Skip to main content

Table 3 Screening recommendations in low-incidence countries based on TB incidence, positive predictive value of IGRAs and TST for progression to active TB disease, and number needed to screen

From: Recommendations for the screening of paediatric latent tuberculosis infection in indigenous communities: a systematic review of screening strategies among high-risk groups in low-incidence countries

Country or Region

Risk Sub-group Studied

Screening Tool

2015 National TB Incidence (reported cases/million population/year) [58]

PPV a for Progression to Active Disease

NNT b or NNS c

Screening Tool Recommendations

Screening Strategy Recommendations

Canada

Indigenous individuals [24] d

TST

45.55

NR

NNS: 5.3

Use of the TST in the paediatric population, although IGRAs may be preferable in areas where BCG vaccination persists

[26, 27]

Location-based screening in Indigenous communities with > 5 TB cases in the past 5 years [24]

Individuals in long-term care facilitiesd [59]

TST

 

NR

1410

Australia

Immigrant/refugee children or child contacts of TB cases

TST & IGRAs

52.25

NR

NR

Although prior studies indicate potentially poorer sensitivity of IGRAs compared to the TST, [38, 43]the basis of this conclusion in the absence of a gold standard diagnostic tool is unclear, and a more recent study suggests poorer sensitivity of the TST compared to IGRAs for the detection of LTBI, based on a prospective follow-up of study subjects. [44]

 

Italy

Immigrant children and child contacts of TB cases

TST & IGRAs

62.82

NR

NR

Use of IGRAs recommended in BCG-vaccinated paediatric populations [56]

 

Spain

Immigrant children [47]

QFT-GIT & TST

91.12

NR

NR

Use of IGRAs is preferential in low-incidence settings to prevent unnecessary prophylactic treatment

Risk-based screening: contacts of TB cases and undocumented immigrant children [46, 47]

Contacts of TB cases [46]

QFT-GIT & TST

 

NR

NR

United Kingdom [33]

Immigrant children from low-incidence countries (< 150/100,000)

NR

96.00

NR

NNS: 5291

IGRAs are more cost-effective in low-incidence countries [37]

Risk-factor-based screening: immigrants from high-incidence countries [33,34,35]

Immigrant children from high-incidence countries (> 500/100,000)

NR

 

NR

88

United States

Immigrants d [60]

TST

29.66

NR

NNS: 150

IGRAs are a better predictor of progression to active disease in paediatric populations [40, 41]

Risk-factor-based screening: immigration status, malnutrition [31, 32, 36]

Europe d [54]

Immune-compromised individuals [61]

TST

QFT-GIT

T-SPOT.TB

NA

1.5

0.9

1.3

NNT:

50

80

60

 

Targeted screening of close contacts [54]

Contacts of TB cases [62]

QFT-GIT

T-SPOT.TB

NA

1.9

0.7

37

37

  1. aPPV = Positive Predictive Value (in this case, the number of individuals progressing to TB disease among those with a positive IGRA result)
  2. bNNT = Number Needed to Treat (in this case, the difference between the number of TB cases developing among individuals testing positive via IGRA in those receiving compared to not receiving prophylactic treatment)
  3. cNNS = Number Needed to Screen (the number of individuals needed to screen in order to prevent one TB case)
  4. dNot in exclusively paediatric populations
  5. NA Not applicable
  6. NR Not reported