Skip to main content
. 2025 Mar 24;14(4):803–818. doi: 10.1007/s40121-025-01127-0

Table 3.

Performance of the Xpert MTB/XDR assay compared with the gold standard Lowenstein–Jensen proportion method for detection of resistance to isoniazid, fluoroquinolone, aminoglycoside, and ethionamide

Method Patient group Drugs L-J proportion method Sensitivity %
(95% CI)
Specificity %
(95% CI)
PPV
(95% CI)
NPV
(95% CI)
Level of agreement (k-value)
R S
Xpert MTB/XDR assay Overall (n = 793) INH (n = 790) R 264 14

94.0

(90.5–96.4)

97.3

(95.4–98.5)

95.0

(91.8–96.9)

96.7

(94.8–97.9)

0.91
S 17 495
FLQ (n = 788) R 98 5

86.0

(78.2–91.8)

99.3

(98.3–99.8)

95.2

(89.1–97.9)

97.7

(96.4–98.5)

0.89
S 16 669
AMG (n = 760) R 6 1

85.7

(42.1–99.6)

99.9

(99.3–100)

85.7

(45.3–97.8)

99.9

(99.2–100)

0.86
S 1 752
ETH (n = 793) R 48 20

25

(19.0–31.7)

96.7

(94.9–98.0)

70.6

(59.4–79.8)

80.1

(78.8–81.4)

0.28
S 144 581
New (n = 611) INH (n = 610) R 149 13

91.4

(86.0–95.2)

97.1

(95.1–98.4)

92.0

(87.0–95.2)

96.9

(94.9–98.1)

0.89
S 14 434
FLQ (n = 607) R 53 5

79.1

(67.4–88.1)

99.1

(97.9–99.7)

91.4

(81.5–96.2)

97.5

(96.0–98.4)

0.83
S 14 535
AMG (n = 582) R 0 1

99.8

(99.1–100)

100

(99.4–100)

S 0 581
ETH (n = 611) R 29 12

19.5

(13.4–26.7)

97.4

(95.5–98.7)

70.7

(55.9–82.2)

79.0

(77.6–80.3)

0.22
S 120 450
Re-treated (n = 182) INH (n = 180) R 115 1

97.5

(92.8–99.5) *

98.4

(91.3–100)

99.1

(94.3–99.9)

95.3

(86.9–98.4)

0.95
S 3 61
FLQ (n = 181) R 45 0

95.7

(85.5–99.5) *

100

(97.3–100)

100

(92.1–100)

98.5

(94.5–99.6)

0.97
S 2 134
AMG (n = 178) R 6 0

85.7

(42.1–99.5)

100

(97.9–100)

100

(54.1–100)

99.4

(96.5–99.9)

0.92
S 1 171
ETH (n = 184) R 19 8

44.2

(29.1–60.1) *

94.2

(89.0–97.5)

70.4

(52.8–83.4)

84.5

(80.7–87.7)

0.44
S 24 131

*Significant differences of proportion between the new and re-treated group of TB patients

RIF rifampicin, INH isoniazid, FLQ fluoroquinolones, AMG aminoglycoside, ETH ethionamide, R resistant, S sensitive, L-J Lowenstein–Jensen, PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value, CI confidence interval