Eurosurveillance - Volume 23, Issue 14, 05 April 2018

: The foreign-born population make up an increasing and large proportion of tuberculosis (TB) cases in European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA) low-incidence countries and challenge TB elimination efforts. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to determine effectiveness (yield and performance of chest radiography (CXR) to detect active TB, treatment outcomes and acceptance of screening) and a second systematic review on cost-effectiveness of screening for active TB among migrants living in the EU/EEA. Results: We identified six systematic reviews, one report and three individual studies that addressed our aims. CXR was highly sensitive (98%) but only moderately specific (75%). The yield of detecting active TB with CXR screening among migrants was 350 per 100,000 population overall but ranged widely by host country (110–2,340), migrant type (170–1,192), TB incidence in source country (19–336) and screening setting (220–1,720). The CXR yield was lower (19.6 vs 336/100,000) and the numbers needed to screen were higher (5,076 vs 298) among migrants from source countries with lower TB incidence (≤ 50 compared with ≥ 350/100,000). Cost-effectiveness was highest among migrants originating from high (> 120/100,000) TB incidence countries. The foreign-born had similar or better TB treatment outcomes than those born in the EU/EEA. Acceptance of CXR screening was high (85%) among migrants. Discussion: Screening programmes for active TB are most efficient when targeting migrants from higher TB incidence countries. The limited number of studies identified and the heterogeneous evidence highlight the need for further data to inform screening programmes for migrants in the EU/EEA.

Migrants account for a large and growing proportion of tuberculosis (TB) cases in low-incidence countries in the European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA) which are primarily due to reactivation of latent TB infection (LTBI). Addressing LTBI among migrants will be critical to achieve TB elimination. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to determine effectiveness (performance of diagnostic tests, efficacy of treatment, uptake and completion of screening and treatment) and a second systematic review on cost-effectiveness of LTBI screening programmes for migrants living in the EU/EEA. Results: We identified seven systematic reviews and 16 individual studies that addressed our aims. Tuberculin skin tests and interferon gamma release assays had high sensitivity (79%) but when positive, both tests poorly predicted the development of active TB (incidence rate ratio: 2.07 and 2.40, respectively). Different LTBI treatment regimens had low to moderate efficacy but were equivalent in preventing active TB. Rifampicin-based regimens may be preferred because of lower hepatotoxicity (risk ratio = 0.15) and higher completion rates (82% vs 69%) compared with isoniazid. Only 14.3% of migrants eligible for screening completed treatment because of losses along all steps of the LTBI care cascade. Limited economic analyses suggest that the most cost-effective approach may be targeting young migrants from high TB incidence countries. Discussion: The effectiveness of LTBI programmes is limited by the large pool of migrants with LTBI, poorly predictive tests, long treatments and a weak care cascade. Targeted LTBI programmes that ensure high screening uptake and treatment completion will have greatest individual and public health benefit.