Chronic pulmonary aspergillosis (CPA) is an uncommon and problematic pulmonary disease, complicating many other respiratory disorders, thought to affect ∼240 000 people in Europe. The most common form of CPA is chronic cavitary pulmonary aspergillosis (CCPA), which untreated may progress to chronic fibrosing pulmonary aspergillosis. Less common manifestations include:Aspergillusnodule and single aspergilloma. All these entities are found in non-immunocompromised patients with prior or current lung disease. Subacute invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (formerly called chronic necrotising pulmonary aspergillosis) is a more rapidly progressive infection (<3 months) usually found in moderately immunocompromised patients, which should be managed as invasive aspergillosis. Few clinical guidelines have been previously proposed for either diagnosis or management of CPA. A group of experts convened to develop clinical, radiological and microbiological guidelines. The diagnosis of CPA requires a combination of characteristics: one or more cavities with or without a fungal ball present or nodules on thoracic imaging, direct evidence ofAspergillusinfection (microscopy or culture from biopsy) or an immunological response toAspergillusspp. and exclusion of alternative diagnoses, all present for at least 3 months.Aspergillusantibody (precipitins) is elevated in over 90% of patients. Surgical excision of simple aspergilloma is recommended, if technically possible, and preferablyviavideo-assisted thoracic surgery technique. Long-term oral antifungal therapy is recommended for CCPA to improve overall health status and respiratory symptoms, arrest haemoptysis and prevent progression. Careful monitoring of azole serum concentrations, drug interactions and possible toxicities is recommended. Haemoptysis may be controlled with tranexamic acid and bronchial artery embolisation, rarely surgical resection, and may be a sign of therapeutic failure and/or antifungal resistance. Patients with singleAspergillusnodules only need antifungal therapy if not fully resected, but if multiple they may benefit from antifungal treatment, and require careful follow-up.

Tuberculosis control relies on the identification and preventive treatment of individuals who are latently infected withMycobacterium tuberculosis. However, direct identification of latent tuberculosis infection is not possible. The diagnostic tests used to identify individuals latently infected withM. tuberculosis, thein vivotuberculin skin test and theex vivointerferon-γ release assays (IGRAs), are designed to identify an adaptive immune response against, but not necessarily a latent infection with,M. tuberculosis. The proportion of individuals who truly remain infected withM. tuberculosisafter tuberculin skin test or IGRA conversion is unknown. It is also uncertain how long adaptive immune responses towards mycobacterial antigens persist in the absence of live mycobacteria. Clinical management and public healthcare policies for preventive chemotherapy against tuberculosis could be improved, if we were to gain a better understanding onM. tuberculosislatency and reactivation. This statement by the TBNET summarises knowledge and limitations of the currently available tests used in adults and children for the diagnosis of latent tuberculosis infection.In summary, the main issue regarding testing is to restrict it to those who are known to be at higher risk of developing tuberculosis and who are willing to accept preventive chemotherapy.

Interferon-γ release assays (IGRAs) are now established for the immunodiagnosis of latent infection withMycobacterium tuberculosisin many countries. However, the role of IGRAs for the diagnosis of active tuberculosis (TB) remains unclear.Following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) and quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS) guidelines, we searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases to identify studies published in January 2001–November 2009 that evaluated the evidence of using QuantiFERON-TB® Gold in-tube (QFT-G-IT) and T-SPOT.TB®directly on blood or extrasanguinous specimens for the diagnosis of active TB.The literature search yielded 844 studies and 27 met the inclusion criteria. In blood and extrasanguinous fluids, the pooled sensitivity for the diagnosis of active TB was 80% (95% CI 75–84%) and 48% (95% CI 39–58%) for QFT-G-IT, and 81% (95% CI 78–84%) and 88% (confirmed and unconfirmed cases) (95% CI 82–92%) for T-SPOT.TB®, respectively. In blood and extrasanguinous fluids, the pooled specificity was 79% (95% CI 75–82%) and 82% (95% CI 70–91%) for QFT-G-IT, and 59% (95% CI 56–62%) and 82% (95% CI 78–86%) for T-SPOT.TB®, respectively.Although the diagnostic sensitivities of both IGRAs were higher than that of tuberculin skin tests, it was still not high enough to use as a rule out test for TB. Positive evidence for the use of IGRAs in compartments other than blood will require more independent and carefully designed prospective studies.

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the accuracy of the QuantiFERON-TB® Gold In-Tube (QFT-G-IT) and the T-SPOT®.TBassays with the tuberculin skin test (TST) for the diagnosis of latentMycobacterium tuberculosisinfection (LTBI).The Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were explored for relevant articles in November 2009. Specificities, and negative (NPV) and positive (PPV) predictive values of interferon-γ release assays (IGRAs) and the TST, and the exposure gradient influences on test results among bacille Calmette–Guérin (BCG) vaccinees were evaluated.Specificity of IGRAs varied 98–100%. In immunocompetent adults, NPV for progression to tuberculosis within 2 yrs were 97.8% for T-SPOT®.TBand 99.8% for QFT-G-IT. When test performance of an immunodiagnostic test was not restricted to prior positivity of another test, progression rates to tuberculosis among IGRA-positive individuals followed for 19–24 months varied 8–15%, exceeding those reported for the TST (2–3%). In multivariate analyses, the odd ratios for TST positivity following BCG vaccination varied 3–25, whereas IGRA results remained uninfluenced and IGRA positivity was clearly associated with exposure to contagious tuberculosis cases.IGRAs may have a relative advantage over the TST in detecting LTBI and allow the exclusion ofM. tuberculosisinfection with higher reliability.

Treatment of multidrug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is lengthy, toxic, expensive, and has generally poor outcomes. We undertook an individual patient data meta-analysis to assess the impact on outcomes of the type, number, and duration of drugs used to treat MDR-TB. Three recent systematic reviews were used to identify studies reporting treatment outcomes of microbiologically confirmed MDR-TB. Study authors were contacted to solicit individual patient data including clinical characteristics, treatment given, and outcomes. Random effects multivariable logistic meta-regression was used to estimate adjusted odds of treatment success. Adequate treatment and outcome data were provided for 9,153 patients with MDR-TB from 32 observational studies. Treatment success, compared to failure/relapse, was associated with use of: later generation quinolones, (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.5 [95% CI 1.1–6.0]), ofloxacin (aOR: 2.5 [1.6–3.9]), ethionamide or prothionamide (aOR: 1.7 [1.3–2.3]), use of four or more likely effective drugs in the initial intensive phase (aOR: 2.3 [1.3–3.9]), and three or more likely effective drugs in the continuation phase (aOR: 2.7 [1.7–4.1]). Similar results were seen for the association of treatment success compared to failure/relapse or death: later generation quinolones, (aOR: 2.7 [1.7–4.3]), ofloxacin (aOR: 2.3 [1.3–3.8]), ethionamide or prothionamide (aOR: 1.7 [1.4–2.1]), use of four or more likely effective drugs in the initial intensive phase (aOR: 2.7 [1.9–3.9]), and three or more likely effective drugs in the continuation phase (aOR: 4.5 [3.4–6.0]). In this individual patient data meta-analysis of observational data, improved MDR-TB treatment success and survival were associated with use of certain fluoroquinolones, ethionamide, or prothionamide, and greater total number of effective drugs. However, randomized trials are urgently needed to optimize MDR-TB treatment. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary. In 2010, 8.8 million people developed tuberculosis—a contagious bacterial infection—and 1.4 million people died from the disease. Mycobacterium tuberculosis, the bacterium that causes tuberculosis, is spread in airborne droplets when people with the disease cough or sneeze and usually infects the lungs (pulmonary tuberculosis). The characteristic symptoms of tuberculosis are a persistent cough, weight loss, and night sweats. Tuberculosis can be cured by taking several powerful antibiotics regularly for at least 6 months. The standard treatment for tuberculosis comprises an initial intensive phase lasting 2 months during which four antibiotics are taken daily followed by a 4-month continuation phase during which two antibiotics are taken. However, global efforts to control tuberculosis are now being thwarted by the emergence of M. tuberculosis strains that are resistant to several antibiotics, including isoniazid and rifampicin, the two most powerful, first-line (standard) anti-tuberculosis drugs. Although multi-drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) can be cured using second-line anti-tuberculosis drugs, these are more expensive and more toxic than first-line drugs and optimal treatment regimens for MDR-TB have not been determined. Notably, there have been no randomized controlled trials of treatments for MDR-TB. Such trials, which compare outcomes (cure, treatment failure, relapse, and death) among patients who have been randomly assigned to receive different treatments, are the best way to compare different anti-tuberculosis drug regimens. It is possible, however, to get useful information about the association of various treatments for MDR-TB with outcomes from observational studies using a statistical approach called “individual patient data meta-analysis.” In observational studies, because patients are not randomly assigned to different treatments, differences in outcomes between treatment groups may not be caused by the different drugs they receive but may be due to other differences between the groups. An individual patient data meta-analysis uses statistical methods to combine original patient data from several different studies. Here, the researchers use this approach to investigate the association of specific drugs, numbers of drugs and treatment duration with the clinical outcomes of patients with pulmonary MDR-TB. The researchers used three recent systematic reviews (studies that use predefined criteria to identify all the research on a given topic) to identify studies reporting treatment outcomes of microbiologically confirmed MDR-TB. They obtained individual patient data from the authors of these studies and estimated adjusted odds (chances) of treatment success from the treatment and outcome data of 9,153 patients with MDR-TB provided by 32 centers. The use of later generation quinolones, ofloxacin, and ethionamide/prothionamide as part of multi-drug regimens were all associated with treatment success compared to failure, relapse or death, as were the use of four or more likely effective drugs (based on drug susceptibility testing of mycobacteria isolated from study participants) during the initial intensive treatment phase and the use of three or more likely effective drugs during the continuation phase. The researchers also report that among patients who did not die or stop treatment, the chances of treatment success increased with the duration of the initial treatment phase up to 7.1–8.5 months and with the total duration of treatment up to 18.6–21.5 months. These findings suggest that the use of specific drugs, the use of a greater number of effective drugs, and longer treatments may be associated with treatment success and the survival of patients with MDR-TR. However, these findings need to be interpreted with caution because of limitations in this study that may have affected the accuracy of its findings. For example, the researchers did not include all the studies they found through the systematic reviews in their meta-analysis (some authors did not respond to requests for individual patient data, for example), which may have introduced bias. Moreover, because the patients included in the meta-analysis were treated at 32 centers, there were many differences in their management, some of which may have affected the accuracy of the findings. Because of these and other limitations, the researchers note that, although their findings highlight several important questions about the treatment of MDR-TB, randomized controlled trials are urgently needed to determine the optimal treatment for MDR-TB. Please access these Web sites via the online version of this summary at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001300.