific Reports 2016 3.1% (5/162) 91% (147/162)
Takasaki, J Infect Chemother 2017 0% (0/99) 99% (98/99)
Horne, IJTLD 2018 4.3% 7/164 89% (146/164)
Fukushima, Kekkaku 2018 1.3% 1/77 93.5% (72/77)
TOTAL N=642 2.5% 16/642 91.5% (588/642)
Sensitivity meta-analyses (culture proven TB) QFT - GIT
Sester et al. ERJ. 2011 80%
Diel et al. Chest. 2010 84%
10/10/2018
10
Specificity of QFT-Plus – published data
19
.
Publication N Specificity (negative/N)
BARCELLINI et al, ERJ 2016 106 97.2% (103/166)
YI et al, Scientific Reports 2016 212 97.6% (207/212)
Moon et el, JCM 2017 625 US HCW no risk identified
97.1% (607/625)
Takasaki, J Infect Chemother2017
106 98% (104/106)
Siegel et al, IJTLD, 2018 262 (includes 51 with pulmonary NTM)
98.1% (257/262)
TOTAL 1311 97.3% (1021/1049)
Specificity of QFT-Plus – Independent dataConservative positive definition in persons with no risk: concordant positive of bothTB1 and TB2
20
.
Publication N Specificity (negative/N)
BARCELLINI et al, ERJ 2016 106 99.1% (105/106)
Moon et el, JCM 2017 625 US HCW no risk identified
99% (619/625)
Takasaki, J Infect Chemother2017
106 99% (105/106)
TOTAL 837 99% 829/837
1. QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) ELISA Package Insert. Rev. 02. February 2015.1083163.
10/10/2018
11
QFT-Plus: Clinical performance – Specificity Studies
FDA approved US Package Insert
21
Overall No loss of specificity with QFT-Plus
Total of 733 low-risk subjects
Site N QFT QFT-Plus QFT-Plus(concordant positive)
% Specificity(95% CI)
% Specificity(95% CI)
% Specificity(95% CI)
Australia 3 199 95.9 %(92.3 – 97.9)
95.5%(91.6 - 97.6)
97.9 %(94.6 - 99.4)
Japan 1 216 98.6 %(96.0 - 99.7)
97.7 %(94.7 - 99.2)
99.1 %(96.7 - 99.9)
Japan 3 106 99.1 %(94.9 - 99.8)
98.1 %(93.4 - 99.5)
100.0 %(96.6 - 100.0)
USA 4 212 99.1 %(96.6 - 99.9)
98.1 %(95.2 - 99.5)
99.1 %(96.6 - 99.9)
Overall 733 98.1 %(96.9 - 99.0)
97.3 %(95.9 - 98.4)
98.9 %(97.9 - 99.5)
22
Evidence:CD8 antigens in action
10/10/2018
12
23
QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus: Potential to better identify risk for progression
QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus: Gaining attention in 2016 WHO TB report
Barcellini L, Borroni E, Brown J, Brunetti E, Campisi D, Castellotti PF et al. First evaluation of QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus performance in contact screening. Eur Respir J. 2016:ERJ-00510-02016.
CD8 and CD4 T-cell response
“Current IGRA assays primarily detect a CD4 T-cell response. However, a new generation assay, the QuantiFERON-TB Plus (QFT-Plus, Qiagen, Hilden, Germany), has been developed to stimulate gamma interferon production by both CD4 and CD8 T-cells. First results indicate that the CD8 T-cell response may be able to identify people at greater risk of progression to active TB”.
TB2:TB1 differential as a surrogate measure for CD8 stimulation
24
15% of contacts had TB2-TB1 values >0.6 IU/mL (25% of those QFT+)
• Significantly associated with proximity to the index case
◦ p = 0.0029
• Significantly associated with European origin
◦ p = 0.043
Overall stronger risk association compared to QFT-GIT
“…QFT-Plus in contact screening has improved performance compared to QFT-GIT...”
“[QFT-Plus performance] suggests a role for the differential value between the two tubes as a proxy for recent infection.”
Barcellini et al, Eur Respir J. 2016 Jul 7. pii: ERJ-00510-2016. doi: 10.1183/13993003.00510-2016. Epub ahead of print]
First evaluation of QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus performance in contact screening
10/10/2018
13
NEW! A multicentre verification study of the QFT-Plus
PowerPoint Style Guide 25
ED Pieterman et al, Tuberculosis 108 (2018) 136–142
Study objective: comparison QFT-Plus vs QFT-GIT in testing at-risk groupsN=1031 16 laboratories in Netherlands and Belgium
Reason for screening
N Positive by QFT-Plus
TB suspicion 263 41/263 15%
Contact investigation
127 54/127 42%
Screening before immunotherapy
337 18/337 5%
Occ health periodic check*
189 9/189 5%
Other 57 13/57 23%
Unknown 58 12/58 21%*HCWs working with TB patients or possibly Mtb infected materials
Percent with CD8 signal >0.6 IU/ml TB2-TB1
17%
33%
11%
33%
15%
33%“Themost striking observation of this study was that one third of all positive tested contact screening subjects had a true difference in IFN‐γ release between TB1 and TB2…”
26
Evidence:QFT-Plus adding value in
immunocompromised persons
10/10/2018
14
1st evaluation of QFT-Plus performance in PLHIV (high-burden setting)
Study design: Prospective recruitment of Zambian patients with pulmonaryTB• Mean age of 32, 73% male; 63% HIV infected, BMI <18.5 (>50%)• 108 consecutive smear or Xpert +
Telisinghe et al. (2016)The sensitivity of the QuantiFERON®-TB Gold Plus assay in Zambian adults with active tuberculosis. Int. J. Tuberc. Lung Dis. 21(6)
108 Pulmonary TB patients
68 HIV-positive39 smear+, 29 Xpert+
40 HIV-negative34 smear+, 6 Xpert+
QFT-Plus results
58 Positive
6 Negative
4 Indeterminate
32 Positive
5 Negative
3 Indeterminate
85%
80%
6%
8%
QFT-Plus results not affected by HIV status
28
• Median IFN γ was higher in TB2 than in TB1 irrespective of HIV status
• HIV negative: 20% of negative/indeterminate results on TB1 were positive on TB2
• HIV positive: 29% of negative/indeterminate results on TB1 were positive on TB2.
• QFT Plus negative/indeterminate (n=18) were associated with nutritional status (76% underweight) and not associated with HIV status
• Compared to prior study in their institution with similar cohorts (Raby 2007) QFT not affected by HIV status and less affected by low CD4 count (results in % below)
Telisinghe et al, INT J TUBERC LUNG DIS 21(6):690–696
QFT-Plus performance in PLHIV (high-burden setting) cont….
10/10/2018
15
3-way comparison: QFT-Plus, QFT-GIT and T-Spot in active TB
K. Fukushima et al, Kekkaku, Vol. 93, No. 10: 517-523, 2018
29
• N= 77 culture or LAMP/PCR proven pulmonary TB patients • Average 80 years old• T-SPOT cut point =8 spots (blood age >8hrs with additive T-cell Xtend)
Assay Sensitivity (%) Indeterminate or invalid (%)
QFT-Plus** 72/77 (93.5) 1 (1.3)
QFT-GIT 70/77 (90.9) 3 (3.9)
T-SPOT 57/77 (74.0)* 6 (7.8)
*statistically significant p<0.05 from both QFTs
QFT-plus had the highest sensitivity in all age groups and was significantly higher than Elispot in active TB, elderly patients (p<0.005) and those with low CD4
Sensitivity by assay N=20 <age 80 N=57 >age80 N=23 CD4<200
QFT-Plus (%) 95 93 82.6
QFT-GIT (%) 95 89.5 73.9*
T-Spot (%) 80 71.9 65.2*
**2 of the 3 QFT-GIT indeterminates were positive for QFT-plus due to positive TB2 tube
Quantiferon-TB Gold Plus is a More Sensitive Screening Tool than Quantiferon-TB Gold In-Tube for Latent Tuberculosis Infection among Older Adults in Long-Term Care Facility
30
NEW! ELISA-IGRA study in the elderly
Study Design: QFT-GIT/QFT-Plus comparison study• LTBI sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV derived from reproducible positive results
Key findings:• QFT‐Plus had significantly higher LTBI sensitivity and NPV and equal specificity
and PPV compared to QFT‐GIT• QFT‐GIT had decreased in sensitivity over age 75, whereas no loss in sensitivity
was seen with QFT‐Plus• Positive TB2 test results significantly increased the sensitivity of QFT‐Plus, from
86.4% to 100.0% (P=0.004)
Jung‐Yien Chien et al, J. Clin. Microbiol. doi:10.1128/JCM.00427‐18, Posted Online 23 May 2018
N=229 51% maleMedian age 80 yrs
(60-102 yrs)
Positiveresults
Sensitivity Specificity PPV NPV
QFT-GIT 28.8% 89.4% 95.7% 89.4% 95.7%QFT-Plus 32.3% 100%* 95.1% 89.2% 100%*
*P<0.05
10/10/2018
16
Infect Chemother. 2018 Feb;24(2):110-116. doi: 10.1016/j.jiac.2017.09.012
31
Japanese IGRA Comparison LTBI trial among patients with rheumatoid arthritis
Assay type Positive (%) Negative (%) Indeterminate (%)
QFT-Plus 15 (9.7) 138 (89.6) 1 (0.7)
TSpot-TB 7 (4.5) 143 (92.9) 4 (2.6)
*P>0.05 Estimated Japanese LTBI prevalence for age 60-79 yrs (2015, Matsumoto): 10.6% -15%
*
N=154 Average age 66.5 years• Compared results by assay type and CD4 and CD8 response• 63% on steroids, 53% on biologic agents, 76% on methotrexate
• QFT-Plus positive rate significantly higher than TSPOT but lower than expected age group prevalence
• Higher QFT-Plus + rate was not driven by CD8 tube (TB2) –suggests these patients are not newly infected or in the process of developing active TB
• Positive rates impacted by CD4 and CD8 count of both assays (Indication: careful interpretation of negative results )
Igari H, Ishikawa S, Nakazawa T, Oya Y, Futami H, Tsuyuzaki M, Suzuki K, Matsumura R
One-Year Experience with QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus in Patients with Immunosuppressive Conditions (Spain)
Study Design: Assessment of QFT-Plus by comparing results from 2 periods of head to head testing of patients with QFT-GIT and T-Spot.TB (5/15 to 6/16) vs QFT-Plus and TSTB (7/16 to 7/17)
Risk factors: HIV, hematologic diseases, inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatic disease, candidates for biological therapy
A. Fernandez-Blazquez et al, Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2018;197:A5549, www.atsjournals.org
32
FINDINGS• Significantly higher agreement between QFT-Plus and TSTB • Significantly lower indeterminate rates by both QFTs compared to TSTB
Authors conclusion:“ The performance of QTF-Plus improves that of QTF-GIT, achieving substantial strength of
agreement with TSTB.”
% Positive % Indeterminate Agreement Kappa
QFT-GIT 14.33% 3.26 83.19%, 0.53
TSTB 17.02% 8.47
QFT-Plus 15.02 2.05 87.57%* 0.61*
TSTB 15.37 5.26
p<.00001
p<.00001
p<..0007N=1535
N=1464
Per
iod
1P
erio
d 2
Poster ATS 2018
10/10/2018
17
QuantiFERON TB Gold Plus in renal transplantation receiving immune suppressive agents (Japan)
Study Design: 113 renal transplantation patients tested with QFT-Plus. Percentage of CD4 T-cell or CD8 T-cell was determined by flow cytometry
N=113 Mean age 49 yrs (44-63)
H Igari et al, Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2018;197:A5548, www.atsjournals.org
33
FINDINGS Patients with • CD8 T-cell >=600/μL and CD4/CD8 ratio <1.0 had significantly higher positive rates.• CD8 T-cell counts showed a positive correlation with IFN-gamma production in TB-1 and
TB-2, however, CD4 counts did not. • QFT-Plus had significantly lower indeterminate rates compared to elispot
Authors conclusion:“QFT-Plus positive rate of 5.3% is acceptable in consideration of Japanese TB statistics.”
“Our result demonstrated the CD8 T-cell dominant immune response to TB specific antigen in the patients of renal transplantation”
% Positive % Indeterminate
QFT-Plus 5.3 0
TB2 4.4
TB1 5.3
Poster ATS 2018
QFT-Plus is an improved version of QFT-GIT and moving the field of LTBI forward
• CD8 responses correspond to new infection in contacts, exposure and TB burden in active TB (Barcellini 2016, Petruccioli2017, Knierer 2017)
• Compared to QFT_GIT, QFT-Plus with higher sensitivity in the elderly (Chien 2018, Fukushima-2018 in press)
• Unlike QFT-GIT, QFT-Plus results are not impacted by HIV status and less impacted by CD4 count (Telisinghe 2017, Walles 2018 pregnancy study, Fukushima 2018)
• In direct comparison studies in active TB and rheumatoid arthritis patients, QFT-Plus is significantly more sensitive than elispot (2018 Fukushima 2018, Igari 2018)
34
Summary
10/10/2018
18
QFT-Plus moving the field of LTBI forward: Research questions
• CD8 responses as a biomarker of new infection…biomarker of incipient TB?
• Will TB2 and CD8 response have clinical utility?
• The CD8 signal: Is there a quantitative threshold that is significant?
• 2 antigen tubes=2 results in one test:
1. What is its utility in maximizing specificity in low risk persons being tested?
2. Will test conversion that signifying new infection be more evident?
• Will QFT-Plus perform better in young children as it does in the extreme elderly?
35
The future
Sample to Insight
Using QFT-Plus results: case scenarios
10/10/2018
19
Golden Rules: NEVER use a TST or IGRA to:
“Rule out” disease in TB suspects (symptoms, abnormal CXR or physical finding suspicious of TB)
“Rule out” LTBI in immunocompromised individuals in the setting of high exposure and high risk of disease progression (e.g., HIV, children under 5, transplant patients, those on immunosuppressive drugs)
NO TEST CAN REPLACE CLINICAL JUDGMENT!!!!
Sample to Insight
38
Scenario 1: In a S. American country, a rheumatologist has 3+ smear positive active cavitary tuberculosis and coughing for 2 months
She takes the contact investigation upon herself. Her strain is pan-
susceptible
She has 2 daughters (age 1 and 3), a baby sitter and husband in her home and visits with her sister frequently.
QFT-Plus is performed
TB EXPOSURE SCENARIO: CONTACT INVESTIGATION
10/10/2018
20
Sample to Insight
39
Scenario 1: In a S. American country, a rheumatologist has active cavitary tuberculosis and coughing for 2 months
She has 2 daughters (age 1 and 3), a baby sitter and husband in her home and visits with her
sister frequently.
QFT-Plus is performed 6/18Husband: PositiveBabysitter: Positive
Sister: Positive
2 daughters: NegativeBabysitter’s 6 yr old child: Negative
(occasional contact)
CXRs performed on all household contacts: NORMAL
Isoniazid started on husband, babysitter, sister and 2 children (All asymptomatic with normal
examinations)
TB EXPOSURE SCENARIO: CONTACT INVESTIGATION
Is primary prophylaxis of the QFT-negative daughters warranted? YES, consistent with US and WHO guidelines
What next?
40
Scenario 1: Examining the QFT resultsInitial QFT June 2018 and repeated Sept 2018
TB EXPOSURE SCENARIO: CONTACT INVESTIGATION
Daughter age 3
Check list:
Control values Consistency of TB1 and TB2 Change in values between tests? Conversion? Weak or strong?
Findings:• Nil close to zero• Healthy mitogen responses• Healthy conversion from 0.02 to
>2 iu/ml
Diagnosis: LTBI, recent conversionClinical management: Complete 9 months INH
10/10/2018
21
QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus)
41
Interpretation of QFT-Plus results (1)
Nil (IU/ml) TB1 minusNil (IU/ml)
TB2 minus Nil (IU/ml)
Mitogen minus Nil (IU/ml)
QFT-Plus result
Report/Interpretation
≤8.0 ≥0.35 and ≥25% of Nil
Any Any Positive M. tuberculosis infection likely
Any ≥0.35 and ≥25% of Nil
<0.35 OR ≥0.35 and <25% of Nil
≥0.5 Negative M. tuberculosis infection NOT likely
<0.5 Indeterminate Likelihood of M.tuberculosisinfection cannot be determined
>8.0 Any
Note: Cutoffs have not changed from QFT: revalidated 0.35 as most clinically relevant.
Positive results by TB1, TB2, or both are considered positive.
1. QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) ELISA Package Insert. Rev. 02. February 2015.1083163
Systematically assessing both qualitative and quantitative results
1. Review control values to: Assess the quality of the host response Assess potential technical error What to expect in a healthy patient with NO risk of false negative
or indeterminate? Nil value close to zero Mitogen value near 10 IU/ml or above
2. Review quantitative values of antigen (TB1 and TB2) to: Assess values in light of control results Assess potential technical error (eg. TB1>>>TB2) What to expect? TB1 and TB2 values should be close in value, or TB2>TB1
10/10/2018
22
43
Scenario 1: Examining the QFT resultsInitial QFT June 2018 and repeated Sept 2018
TB EXPOSURE SCENARIO: CONTACT INVESTIGATION
Daughter age 1
Check list:
Control values Consistency of TB1 and TB2 Change in values between tests?
Findings:• Nil closer to zero than 8.0 IU/ml• Healthy mitogen responses• Missing: 3 of 4 TB1 and TB2 values
Diagnosis: LTBI unlikelyClinical management: 1. Obtain all TB1 and TB2 quantitative
values2. If values close to zero, stop INH 3. If values close to cut point consider
continuing INH? ---conservative approach in setting with known transmission and highly vulnerable contact
Documented transmission hence, Important to ensure
TST and IGRA test interpretation:
false-negative or indeterminate resultsHost factors affecting TST and likely IGRAs
HIV- low CD4, no ARVs
Recent TB infection (<8 weeks)
Infections (viral, fungal, bacterial)
Other illness affecting lymphoid organs
Live virus vaccination
Immunosuppressive drugs
Overwhelming TB
Malnutrition
Age (<2 years, elderly)
Does our patient have any of these factors?
10/10/2018
23
45
Scenario 1: Examining the QFT resultsInitial QFT June 2018 and repeated Sept 2018
TB EXPOSURE SCENARIO: CONTACT INVESTIGATION
Husband
Check list:
Control values Consistency of TB1 and TB2 Change in values between tests?
Findings: Positive, valid but unusual• Nil value high but closer to zero than
8 IU/ml (cut point for nil indeterminate)
• Mitogen response lower than expected
• TB1 and TB2 values >25% the nil value and perfect duplication of results
Diagnosis: LTBI Clinical management: 1. No change in INH treatment
May indicate:
Excessive levels of circulating IFN-(e.g., another infection)
Presence of heterophile antibody
Incorrect sample handling
Over vigorous shaking at high temperatures
Disturbing material on surface of gel when sampling for ELISA
Very rare
In clinical studies*, < 0.25% of subjects had IFN- > 8 IU/ml for Nil
High Nil (> 8 IU/ml) Mitogen – Nil < 0.5 IU/ml
Indeterminate QFT results – Causes
May indicate:
Incorrect sample handling
> 16 hours from blood specimen draw to incubation
Transportation / incubation at incorrect temperature
Inadequate shaking of tubes- most common cause
Overfilling of tubes
10/10/2018
24
Summary: Highly infectious index case with contacts under age 5, known transmission (QFT conversion of 3 yr old, totaling 4/5+ contacts)
Conservative approach: ensure reviewing quantitative as well as qualitative results, especially when the patient is vulnerable to false-negative results. Any immune response may be helpful in making a clinical decision
Test conversion was not subtle: both TB1 and TB2 values went from near zero to >1.9 IU/ml indicating true conversion
Doctors are not robots: Decision to test is a decision to think! (John Bernardo MD, Boston)
Use clinical patient information, risks and a systematic approach to review quantitative results to make final management decisions
Key points
Seeking help and consultation
48
This doctor has been using QFT-Plus to
monitor progress of active TB treatment. He notices fluctuations and wants to
know why.
What’s missing from the data that was sent?
Nil and Mitogen control values
Clinical information about TB risk, co-morbidities, nutritional status, and clinical response to
treatment
What’s available in the literature?
10/10/2018
25
Effect of tuberculosis treatment on newly developed QuantiFERON-TB® Gold Plus
Kamada, Arisu et al, National Hospital Organization Hokkaido Medical Center, Sapporo, JapanP1174, 2016 ATS
• Significant decreases of interferon gamma responses were observed during treatment of active TB in both TB1 and TB2 tubes in the first 3 months.
• The delta (TB2-TB1) between tubes was statistically significant in the latter half and throughout treatment (P=<.05).
“The finding suggests CD8+ responses (represented by the difference between the 2 tubes) declined with TB treatment”
49
Quantitative results (IU/mL) During Treatment N=38
Seeking help and consultation
50
This doctor has been using QFT-Plus to
monitor progress of active TB treatment. He notices fluctuations and wants to
know why.
Is it appropriate to use QFT-Plus for monitoring
treatment?
NO!Like the TST, IGRAs
should not be used for treatment monitoring until
there is more evidence
10/10/2018
26
Summary
51
• Although better than TST, IGRAs are not panaceas: Doctors must remain doctors and use their clinical assessment
• Interpretation and management of IGRA results is optimized when the following is taken into consideration:
• Quantitative values of controls and antigen tubes
• Risk of infection and population prevalence of LTBI
• Risk of disease progression or potential bad outcome if LTBI is missed
• Risk vs. benefit of treatment
• The CD8 response may be helpful in assessing where a patient falls in the TB spectrum of infection to disease
• QFT‐Plus is moving the field forward in LTBI: providing more information than prior IGRAs with the new CD8 antigens and 2nd antigen tube
• New evidence continues to be favorable for QFT‐Plus, especially in immunocompromised populations
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!
Title, Location, Date 52