Table 2.
Comparison of the performance between the RIF-RDp assay and Anyplex™ II MTB/MDR in the detection of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis against drug susceptibility testing (DST) and DNA sequencing method.
| Assays | RIF-RDp | PPV, NPV * (95% CI) | AnyplexTM II MTB/MDR | PPV, NPV * (95% CI) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R | S | R | S | ||||
| DST | R | 52 | 3 | 98.11% (88.16–99.73) |
52 | 3 | 100% |
| S | 1 | 54 | 94.74% (85.69–98.19) |
0 | 55 | 94.83% (85.92–98.22) |
|
|
Sensitivity, Specificity
(95% CI) |
94.55% (84.88–98.86) |
98.18% (90.28–99.95) |
94.55% (84.88–98.86) |
100% (93.51–100) |
|||
|
DNA
sequencing |
R | 53 | 2 | 100% | 52 | 3 | 100% |
| S | 0 | 55 | 96.49% (87.58–99.08) |
0 | 55 | 94.83% (85.92–98.22) |
|
|
Sensitivity, Specificity
(95% CI) |
96.36% (87.47–99.56) |
100% (93.51–100) |
94.55% (84.88–98.86) |
100% (93.51–100) |
|||
* PPV: positive predictive value, NPV: negative predictive value, 95% CI: confidence interval.