Quantiferon Gold Test for Detecting Tuberculosis (TB) Infection in HIV/AIDS Patients in South Africa

October 2, 2019 updated by: Johns Hopkins University

Quantiferon Gold Test for Detecting TB Infection in HIV/AIDS Patients in South Africa

The purpose of this study is to use a cluster randomized trial to compare the effectiveness of linking the Quantiferon-gold in-tube test (QGIT) with routine CD4 testing to the routine use of the tuberculin skin test (TST), the current standard of care for diagnosing latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in South Africa. The investigators hypothesize that QGIT clinics will identify LTBI and initiate isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) in a higher proportion of patients and in a significantly faster timeframe. The cost-effectiveness of linking QGIT with routine CD4 compared to routine TST will also be evaluated, and the process of implementation of QGIT into the routine cluster of differentiation 4 (CD4) blood draw will be evaluated using a mixed method approach to identify steps that can be modified for future scale-up of the intervention.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

The investigators propose a cluster randomized trial in 16 HIV clinics in South Africa to compare time to determine LTBI status in patients in clinics using QGIT and TST and those with TST only. The investigators will take advantage of the excellent HIV services provided in South Africa and link QGIT with CD4 blood collection and provide the first evidence of an operational comparison between QGIT and TST in HIV-infected patients in a country that accounts for one-third of the HIV-related TB in the world. The QGIT study will contribute to the understanding of QGIT performance and implementation in HIV-infected individuals. Careful evaluation of the implementation and operational aspects of the program will provide useful knowledge for future scale-up in this and other HIV clinic settings.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

3506

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • North West
      • Klerksdorp, North West, South Africa
        • Tshepong Wellness Clinic
      • Klerksdorp, North West, South Africa
        • Bothabelo CHC
      • Klerksdorp, North West, South Africa
        • Grace Mokhomo
      • Klerksdorp, North West, South Africa
        • Jouberton
      • Klerksdorp, North West, South Africa
        • Marcus Zenzile
      • Klerksdorp, North West, South Africa
        • NM Pretorious Gateway
      • Klerksdorp, North West, South Africa
        • Orkney
      • Klerksdorp, North West, South Africa
        • Park Street
      • Klerksdorp, North West, South Africa
        • Stilfontein
      • Klerksdorp, North West, South Africa
        • Tsholofelo
      • Potchefstroom, North West, South Africa
        • Boiki Tihapi
      • Potchefstroom, North West, South Africa
        • Potchefstroom Gateway
      • Potchefstroom, North West, South Africa
        • Potchefstroom
      • Potchefstroom, North West, South Africa
        • Steve Tshwete

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • HIV-infected
  • >= 18 years of age
  • attending one of the 14 clinics during the duration of the study
  • eligible to receive TST or IPT according to South Africa guidelines

Exclusion Criteria:

  • diagnosed with active tuberculosis
  • not eligible to receive TST or IPT according to South Africa guidelines

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: DIAGNOSTIC
  • Allocation: RANDOMIZED
  • Interventional Model: PARALLEL
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
NO_INTERVENTION: TST only
Tuberculin skin test for all eligible patients, to be placed and read by clinic staff. Thereafter, for 2 years, annual TST provided for patients with TST negative/unknown history. IPT to be provided to patients with a positive TST for whom active TB has been ruled out.
EXPERIMENTAL: QGIT
QGIT for all eligible patients, to be done at routine CD4 blood draw. Thereafter, for 2 years, annual QGIT at CD4 blood draw for patients with QGIT negative/unknown history. IPT to be provided to patients with a positive QGIT for whom active TB has been ruled out.
Seven pairs of clinics will be included in this study. One clinic in each pair will be selected by a computerized randomization program to be the standard of care arm (TST only) and the other will be in the QGIT arm.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Impact of linking QGIT with CD4 blood collection and the current standard of care process of TST in HIV clinics in South Africa on operational metrics
Time Frame: Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Time to known latent TB infection status in clinics integrating QGIT with CD4 blood draw versus clinics with current standard of care (TST only)
Time Frame: Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Time to provision of IPT for eligible patients in QGIT versus TST-only clinics
Time Frame: Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Proportion of patients with known LTBI status in QGIT and TST-only clinics
Time Frame: Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Proportion of eligible patients receiving IPT between QGIT and TST-only clinics
Time Frame: Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Proportion of eligible patients receiving a second TST or QGIT following an initial negative test
Time Frame: Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Patient-, provider-, and clinic-level factors that impact outcomes within and between arms
Time Frame: Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years
Participants will be followed for the duration of the study, an expected average of 2 years

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Cost effectiveness of implementing QGIT versus TST-only
Time Frame: 1 year
Costs and effectiveness (quality-adjusted life years) of LTBI screening and treatment with QGIT versus TST standard of care. Looking at the impact on the HIV-associated TB epidemic in South Africa under each strategy and scenarios under which QGIT is cost-effective relative to TST, and vice versa.
1 year
Attitudinal and operational factors influencing the successful implementation of QGIT versus TST diagnostic practices from the perspective of key clinic personnel
Time Frame: up to 6 months
Knowledge, attitudes and practices of clinic personnel, along with consensus regarding key factors linked to successful screening
up to 6 months
Attitudinal and operational factors influencing the successful implementation of QGIT versus TST diagnostic practices from the perspective of patients
Time Frame: up to 6 months
Patients' understandings and experiences with TB screening approaches, along with consensus regarding key factors linked to successful screening
up to 6 months
Attitudinal and operational factors influencing the successful implementation of QGIT versus TST diagnostic practices from the perspective of clinic personnel
Time Frame: 1 year
Knowledge, attitudes and practices of clinic personnel, along with consensus regarding key factors linked to successful screening
1 year
Attitudinal and operational factors influencing the successful implementation of QGIT versus TST diagnostic practices from the perspective of patients
Time Frame: 1 year
Patients' understandings and experiences with TB screening approaches, along with consensus regarding key factors linked to successful screening
1 year
Attitudinal and operational factors influencing the successful implementation of QGIT versus TST diagnostic practices from the perspective of clinic personnel
Time Frame: 2 years
Knowledge, attitudes and practices of clinic personnel, along with consensus regarding key factors linked to successful screening
2 years
Attitudinal and operational factors influencing the successful implementation of QGIT versus TST diagnostic practices from the perspective of patients
Time Frame: 2 years
Patients' understandings and experiences with TB screening approaches, along with consensus regarding key factors linked to successful screening
2 years
Cost effectiveness of implementing QGIT versus TST-only
Time Frame: 2 years
Costs and effectiveness (quality-adjusted life years) of LTBI screening and treatment with QGIT versus TST standard of care. Looking at the impact on the HIV-associated TB epidemic in South Africa under each strategy and scenarios under which QGIT is cost-effective relative to TST, and vice versa.
2 years

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (ACTUAL)

November 1, 2014

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

June 1, 2018

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

May 1, 2019

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 10, 2014

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 18, 2014

First Posted (ESTIMATE)

April 21, 2014

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)

October 3, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 2, 2019

Last Verified

October 1, 2019

More Information

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on HIV

3
Subscribe