Inferred analytical accuracies of the whole genome mutation library and three commercial molecular tests for resistance. In silico analysis of published sequence data using mutation libraries derived from XpertMTB/RIF (Cepheid Inc., USA) (purple), MTBDRsl (red) and MTBDRplus (orange) (Hain Life Sciences, Germany), and the curated whole genome library (blue). For each library in silico inferred resistance phenotypes were compared to reported phenotypes obtained from conventional drug susceptibility testing. Errors bars correspond to 95% confidence intervals. Abbreviations: AMK, amikacin; CAP, capreomycin; EMB, ethambutol; ETH, ethionamide; INH, Isoniazid; KAN, kanamycin; MDR, multi-drug resistance; MOX, moxifloxacin; OFX, ofloxacin; PZA, pyrazinamide; RMP, rifampicin; STR, streptomycin; XDR, extensive drug resistance.
Comparative Analysis of Whole Genome Sequencing
Corresponding Organization :
Other organizations : London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, University of Nottingham, University of Sydney, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, National Institute of Health Dr. Ricardo Jorge, University of Lisbon, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Aga Khan University Hospital, Birkbeck, University of London
Protocol cited in 46 other protocols
Variable analysis
- Whole genome sequencing comparison
- Three commercial tests: (1) Xpert MTB/RIF, (2) LPA MTBDRplus, and (3) LPA MTBDRsl
- Analytical sensitivities and specificities of the inferred resistance relative to the reported phenotype
- Phenotypic drug susceptibility testing (DST) results used as the reference standard
- Phenotypic drug susceptibility testing (DST) results used as the reference standard (positive control)
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!