TABLE II. Comparison among the seven whole-genome sequencing based tools against the drug susceptibility test.
| Drug-susceptibility test (Proportion Method) → | INH | RIF | PZA | EMB | SM | MDR: RIF+INH | ||||||||
| WGS tools ↓ | DST status | R | S | R | S | R | S | R | S | R | S | MDR-status | MDR | N-MDR |
| TB-profiler | R | 26 | 1 | 17 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 1 | MDR | 14 | 4 |
| S | 4 | 40 | 1 | 48 | 3 | 63 | 0 | 57 | 2 | 62 | N-MDR | 1 | 52 | |
| MTBSEQ | R | 28 | 10 | 15 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 2 | MDR | 13 | 4 |
| S | 2 | 31 | 3 | 48 | 4 | 60 | 1 | 58 | 2 | 61 | N-MDR | 3 | 51 | |
| Phyressea | R | 20 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 2 | MDR | 1 | 0 |
| S | 10 | 41 | 17 | 53 | 4 | 60 | 0 | 59 | 3 | 61 | N-MDR | 15 | 55 | |
| Kvarq | R | 26 | 1 | 17 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 7 | 2 | 6 | 1 | MDR | 14 | 4 |
| S | 4 | 40 | 1 | 48 | 5 | 61 | 1 | 61 | 2 | 62 | N-MDR | 2 | 51 | |
| CASTBb | R | 25 | 3 | 13 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 36 | MDR | 11 | 4 |
| S | 5 | 38 | 5 | 49 | 2 | 61 | 3 | 58 | 3 | 27 | N-MDR | 5 | 51 | |
| Resistance sniffer | R | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | MDR | 0 | 0 |
| S | 30 | 41 | 18 | 53 | 6 | 65 | 8 | 63 | 8 | 63 | N-MDR | 16 | 55 | |
| Mykrobe | R | 27 | 2 | 17 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 1 | MDR | 14 | 4 |
| S | 3 | 39 | 1 | 47 | 2 | 60 | 1 | 56 | 2 | 62 | N-MDR | 2 | 51 | |
INH: isoniazid; RIF: rifampicin; PZA: pyrazinamide; EMB: ethambutol; SM: streptomycin; MDR: multidrug-resistant; WGS: whole-genome sequencing; DST: drug susceptibility test. a: n = 69; b: n = 60.