Back

Tongue swab Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra testing for tuberculosis in adolescents: a cross-sectional study of diagnostic accuracy and acceptability

MacLean, E. L.; Ma, T. T.; Chuong, L. H.; Minh, K. H.; Hoddinott, G.; Pham, Y. N.; Tiep, H. T.; Nguyen, T.-A.; Fox, G.; Nguyen, N. T.

2026-04-25 infectious diseases
10.64898/2026.04.17.26351119 medRxiv
Show abstract

Introduction Improved diagnostics are needed for people at risk of tuberculosis, especially adolescents. Tongue swab (TS) molecular testing has emerged as a promising strategy for tuberculosis diagnosis. We evaluated diagnostic accuracy and acceptability of Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert) using TS samples for tuberculosis detection among adolescents. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study with consecutive recruitment in Vietnam. Adolescents aged 10-19 who were recommended to undergo investigation for tuberculosis and had not received tuberculosis treatment in the past years were eligible. Participants provided TS and sputum samples and completed a structured survey regarding sampling experiences. TS was tested on Xpert, with sputum tested on Xpert and liquid culture. We utilised a composite reference standard of a positive result on sputum Xpert or sputum culture to define disease status. Sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic yield were calculated for TS Xpert. Results From July to December 2025, we enrolled 225 adolescents from Can Tho and An Giang provinces in southern Vietnam. Fewer than half (96/225, 43%) the participants exhibited a tuberculosis -like symptom, and the majority (157/225, 70%) were close contacts of a person recently diagnosed with tuberculosis. TS were collected from all adolescents, while 116 (52%) could provide mucopurulent sputum. Tuberculosis prevalence was relatively low (12/225, 5.3%). TS Xpert sensitivity (90% CI) and specificity (90% CI) were 58.3% (35.6, 78.0) and 99.5% (97.9, 99.9), respectively. Diagnostic yield among all diagnosed was 58.3% (7/12). TS sampling was highly acceptable to adolescents; the short time and simplicity of collecting TS were considered favourably. Conclusions The sensitivity and diagnostic yield of TS Xpert was relatively low among adolescents recommended for tuberculosis investigation, which includes asymptomatic individuals who may not provide high quality sputum. Specificity was excellent, and everyone could provide a TS. TS high acceptability indicates it remains a promising sample for diagnostic algorithms.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
14.4%
2
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
14.1%
3
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.9%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 34%
4.2%
5
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
134 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.9%
6
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
7
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.0%
8
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.0%
9
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
60 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.0%
10
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.8%
11
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
12
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.6%
13
Epidemiology and Infection
84 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.0%
14
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
15
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
16
The Lancet Microbe
43 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
17
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 65%
1.3%
18
Thorax
32 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
19
Journal of Clinical Virology
62 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
20
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
21
European Respiratory Journal
54 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
39 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
23
Infectious Diseases
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
24
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
25
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
378 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
27
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
28
Journal of Infection and Public Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
29
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
30
Journal of Global Antimicrobial Resistance
15 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%