Agreement Between Quantiferon-TB Gold Test and Tuberculin Skin Test in the Identification of Latent Tuberculosis Infection in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Ankylosing Spondylitis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the Quantiferon-TB Gold test (QTF-G) with the tuberculin skin test (TST) for the detection of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS), with reevaluation of the patients treated with tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) antagonists in the followup. METHODS: The study involved 140 consecutive patients, 82 with RA and 58 with AS. Thirty patients were evaluated with QTF-G for detection of LTBI before and after 6 months of TNF-alpha antagonist treatment. QTF-G was also performed on 49 healthy controls. QTF-G results were recorded as positive, negative, or indeterminate. A positive TST was defined as >or= 5 mm for RA and AS. RESULTS: The percentages of positive QTF-G were comparable in RA and AS (37% vs 32%). The rate of positive QTF-G in healthy controls (29%) was also similar to RA and AS. In contrast to QTF-G results, a high rate of TST positivity was observed in AS compared to RA (82% vs 55%; p = 0.02). The total agreement between QTF-G and TST was observed to be 61% (kappa = 0.29) in the whole group, 70% (kappa = 0.42) in RA, and 49% (kappa = 0.14) in AS. After 6 months of treatment with TNF-alpha antagonists, a high rate of QTF-G change was observed in patients with indeterminate results (23% vs 3%; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: The comparable prevalence of LTBI among the study groups according to QTF-G supports the view that QTF-G is less susceptible to external factors than TST. Sequential testing for QTF-G in patients with indeterminate or negative results may also be helpful in discriminating LTBI better.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it