TABLE 3.
Antibiotic (concn [μg/ml]) | MGIT 960 resulta | RRM/MPAa,b results
|
Rate of agreement (%) | Sensitivityc (%) | Specificityd (%) | PPVe (%) | NPVf (%) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S | R | |||||||
AMI (1.0) | S | 108 | 1 | 99 | 96 | 99 | 96 | 99 |
R | 23 | |||||||
CAP (1.25) | S | 105 | 2 | 97 | 92 | 98 | 92 | 98 |
R | 2 | 24 | ||||||
OFL (1.0)b | S | 97 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | |
R | 34 | |||||||
RIFB (0.5) | S | 6 | 2 | 99 | 98 | 100 | 100 | 75 |
R | 125 | |||||||
PRO (2.5) | S | 119 | 3 | 96 | 75 | 98 | 82 | 98 |
R | 2 | 9 | ||||||
PRO (5.0) | S | 124 | 3 | 97 | 63 | 99 | 83 | 98 |
R | 5 |
S, susceptible; R, resistant.
Values are numbers of isolates. A total of 132 M. tuberculosis clinical isolates were tested.
The sensitivity, i.e., the ability of MGIT 960 to detect true resistance compared with the RRM results.
The specificity, i.e., the ability of MGIT 960 to detect true susceptibility compared with the RRM results.
PPV, positive predictive value.
NPV, negative predictive value.