TB blood tests, like QFT-Plus, provide the convenience of a single patient visit with electronic reporting and accurate results. Find out more about TB testing.
TB Management

TB Testing

TB testing is critical because it allows us to identify individuals who have been infected with TB bacteria, even if they have not yet developed active TB disease. This helps prevent the spread of the disease and reduce its impact on the community. Find out types of TB infection testing.

Stop TB in its tracks with TB testing

TB infection occurs when a person is infected with the bacteria that cause TB but does not have active TB disease. In other words, the bacteria are present in the body, but the person does not feel sick or experience any symptoms. TB bacteria can live in the body for years without causing any harm, but in some cases, the bacteria can become active and cause active TB disease.

TB is a major public health issue affecting millions of people worldwide, and it can significantly impact healthcare systems and economies. TB testing is important because it can lead to early treatment and better health outcomes. Additionally, by diagnosing and treating TB infection early, we can help prevent the spread of the disease and reduce its impact on the community.

TB is a major public health issue affecting millions of people worldwide, and it can significantly impact healthcare systems and economies.

Types of TB infection testing

When it comes to testing for TB infection, there are two main options: the Interferon-Gamma Release Assay (IGRA), also known as the blood test, and the Tuberculin Skin Test (TST), simply known as the skin test.

The IGRA test uses a blood sample to measure the immune response to TB-specific antigens, while the TST involves injecting a small amount of TB antigen under the skin and measuring the immune response.

Differences between TST and TB blood tests (IGRAs)

Tuberculin skin test (TST)

  • Requires two or more patient visits to conduct the test
  • Results are available 48 to 72 hours later
  • Reading by healthcare workers may be subjective
  • ?
    BCG vaccination can cause false-positive results
  • No test controls, not possible to assess the quality of test administration
  • Initial test can boost future reactions

TB blood test

  • Requires one patient visit to conduct the test
  • Results can be available in 24 hours
  • Laboratory test with objective results
  • BCG vaccination does not cause false-positive results
  • Use of positive and negative controls
  • Test does not cause boosted reaction

QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) is the world’s leading TB blood test (IGRA). It’s the simpler, more affordable way to test for TB infection, producing more accurate results than the century-old TST. Here are the major differences between the two:

  • QFT-Plus has >94% sensitivity and >97% specificity.
  • QFT-Plus is unaffected by the BCG vaccine, reducing the risk of false positives.
  • QFT-Plus uses a lab-controlled assay that provides clear, objective results.
Curious to see how QFT-Plus can protect all at-risk patients?
One visit, one tube, one objective result – discover why more providers choose QFT-Plus, making it the world’s #1 TB blood test.
Learn more

TB testing for accurate TB detection

Over the past 15 years, laboratory-based TB IGRAs have been transforming screening programs with higher accuracy, operational advantages and improved convenience. QuantiFERON technology has been the subject of over 2000 clinical and scientific studies.

QFT-Plus for TB testing uses an IGRA to measure the T cell immune response to MTB and provides the convenience of a single patient visit with electronic reporting, quantitative results and high accuracy. It is endorsed by the WHO, embraced by the UN and IPPA and among the WHO’s 120 essential diagnostic tests.

Watch Dr. Riccardo Alagna discuss the performance of QFT-Plus in different patient categories.

References:

  1. QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) ELISA Package Insert. Current QFT-Plus package inserts are available at www.QIAGEN.com
  2. Diel, R., Loddenkemper, R., and Nienhaus, A. (2010) Chest 137, 952.
  3. Harada, N. et al. (2008) J. Infect. 56, 348.