Skip to main content
. 2026 May 18;14(7):e02917-25. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.02917-25

TABLE 2.

Performance characteristics of tNGS compared to WGS and LPAa

Test Drug Profile pDST Performance (95% CI)
R S Sensitivity Specificity PPV NPV Concordance Cohen's kappa
tNGS RIF R 37 2 95.0 (83.0–99.0) 97.0 (89.0–100) 95.0 (83.0–99.0) 97.0 (89.0–100) 96.0 (90.0–99.0) 0.92 (95% CI: 0.84–0.92)
S 2 63
WGS RIF R 36 1 97.0 (86.0–100) 99.0 (92.0–100) 97.0 (86.0–100) 99.0 (92.0–100) 98.0 (93.0–100) 0.96 (95% CI: 90.0–0.96)
S 1 66
LPA RIF R 19 1 100 (82.0–100) 93.0 (0.68–100) 95.0 (75.0–100) 100 (77.0–100) 97.0 (85.0–100) 0.94 (95% CI: 0.82–0.94)
S 0 14
tNGS INH R 37 1 88.0 (74.0–96.0) 98.0 (91.0–100) 97.0 (86.0–100) 92.0 (83.0–97.0) 94.0 (88.0–98.0) 0.88 (95% CI: 78.0–88.0)
S 5 61
WGS INH R 37 2 92.0 (80.0–98.0) 97.0 (89.0–100) 95.0 (83.0–99.0) 95.0 (0.87–99.0) 95.0 (89.0–98.0) 0.90 (95% CI: 0.81–90.0)
S 3 62
LPA INH R 16 1 89.0 (65.0–99.0) 94.0 (70.0–100) 94.0 (71.0–100) 88.0 (64.0–99.0) 91.0 (76.0–98.0) 0.82 (95% CI: 63.0–0.82)
S 2 15
tNGS FQ R 32 0 100 (89.0–100) 100 (95.0–100) 100 (89.0–100) 100 (95.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 1.00 (95% CI: 1.00–1.00)
S 0 71
WGS FQ R 30 0 100 (88.0–100) 100 (95.0–100) 100 (88.0–100) 100 (95.0–100) 98.0 (93.0–100) 1.00 (95% CI: 1.00–1.00)
S 0 73
LPA FQ R 17 0 100 (80.0–100) 100 (79.0–100) 100 (80.0–100) 100 (79.0–100) 100 (89.0–100) 1.00 (95% CI: 1.00–1.00)
S 0 16
tNGS AMG R 19 0 100 (82.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 100 (82.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 1.00 (95% CI: 1.00–1.00)
S 0 84
WGS AMG R 17 0 94.0 (0.73–100) 100 (96.0–100) 100 (80.0–100) 99.0 (94.0–100) 99.0 (95.0–100) 0.97 (95% CI: 90.0–0.97)
S 1 85
LPA AMG R 19 1 100 (75.0–100) 95.0 (75.0–100) 93.0 (66.0–100) 100 (82.0–100) 97.0 (0.84–100) 0.94 (95% CI: 0.82–0.94)
S 0 13
tNGS STM R 20 0 95.0 (76.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 100 (83.0–100) 99.0 (94.0–100) 99.0 (95.0–100) 0.97 (95% CI: 0.91–0.97)
S 1 83
WGS STR R 18 3 95.0 (74.0–100) 96.0 (90.0–99.0) 86.0 (64.0–97.0) 99.0 (93.0–100) 96.0 (90.0–99.0) 0.88 (95% CI: 76.0–88.0)
S 1 82
tNGS EMB R 0 0 NA 100 (94.0–100) NA 100 (94.0–100) 100 (94.0–100) NA
S 0 56
WGS EMB R 0 0 NA 97.0 (88.0–100) NA 100 (94.0–100) 97.0 (88.0–100) NA
S 2 56
tNGS PZA R 20 1 83.0 (63.0–95.0) 99.0 (93.0–100) 95.0 (76.0–100) 95.0 (88.0–99.0 95.0 (89.0–98.0) 0.88 (95% CI: 74.0–86.0)
S 4 79
WGS PZA R 20 2 87.0 (66.0–97.0) 98.0 (91.0–100) 91.0 (71.0–99.0) 96.0 (90.0–99.0) 95.0 (89.0–98.0) 0.86 (95% CI: 74.0–86.0)
S 3 79
tNGS LZD R 5 0 100 (48.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 100 (48.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 100 (97.0–100) 1.00 (95% CI: 1.00–1.00)
S 0 102
WGS LZD R 5 0 100 (48.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 100 (48.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 1.00 (95% CI: 1.00–1.00)
S 0 98
tNGS CFZ R 0 0 NA 100 (97.0–100) NA 100 (97.0–100) 100 (97.0–100) NA
S 0 107
WGS CFZ R 0 0 NA 100 (96.0–100) NA 100 (96.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) NA
S 0 103
tNGS BDQ R 0 0 NA 100 (96.0–100) NA 98.0 (93.0–100) 98.0 (93.0–100) NA
S 2 103
WGS BDQ R 2 0 100 (16.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 100 (16.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 100 (96.0–100) 1.00 (95% CI: 1.00–1.00)
S 0 99
tNGS ETH R 8 1 73.0 (39.0–94.0) 99.0 (94.0–100) 89.0 (52.0–100) 97.0 (91.0–99.0) 96.0 (90.0–99.0) 0.78 (95% CI: 0.57–78.0)
S 3 91
WGS ETH R 7 2 70.0 (35.0–93.0) 98.0 (92.0–100) 78.0 (40.0–97.0) 97.0 (91.0–99.0) 95.0 (89.0–98.0) 0.71 (95% CI: 0.47–71.0)
S 3 91
a

For samples with available pDST results, tNGS, WGS, and LPA results were assessed to study their sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, concordance, and agreement Cohen’s kappa with 95% CI. tNGS—targeted next-generation sequencing; WGS—whole-genome sequencing; LPA—line probe assay; pDST—phenotypic drug susceptibility testing; RIF—rifampicin; INH—isoniazid; FQ—fluoroquinolone; AMG—aminoglycoside; STR—streptomycin; EMB—ethambutol; PZA—pyrazinamide; LZD—linezolid; CFZ—clofazimine; BDQ—bedaquiline; ETH— ethionamide; R—resistant; S—susceptible; PPV—positive predictive value; NPV—negative predictive value. CI—confidence interval; NA—not available.