Prioritizing Tuberculosis 

Genotype Clusters for 

Further Investigation 

& Public Health Action

iii

August 2017

For more information, contact

Division of Tuberculosis Elimination

National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

1600 Clifton Road NE

MS E-10

Atlanta, GA 30333

Phone: 1-888-300-4261

E-mail: tbgenotyping@cdc.gov.

Web address: http://www.cdc.gov/tb/

This report is accessible via the internet at http://www.cdc.gov/tb/programs/genotyping/default.htm

Suggested Citation: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype 

Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and 

Human Services, CDC; 2017. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/tb/programs/genotyping/default.htm.

All material in this report is in the public domain and may be reproduced or copied without permission; 

however, citation as to source is requested.
iv

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

This report was prepared by collaborators of an Outbreak Detection Work Group and

CDC’s Division of Tuberculosis Elimination

Outbreak Detection Work Group

Martin Cilnis, M.P.H., M.S., California Department of Public Health

Jason Cummins, M.P.H., Tennessee Department of Health

Wendy Cronin, Ph.D., M.S., Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene

Lauren DiMiceli, Dr.P.H. M.S.P.H., Georgia Department of Public Health

Richard Doggett, Florida Department of Health

Cheryl Kearns, M.P.H., New York State Department of Health

Laura Lane, M.P.H., Texas Department of State Health Services

Nancy Robinson, M.P.H., Alabama Department of Public Health

Lynn Sosa, M.D., Connecticut Department of Public Health

Trudy Stein-Hart, M.S., Tennessee Department of Health

Tambi Shaw, M.P.H., California Department of Public Health

Jeanne Sullivan Meissner, M.P.H., New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene

Shameer Poonja, M.P.H., Los Angeles County Department of Public Health

Division of Tuberculosis Elimination

Benjamin Silk, Ph.D., M.P.H.

Anne Marie France, Ph.D., M.P.H.

Tracie Gardner, Ph.D., M.S.

Smita Ghosh, M.S.

J. Steve Kammerer, M.B.A.

Lauren A. Lambert, M.P.H.

Clinton McDaniel, M.P.H., C.P.H.

Krista Powell, M.D., M.P.H

Sandy Althomsons, M.P.H.

Maryam B. Haddad, M.S.N., M.P.H., F.N.P.

Jonathan Wortham, M.D., F.A.A.P. 

Mark Miner, B.S.Ed.
v

August 2017

Table of Contents

I. Purpose .

II. Overview of TB Genotype Clusters .

A. What is a TB genotype cluster?  

B. What is a genotype cluster investigation? 

C. Why prioritize genotype clusters? .

III. Establishing a Cluster Prioritization Process .

A. Identify key staff and establish roles 

B. Determine how to identify clusters 

C. Establish key criteria for cluster review, prioritization, and public health action 

IV. Considerations for Prioritizing Cluster Investigations .

A. Determine if the cluster likely represents recent transmission  

B. Identify concerning characteristics in a cluster 

C. Additional considerations  

V. Suggested Steps and Outcomes of the Prioritization Process  

Step 1: Identify readily available data sources for genotype cluster review  

Step 2: Establish the current priority level of the cluster 

Step 3: Establish action items and next steps 

Step 4: Obtain additional information that is not readily available .

Step 5: Identify resource needs and key partners 

Step 6: Document review and decisions . 

Step 7: Follow up and reconsider cluster prioritization as applicable . 
vi

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

VI. Examples of Prioritizing Genotype Clusters .

Example 1: Assessment of a Priority 3 cluster in County B, a jurisdiction with

TB incidence higher than the national average   

Example 2: Assessment of a Priority 2 cluster in County B  .

Example 3: Reprioritization of a cluster to Priority 1 in County B . 

Example 4: Assessment of a genotype cluster in County C,

a jurisdiction with TB incidence lower than the national average  .

VII. Appendix .

A. Key Terms . 

B. How do TB contact investigations differ from genotype cluster investigations 

and outbreak investigations? . 
1

August 2017

I. Purpose

Routine, systematic review of clusters of tuberculosis (TB) cases with matching genotypes can help

determine which clusters to prioritize for public health action. This guidance document can assist state and 

local TB programs in developing policies and procedures for prioritizing TB genotype clusters for further

investigation. Prioritization is especially important for jurisdictions where investigating all TB genotype

clusters may be too resource intensive.

This guidance document will present background information on TB genotype cluster investigations and why 

they are important, describe how a program can establish a cluster prioritization process, and suggest considerations for assessing and prioritizing clusters for public health action. To illustrate how a TB program could 

employ a cluster prioritization system, hypothetical examples and key concepts have been included. 

Additional information on the National TB Genotyping Service is included in the Appendix under Key Terms.

II. Overview of TB Genotype Clusters

A. What is a TB genotype cluster?

A TB genotype cluster can be defined as two or more TB cases with matching genotypes. A cluster definition 

usually includes place and time components, such as “TB cases with a matching genotype diagnosed in 

County A during the previous 3 years (e.g., in January 2016, cases diagnosed with a matching genotype

in County A since January 2013).”

Nationally, a genotype cluster is defined as two or more TB cases diagnosed during a specified 3-year time 

period with Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis) isolates that match by spacer oligonucleotide typing 

(spoligotyping) and 24-locus variable-number tandem repeat of mycobacterial interspersed repetitive unit 

(MIRU-VNTR) analysis results. Based on these results, cluster naming systems called PCRType and GENType

were developed (1).

B. What is a genotype cluster investigation?

A TB genotype cluster investigation is a systematic process to:

• Determine whether a group of TB cases with matching genotypes are related by recent transmission; 

and

• Identify epidemiologic links and potential sites of transmission among patients.

In doing so, it may be possible to identify contacts not originally identified during contact investigations, other 

opportunities for public health intervention, and false-positive TB cultures (2).

Some of the important differences between contact investigations, genotype cluster investigations, and

outbreak investigations might be unfamiliar to public health practitioners. For additional information

on these types of investigations, see Appendix B.
2

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

C. Why prioritize genotype clusters?

A key goal of the prioritization process is to identify clusters of concern due to the

• Presence of patient characteristics associated with recent transmission; or

• Likelihood of ongoing or future transmission.

Cluster prioritization can help a health department focus resources on where interventions can have the 

greatest impact, benefiting individual patients and the larger community. Considerations for prioritizing 

cluster investigations will vary, but should always be consistent with local public health priorities and available 

resources. TB cluster investigations should not take precedence over treating active cases and conducting contact investigations, although cluster investigation results can inform these and other core TB control activities.

Additionally, not all TB clusters require further investigation; a quick review of available data might

determine that a cluster is a low-priority for further investigation or public health action. However, cluster 

prioritization is a dynamic and ongoing process. Assessments of a cluster can change with new information or 

if additional genotype-matched cases are identified.

III. Establishing a Cluster Prioritization Process

Health departments can improve their ability to respond to genotype clusters by establishing a cluster

prioritization process and planning in advance how the program will respond to each priority level.

This process should also involve clearly outlining in advance who will be involved in the prioritization

process and how they will respond. The cluster review process will vary across programs and depend

on multiple factors, including the jurisdiction’s TB incidence and epidemiology, staff resources, and program 

organization. However, collaboration and communication between state and local programs and other stakeholders is a crucial component to successfully assessing TB clusters. The following is an outline

of considerations for establishing a process to review and prioritize cluster investigations.

A. Identify key staff and establish roles

• Identify person(s) responsible for routine review of genotyping data and clustered cases.

• Identify key personnel and communication processes for cluster assessment and prioritization,

additional decision-making, and related resource allocation and communication.

In some jurisdictions, the state TB genotyping coordinator might review all new or growing genotype 

clusters routinely. A larger team may be convened on a reoccurring or as needed basis to discuss

clusters of concern, coordinate additional information gathering, and establish related action items.
3

August 2017

B. Determine how to identify clusters

• Genotype clusters may be identified in a number of ways, including:

» Discussions with local health department staff and other partners who suspect new clusters before 

genotyping results are available.

» Use of TB Genotyping Information Management System (TB GIMS) to

• Routinely identify and review all clusters in a jurisdiction;

• Selectively review those clusters that have generated TB GIMS alerts based 

on log-likelihood ratio (LLR) calculations; and

• Create personalized notifications through a TB GIMS watch list.

» Creation of local or state algorithms to detect clustering of TB cases geographically and

in a given time frame.

» Discussions with CDC about clusters of concern identified through other means, such as SaTScan or 

LOTUS detection.

C. Establish key criteria for cluster review, prioritization, and public health action

• Determine which clusters will be reviewed.

» Some jurisdictions may review all genotype clusters, whereas others may choose to focus

on new or growing clusters or on TB GIMS alerted clusters only.

» All jurisdictions should consider reviewing previously identified clusters as new cases are added.

• Determine how often clusters will be reviewed. Clusters may be reviewed:

» At regular intervals (e.g., weekly or monthly),

» Whenever a new cluster alerts,

» Whenever new genotyping results are available, or

» Upon request from federal, state, or local programs.

• Define a tiered system that clearly defines cluster priority levels and corresponding action steps.

» One example is a 3-tiered priority system, as described in Table 1.

» Alternatively, some programs might prefer a simpler 2-tiered approach (i.e., investigation

warranted, investigation not warranted at this time).
4

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

Table 1: Example Cluster Prioritization System

Priority Level Description Action

Priority 1 • Clusters with multiple characteristics indicating 

possible recent transmission1

• Multiple characteristics associated with poor patient 

outcomes

• Cases are recent enough that public health

intervention is possible

Convene meetings

to review available data with 

stakeholders and actively seek 

additional information.

Priority 2 • Clusters with some characteristics indicating

possible recent transmission

• Some characteristics associated with poor patient 

outcomes

• Cases are recent enough that public health

intervention is possible

Monitor for additional cases 

with a matching genotype, or 

clinical cases that may share 

characteristics with

other cases in the cluster.2

Priority 3 • Clusters with minimal or no characteristics

indicating possible recent transmission

• Minimal or no characteristics associated with poor 

patient outcomes

• Cases are not recent enough that public health 

intervention is possible

No additional public health 

action indicated at this time.

IV. Considerations for Prioritizing Cluster Investigations

The decision to prioritize a genotype cluster for investigation is multifactorial. The following sets of questions 

can help frame key considerations for prioritizing cluster investigations.

A. Determine if the cluster likely represents recent transmission

• Is the cluster comprised of cases with a new genotype in the county or state?

• Is it the same genotype as a known outbreak?

• Has the cluster grown rapidly in the past 2–3 years?

• Does the cluster include children under 5 years of age?

• Do patients in the cluster have evidence of recent infection (e.g., tuberculin skin test conversions3)?

• Is the genotype rare nationally?

1. See Section IV A and B of this document for additional information on characteristics indicative of recent transmission.

2. Consider monitoring for additional cases matching the genotype of interest by using a “watch list” feature and periodically 

reviewing the TB GIMS National Distribution Report. 

3. For more information, consult the following references: Guidelines for the Investigation of Contacts of Persons with Infectious 

Tuberculosis and Targeted Tuberculin Testing and Treatment of Latent Tuberculosis Infection (8,11).
5

August 2017

For example, in reviewing the line list of a concerning cluster in Figure 1A, there is evidence of recent transmission. 

Note the recent increase in the number of cases and the diagnosis of TB in an infant.

Figure 1A: Line list of patient characteristics and TB risk factors from TB GIMS, GENType G28538, County A, 

2013–2016

Case Count 

Date Gender Race/

Ethnicity

Age 

Group

Origin 

of Birth GENType Sputum 

Smear Cavitary Drug 

Resistance HIV Substance 

Use Corrections Homeless

Case 6 11/20/2015 Male Black 45–64 U.S.-

born G28538 Positive Yes None Negative Yes No Yes

Case 5 11/10/2015 Female Black 00–04 U.S.-

born G28538 Not Done No None Negative No No No

Case 4 09/16/2015 Male Black 25–44 U.S.-

born G28538 Positive Yes None Positive Yes No Yes

Case 3 05/15/2014 Female Asian 25–44 U.S.-

born G28538 Negative No None Negative No No No

Case 2 01/20/2014 Male Asian 25–44 U.S.-

born G28538 Positive No None Negative Yes No No

Case 1 02/08/2013 Male Asian 25–44 U.S.-

born G28538 Positive Yes None Negative No No No

Upon review of the national distribution of the GENType in TB GIMS, TB program staff determined it to be unique 

to their jurisdiction (i.e., not seen anywhere else in the United States), further increasing their suspicion of recent 

transmission in County A.

B. Identify concerning characteristics in a cluster

• Is there evidence to suggest that transmission is ongoing? For example, are there multiple cases

in the previous 12 months?

• Are recent patients in the cluster sputum smear-positive or do patients have cavitary lesions

(i.e., suggestive of infectious TB)?

• Did any recent patients have prolonged infectious periods before diagnosis?

• Is a homeless shelter, correctional institution, or other congregate setting involved?

• Do patients have risk factors, such as substance use, that can be associated with difficult

or incomplete contact investigations?

• Do patients and their contacts have similar risk factors that suggest an increased risk for disease

progression—such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or renal failure?

• Do any patients have drug-resistant TB?

• Were any cases found among contacts missed by previous contact investigations? Could other

contacts have also been missed?

• Were any cases among persons previously identified as contacts but not fully evaluated or treated? 

Could other contacts be at risk?

• Are epidemiologic links among patients unclear or not identified, or is there reason to suspect that 

contact investigations have not been adequately thorough?
6

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

Review again the line list of a concerning cluster in Figure 1B, with markers of infectious TB (i.e., positive sputum 

smears and/or cavitary lesions) and clinical and social TB risk factors (i.e., HIV, substance use, homelessness) among 

patients noted (3).

Figure 1B: Line list of patient characteristics and TB risk factors from TB GIMS, GENType G28538,

County A, 2013–2016

Case Count Date Gender Race/

Ethnicity

Age 

Group

Origin 

of Birth GENType Sputum 

Smear Cavitary Drug 

Resistance HIV Substance 

Use Corrections Homeless

Case 6 11/20/2015 Male Black 45–64 U.S.-

born G28538 Positive Yes None Negative Yes No Yes

Case 5 11/10/2015 Female Black 00–04 U.S.-

born G28538 Not Done No None Negative No No No

Case 4 09/16/2015 Male Black 25–44 U.S.-

born G28538 Positive Yes None Positive Yes No Yes

Case 3 05/15/2014 Female Asian 25–44 U.S.-

born G28538 Negative No None Negative No No No

Case 2 01/20/2014 Male Asian 25–44 U.S.-

born G28538 Positive No None Negative Yes No No

Case 1 02/08/2013 Male Asian 25–44 U.S.-

born G28538 Positive Yes None Negative No No No

C. Additional considerations

• The cluster review process should also consider non-genotyped or clinical TB cases that may be related 

to the cluster. Consult TB GIMS or other local surveillance databases for non-genotyped cases in the same 

time frame and geographic area that have similar demographic and clinical characteristics as cases in the 

cluster of interest.

• Consider consulting the National Distribution Report in TB GIMS if there is concern that additional related 

cases with the genotype of interest have occurred in other jurisdictions. Discuss the possibility of epidemiologic linkages with the state TB program or CDC as appropriate, especially if the genotype is rare 

(i.e., not commonly seen nationally).

• The cluster review process might also include an assessment of cases with closely related GENTypes, 

especially those that have a single locus variant (i.e., a difference for only one of the 24-locus MIRU-VNTR 

results) or have a mixed and missing loci (i.e., designated in MIRU-VNTR results as a “%” and ”-“, 

respectively) that otherwise matches the GENType of interest. Investigation of recent transmission 

among single locus variants (SLV) or mixed and missing loci (MML) cases might be warranted if they are 

epidemiologically linked or share similar characteristics to case(s) with the primary GENType of interest. 

The extent to which TB programs chose to investigate cases with closely related GENTypes will depend 

on an assessment of available resources and an understanding of local TB epidemiology. Additional tools 

are available in TB GIMS to assist local jurisdictions in identifying cases with an SLV or an MML in relation 

to a primary cluster of interest.4

4. Programs can review cases with a single locus variant or a mixed or missing loci report in TB GIMS by selecting “Single Locus 

Variant (GENType)” or “Mixed and Missing Loci (GENType)” under the report field on the “Generate Reports” page.
7

August 2017

• About two-thirds (65%) of all GENType clusters are made up of only two cases. State and local

TB programs may choose to prioritize two-case clusters under specific circumstances such as:

» At least one of the patients has multidrug-resistant TB;

» At least one of the patients is less than 5 years old;

» The GENType is rare and both patients reside in the same local area; or

» One or more patients has locally identified characteristics of concern such as a shared 

setting where transmission is suspected

False-positive culture results can occur due to cross contamination or mislabeling during specimen 

collection or during processing in the laboratory. Laboratory cross-contamination has been reported 

to occur in up to 3% of M. tuberculosis isolates (4). To detect false-positive TB culture results, some 

jurisdictions will routinely review specimen collection and laboratory processing dates for all patients 

in new genotype clusters. Cross-contamination should be considered when M. tuberculosis is cultured 

from a patient specimen that is collected on the same date or processed in the same batch as another 

specimen (especially when a patient does not have symptoms consistent with pulmonary TB). If there is a 

suspicion that laboratory results may be the result of an error, discuss with laboratory partners and other 

appropriate stakeholders. Detecting and identifying false-positive culture results can avoid unnecessary 

TB treatment and unwarranted cluster investigations. Additional information on investigating falsepositive culture results has been described elsewhere (5).

V. Suggested Steps and Outcomes of the Prioritization Process

The following steps are intended as a guide for reviewing and prioritizing TB genotype clusters. The sequence 

of steps and extent to which the steps are conducted may differ depending on each genotype cluster and 

should be based on available resources.

Step 1: Identify readily available data sources for genotype cluster review

TB GIMS provides patient-level information (e.g., demographic, clinical, and social characteristics) from the 

National TB Surveillance System, as well as the local, state, and national distribution of the cluster’s genotype.

Additional data sources that may be readily available include:

• State and local surveillance data and/or case management databases;

• Existing interview notes and contact investigation records for cases;

• Case managers, directly observed therapy workers, clinicians, laboratorians, or other health

department staff who interact most closely with the patients; and

• Any other relevant records, such as past investigations of the cluster.
8

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

Step 2: Establish the current priority level of the cluster

After review and discussion with stakeholders, assign a priority level for the cluster as described in Section III C 

above. This determination should be based on the likelihood for recent transmission in the jurisdiction and 

the level of concern for future growth.

Step 3: Establish action items and next steps

Decide whether public health intervention is indicated (i.e., actively seeking additional information that 

is not readily available). If intervention is not indicated, it may be possible to progress to Step 6 below 

(i.e., skip Steps 4 and 5).

If intervention is indicated:

• Assign responsibilities for next steps based on the locally established cluster prioritization system, 

including roles, expectations, and timeline for reconvening to discuss further; and

• Consider whether additional communication with stakeholders would be helpful, such

as frontline staff who may be aware of potential epidemiologic links between seemingly

unrelated patients. If warranted, identify who should lead the communication efforts.

Step 4: Obtain additional information that is not readily available

To actively seek additional information, consider the following approaches:

• Discuss with frontline TB staff;

• Conduct patient re-interviews;

• Re-review medical records; and

• Conduct other record searches as appropriate (i.e., social media5, fee-based online record

searches6, and other social service databases7).

In some jurisdictions, the state TB genotyping coordinator might examine all the genotyping,

surveillance, and contact investigation data available at the state level, and then determine whether 

additional investigation is warranted.

5. Social media searches should focus on websites that are most popular in the demographic group of interest; dating websites and 

named-based queries using search engines can also be considered.

6. Fee-based online record search services are available that can provide additional information that may be useful in identifying 

epidemiologic links among patients.

7. Social service databases to consider include: jail/prison databases, homeless shelter databases such as the Homeless

Management Information System (HMIS), and healthcare facility databases.
9

August 2017

Due to the concerning factors identified in the G28538 cluster, County A TB program staff convened a case review 

meeting with frontline staff, clinic staff, epidemiologists, and the program manager. During the case review, staff 

were able to identify a previously unrecognized epidemiologic link between Cases 2 and 6. They also communicated 

known epidemiologic links between the three 2015 cases—Cases 4, 5, and 6. Based on this information, the County 

A TB program initiated an investigation to review the contact investigations of all the cases in this cluster and possible sites of transmission, including local homeless shelters where two patients in the cluster may have stayed.

Figure 1C: Social Network Diagram of G28538 in County A, 2013–2016

2013 2014 2015

Case 1 Case 2

Case 4

Case 6

Case 3 Case 5

H

SA

H

SA

+

Legend

Purple = Characteristics consistent with infectious TB

Teal = Lack of characteristics consistent with infectious TB

– = Epidemiologic link

H = History of homelessness

SA = History of substance use

+ = Human immunodeficiency virus positive

Note: Although TB programs define an epidemiologic link between two patients differently, the process of identifying 

epidemiologic links may help TB program staff better understand how, where, and when transmission may have 

occurred. By understanding how patients are epidemiologically linked, transmission patterns can be identified and 

public health interventions can be implemented. Additional information on epidemiologic links, transmission links, 

and how they relate to TB outbreak investigations can be found in the Centers for Disease Control’s Self-Study 

Module 9: Tuberculosis Outbreak Detection and Response (6).

Step 5: Identify resource needs and key partners

• What level and types of resources will the health department need to investigate the cluster?

To intervene?

• If the cluster involves a challenging or difficult-to-access population, consider identifying key 

stakeholders and community resources that could be of assistance. These could include homeless 

shelters, community representatives, and advocacy organizations.
10

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

Step 6: Document review and decisions

Develop a systematic method for documenting cluster assessments and actions taken. This could

be accomplished by maintaining a simple cluster tracking tool in a spreadsheet or word processing document. 

Consider capturing the following information:

• GENType/PCRType,

• Jurisdiction(s),

• Identification method (e.g., notification from local health jurisdiction, TB GIMS LLR alert,

TB GIMS watch list notification for previously identified cluster),

• Date of first identification,

• TB GIMS alert level (if applicable),

• Most recent date of team assessment,

• Most recent team assessment of the cluster (i.e., priority level)

• Justification/reason for assessment, and

• Public health action taken, if warranted.

A sample tool for tracking TB cluster assessments is shown in Figure 2. TB program staff developed a 

spreadsheet to track known clusters in their jurisdiction. In the spreadsheet, staff document when and 

how the cluster was identified, the team’s assessment, and any associated action steps based on the 

cluster prioritization.

Figure 2: Cluster Tracking Tool, County A

GENType/

PCRType Jurisdiction Identification 

Method

Date of First 

TB GIMS Alert

TB GIMS 

Alert Level

Most Recent Date of 

Team Assessment

Team Priority 

Assessment Action Taken

G28538 County A TB GIMS LLR alert 12/2/2015 Medium 12/3/2015 Priority 1 Initiate cluster investigation
11

August 2017

Step 7: Follow up and reconsider cluster prioritization as applicable

Follow up on action items and review new cases or additional information as it becomes available.

For example, reconsider the cluster priority when

• Additional GENType-matched cases are diagnosed, especially when there are more recent cases 

than expected,

• Common demographic characteristics or shared settings are identified or when the demographic 

characteristics of cases in the cluster change (e.g., shift from non-U.S.–born persons to U.S.-born

persons), or

• Cases with resistance to additional TB medications are detected.

• Based on the availability of resources, determine which cluster priority levels warrant re-review.

Considerations for when whole-genome sequencing might help focus 

public health action

Although conventional genotyping results help identify clusters that may represent recent

TB transmission, these methods have limitations. Genotype clustering can occur among cases that

are not related by recent transmission, especially for genotypes that are longstanding or common

in a particular population or geographic area. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and phylogenetic 

analysis use a much larger (~90%) portion of the M. tuberculosis genome, increasing the molecular 

resolution for determining the relatedness of cases.

WGS may provide additional information that can inform public health action by:

• Providing increased molecular resolution for a cluster of cases with a genotype that is common in 

the population or area;

• Identifying a subset of cases where recent transmission is more likely to be occurring during

an outbreak investigation; and

• Providing additional information that can distinguish cases attributable to recent transmission from 

cases that are due to reactivation of latent TB infection.

As of 2016, CDC’s Division of Tuberculosis Elimination began working with state and local partners to 

implement the use of WGS nationally, particularly for genotype-matched clusters of concern. Prospective 

WGS on all TB isolates in the United States will begin in the spring of 2018. Clusters identified through 

TB GIMS alerts are analyzed using whole-genome single nucleotide polymorphism (wgSNP) analysis. 

Additionally, wgSNP analysis on older isolates can be performed upon request. If a cluster investigation 

would benefit from wgSNP analysis, consult with appropriate TB program officials in your jurisdiction. 

Importantly, data collected during epidemiologic investigations are always needed to accurately interpret 

WGS results and identify likely transmission among patients. An optional WGS request form is available to 

assist programs in summarizing information useful for assessing WGS requests. 

To consult about a TB GIMS cluster alert, other TB clusters of concern, or to request whole-genome 

sequencing, e-mail tbgenotyping@cdc.gov.
12

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

VI. Examples of Prioritizing Genotype Clusters

Example 1: Assessment of a Priority 3 cluster in County B, a jurisdiction with

TB incidence higher than the national average

County B has a population of approximately 600,000 people primarily living in one city in the county, and typically 

reports about 40 TB cases per year. In 2014, the county reported 43 TB cases, corresponding to 7.2 cases per 100,000 

persons, which was higher than the national average (3.0 cases per 100,000 persons).

On September 23, 2015, County B received a TB GIMS alert for G17645 due to an increase in alert level from 

none to medium (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Sample email for a TB GIMS cluster alert for GENType G17645 in County B

Subject: TB GIMS (CDC) 

Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 7:01 AM

From: TB GIMS -- TB Genotype Cluster Alert -- County B, State B, G17645

This message is to notify you that the genotype cluster G17645 in County B, State B, has increased Alert Level 

from None to Medium as 09/23/2015. To review data on this genotype cluster, log into TB GIMS application. 

An increase in alert level indicates increased geographical clustering of a genotype in a specified county as 

compared to the rest of the United States, and might be an indicator of recent transmission of TB.

If you have questions about this message, please contact your state TB control program. If you have any 

questions about TB GIMS, please email the TB GIMS help desk at DTBESupport@cdc.gov

Please note that this e-mail is generated byTBGIMS application. For technical issues, please send e-mail to DTBESupport@cdc.gov.

During the regularly scheduled cluster review meeting, TB staff in County B determined this alert was

generated based on two cases—one in 2013 and one in 2015. Both were non-U.S.–born patients who were 

epidemiologically linked to each other as members of the same household. To assist in the review

of genotype clusters, staff routinely develop line lists of known clinical and epidemiologic information (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Line list of patient characteristics and TB risk factors from TB GIMS, GENType G17645, County B

Case Count 

Date Gender Race/

Ethnicity

Origin of 

Birth

Years 

in U.S.

Age 

Group GENType Sputum 

Smear Cavitary Drug 

Resistance HIV Substance 

Use Corrections Homeless

Case 2 9/13/2015 Male Asian non-U.S.–

born 32 45–64 G17645 Negative No None Negative No No No

Case 1 10/23/2013 Male Asian non-U.S.–

born 8 25–44 G17645 Negative No None Negative No No No

Because an epidemiologic link between these two patients was known and there was a lack of clinical 

characteristics consistent with infectious TB (e.g., sputum smear-positive or cavitary lesions) or other TB risk 

factors for cluster growth, staff suspected this cluster was unlikely to be due to recent transmission in the 

United States. Utilizing their pre-defined prioritization system, TB program staff designated this cluster as a 

Priority 3, indicating that no further public health action was indicated at this time.
13

August 2017

Key concepts from Example 1

• Conduct an assessment of a TB GIMS alert during recurring cluster meetings,

• Use readily available data (e.g., patient clinical and demographic characteristics, contact investigation 

records) for genotype cluster review

• Identify known epidemiologic links between cases (e.g., cases within a household),

• Utilize a pre-defined cluster prioritization system during the review process (e.g., Priority 1, Priority 2, 

and Priority 3), and

• Identify as a Priority 3 cluster and close to public health follow up at this time based on known

epidemiologic links and a low suspicion for ongoing transmission.

Example 2: Assessment of a Priority 2 cluster in County B

On February 22, 2015, County B received a TB GIMS e-mail alert message for GENType G56349 due

to an increase in alert level from none to medium. During the regularly scheduled cluster review meeting,

TB staff determined the alert was generated based on 2 cases: one in 2013 and one in 2015. Upon review

of their developed line list, staff identified that both cases were U.S.-born Hispanic males that had no reported 

social risk factors (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Line list of patient characteristics and TB risk factors from TB GIMS, GENType G56349, County B

Case Count 

Date Gender Age 

Group

Race/

Ethnicity

Origin 

of Birth GENType Sputum 

Smear Cavitary Drug 

Resistance HIV Substance 

Use Corrections Homeless

Case 2 7/20/2015 Male 25–44 Hispanic U.S.-

born G56349 Positive No None Negative No No No

Case 1 2/8/2013 Male 65+ Hispanic U.S.-

born G56349 Negative No Isoniazid Negative No No No

Based on the national distribution report in TB GIMS, staff recognized G56349 to be unique to County B. To 

assess for epidemiologic links among cases, TB program staff reviewed case data and readily available contact rosters for both patients and conducted social media searches to look for possible shared contacts. After 

review, no epidemiologic links were identified. Based on the available information and more than 12 months 

between diagnoses of these patients, the review team determined this cluster should be assigned a Priority 2, 

indicating no additional public health action is warranted at this time but that they should monitor for additional cases in the future. Given that both patients are U.S.-born, that this GENType is unique

in this jurisdiction,the cluster includes one patient with drug-resistant TB, and at least one patient has 

characteristics consistent with infectious TB, staff recognized that there may be unrecognized epidemiologic 

links among the patients; there could also be other potentially related cases with infectious TB that have yet 

to be diagnosed. Therefore, the TB program determined this cluster warrants monitoring for the diagnosis of 

additional cases.
14

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

To assist with monitoring this cluster, a staff member was assigned the task of creating a TB GIMS watch list for 

G56349 in County B (Figure 6).

Figure 6: Creating a watch list in TB GIMS to monitor activity related to GENType G56349 in County B

The TB GIMS view shown may differ based on user role and jurisdiction.

In the future, the TB GIMS user who created the watch list item will receive a notification (through TB GIMS or 

via email) if a new case has a matching GENType in County B. This notification will help prompt the

TB program staff to reassess the prioritization of this cluster.

TB program staff also wanted to monitor for clinical or non-genotyped cases with similar characteristics that 

may be related to this cluster. To review these cases, staff can view clinical or non-genotyped cases using local 

databases or through TB GIMS (Figure 7).

To assist in monitoring for cases with a matching GENType outside of their jurisdiction, the staff

member created a national-level watch list. Given this is a unique GENType in their jurisdiction,

this national-level watch list will alert staff to cases that may be diagnosed outside of their jurisdiction, 

but that may be related to their cluster.
15

August 2017

Figure 7: Querying clinical or non-genotyped TB cases in TB GIMS

“FBORN” is equivalent to “non-U.S.–born”

The TB GIMS view shown may differ based on user role and jurisdiction.

To view cases without genotype results in TB GIMS, users can select “not genotyped” under “Advanced

Options” in patient results. TB programs may also consult local TB surveillance databases to review clinical 

and non-genotyped cases that may be related to a genotype cluster of concern.

Key concepts from Example 2

• Assess a cluster based on available information,

• Utilize a national distribution report to review genotype matched cases diagnosed outside of the 

jurisdiction,

• Develop action items during review meeting (e.g., staff member tasked to generate watch list item, 

review national distribution report quarterly), and

• Create a TB GIMS watch list to monitor a cluster for future activity.
16

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

Example 3: Reprioritization of a cluster to Priority 1 in County B

On June 7, 2015, County B TB program staff received a TB GIMS watch list notification for GENType G56349 

(Figure 8) that had been previously determined to warrant monitoring for additional cases (see Example 2 above).

Figure 8: Sample TB GIMS watch list notification of additional cases of GENType G56349 in County B

From: TBGIMS (CDC) 

Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2015 at 6:46 AM 

To: TB GIMS user

Subject: TB GIMS Watch List | Genotype | G56349: Watch for additional cases

Importance: High

This message is to notify you that one or more recent changes have occurred in watch list item G56349: 

Watch for additional cases as of October 21, 2015.

To review data on this watch list item and your other watch list items, log in to TB GIMS.

If you have any questions about this message or TBGIMS in general, please contact your state TB GIMS 

Super User or. e-mail DTBESupport@cdc.gov

TB program staff reviewed cluster information in TB GIMS and determined that two additional cases with 

G56349 had been identified. Now, there are four cases with a GENType that is unique to County B in the past 

three years. TB program staff updated their previous cases to include the two new cases, and re-assessed the 

cluster during their weekly cluster review meeting (Figure 9).

Figure 9: Updated line list of patient characteristics and TB risk factors from TB GIMS, GENType G56349, County B

Case Count 

Date Gender Age 

Group

Race/

Ethnicity

Origin 

of Birth GENType Sputum 

Smear Cavitary Drug 

Resistance HIV Substance 

Use Corrections Homeless

Case 4 09/01/2015 Female 45–64 Black U.S.-

born G56349 Positive Yes None Negative No No No

Case 3 08/16/2015 Female 25–44 Asian U.S.-

born G56349 Negative No None Negative No No No

Case 2 7/20/2015 Male 25–44 Hispanic U.S.-

born G56349 Positive No None Negative No No No

Case 1 2/8/2013 Male 65+ Hispanic U.S.-

born G56349 Negative No Isoniazid Negative No No No

Upon re-review of the cluster, staff noted a lack of social risk factors. However, two new cases have been 

diagnosed in a month, of which, one new case had potentially infectious TB. The increase in the number 

of cases in G56349 in a 2 month period, indicate there has likely been recent transmission associated with 

this GENType. As a result, the team reprioritized the cluster from a Priority 2 to a Priority 1. A Priority 1 

classification had been previously determined to indicate active investigation of the cluster. Staff members 

were assigned responsibility for initiating a cluster investigation of all four patients involving 1) medical 

chart data abstractions, 2) social media searches, and 3) re-interviewing each patient with a specific cluster 

investigation questionnaire.

Through active investigation, program staff were able to identify additional contacts not previously screened 

during the initial contact investigations, possible sites of TB transmission at a church and a single-family home, 

and epidemiologic links between cases through shared contacts and locations. By identifying and prioritizing 

genotype clusters, the local TB staff were able to focus valuable resources on interrupting TB transmission in 

their county.
17

August 2017

Key concepts from Example 3

• Review a watch list item that generates a notification for recent activity related to a previously

reviewed cluster,

• Identify patient characteristics consistent with recent transmission, 

• Identify patient characteristics that increase the level of concern for potential cluster growth

(e.g., infectiousness, homelessness, substance use, HIV), and

• Illustrate how TB GIMS alerts can identify clusters that may represent recent transmission, reassess 

and prioritize a cluster based on new cases, and describe potential public health actions when recent 

transmission is suspected.

Example 4: Assessment of a genotype cluster in County C,

a jurisdiction with TB incidence lower than the national average

County C has a population of approximately 225,000 people and typically reports about four TB cases per year.

In 2014, the county reported five TB cases, corresponding to 2.2 cases per 100,000 persons, which was lower than 

the national average.

On January 13, 2016, County C received a TB GIMS message for G96482 due to an increase in alert level from 

none to medium. During the regularly scheduled cluster review meeting, staff determined this alert was 

generated based on two cases—one in 2014 and one in 2016. Program staff have elected to review and 

develop line lists of all genotype clusters in their jurisdiction (Figure 10).

Figure 10. Line list of patient characteristics and TB risk factors from TB GIMS, GENType G96482, County C

Case Count 

Date Gender Age 

Group

Race/

Ethnicity

Origin 

of Birth GENType Sputum 

Smear Cavitary Drug 

Resistance HIV Substance 

Use Corrections Homeless

Case 2 1/16/2016 Male 25–44 White U.S.-

born G96482 Positive Yes None Negative Yes No No

Case 1 11/17/2014 Male 25–44 White U.S.-

born G96482 Negative No None Negative Yes No No

Both cases were in patients who were U.S.-born white males in the same age group with a history of substance 

use. One of the cases had clinical characteristics consistent with infectious TB (i.e., sputum smear positive and 

cavitary lesions). Due to the low incidence of TB in County C, staff previously determined that any genotype 

cluster warranted further investigation for possible recent transmission. Based on this prioritization scheme, 

a public health staff member was assigned responsibility for 1) reviewing the contact investigations of each 

case for completeness and possible epidemiologic links, and 2) re-interviewing each patient with a specific 

cluster investigation questionnaire. 

Key concepts from Example 4

• Identify how a low incidence jurisdiction may choose to assess and investigate a genotype cluster, and

• Utilize a pre-defined cluster prioritization system during the review process (e.g. investigation

warranted, investigation not warranted).
18

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

VII. Appendix

A. Key Terms

Clinical TB Cases

A clinical TB case is defined by meeting all of the following criteria:

• A positive tuberculin skin test result or positive interferon gamma release assay for M. tuberculosis;

• Other signs and symptoms compatible with TB (e.g., abnormal chest radiograph, abnormal chest computerized tomography scan or other chest imaging study, or clinical evidence of current disease);

• Treatment with two or more anti-TB medications; and

• A completed diagnostic evaluation.

False-positive TB Culture (sometimes called “false-positive laboratory results”)

Persons can be misdiagnosed with TB as a result of specimen mislabeling or cross contamination during 

specimen collection or during processing in the laboratory. Alternatively, a patient may in fact have TB, but 

cross contamination from another TB isolate results in an incorrect genotyping result.

GENType

The sequential designation of codes for each nationally unique combination of spacer oligonucleotide typing 

(spoligotype) and 24-locus mycobacterial interspersed repetitive unit-variable number tandem repeat typing 

(MIRU-VNTR) results.

Log Likelihood Ratio (LLR)

In TB GIMS, a measure of the geographic concentration over time of a local genotype cluster compared with 

the national average. The local area for the LLR calculation is defined by county boundaries and the time 

period is defined as the preceding 3 years.

Large Outbreaks of Tuberculosis in the United States (LOTUS)

Routine surveillance for LOTUS was initiated by CDC in April 2014. Large outbreaks are defined as ≥10 genotype-matched cases within a 3-year period that are related by recent transmission. CDC identifies suspected 

large outbreaks quarterly and notifies programs. Programs are also encouraged to report outbreaks of ≥10 

cases with a 3-year period to CDC.

National TB Genotyping Service

TB genotyping is a laboratory-based approach used to characterize M. tuberculosis strains based on a distinct 

pattern (genotype) identified in specific regions of the TB genome. There are several genotyping methods 

that are used, including spacer oligonucleotide typing (spoligotyping), variable number tandem repeat of 

mycobacterial interspersed repetitive unit analysis (MIRU-VNTR), IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis, and whole genome sequencing (WGS). The National TB Genotyping Service 

performs universal genotyping for all culture-positive TB cases in the United States using spoligotyping and 

24-locus MIRU-VNTR analysis.
19

August 2017

PCRType

The sequential designation of codes for each nationally unique combination of spoligotype and 12-locus 

MIRU-VNTR results. The National TB Genotyping Service began routinely using these two PCR-based

methodologies in 2004. In 2009, MIRU-VNTR expanded the number of loci to 24 (see GENType above).

SaTScan

This software program analyzes spatial (and/or temporal) data using a scan statistic to detect geographically 

defined disease clusters and evaluate the statistical significance of each cluster. Significant localized 

concentrations of cases are detected by zip code location rather than by county or state borders.

Spacer Oligonucleotide Typing (spoligotyping)

Spoligotyping is a hybridization assay that detects variability in the direct repeat (DR) region in the DNA of 

M. tuberculosis. The DR region consists of multiple copies of a conserved 36-base-pair sequence (the direct 

repeats) separated by multiple unique spacer sequences (the standard spoligotyping assay uses 43). Different 

M. tuberculosis strains have various complements of the 43 spacers, and these different complements form the 

basis of the assay (7). Like MIRU-VNTR, this typing method yields results in a standardized code that can be 

easily analyzed and communicated between laboratories and TB programs.

Tuberculosis Genotyping Management System (TB GIMS)

The TB Genotyping Information Management System (TB GIMS) is a secure Web-based system which facilitates 

the linking of genotyping results with patient data reported to the National Tuberculosis Surveillance System, 

allowing users to review and analyze data related to TB genotype clusters. For questions about access to TB 

GIMS, contact TB GIMS staff by email at DTBESupport@cdc.gov.

TB GIMS LLR Alert

Cluster detection alerts in TB GIMS are based on a county-level log-likelihood ratio (LLR) statistic 

(see LLR above). Categories for the alert level:

• “High” (LLR≥10)

• “Medium” (LLR=5.0–9.99)

• “None” (LLR=0–4.99)

LLR calculations are performed each week and county-level clusters with an increase in alert level and case 

count (e.g., “None” to “Medium,” and 2 to 3 cases) are sent automatically by email to registered TB GIMS users 

who have requested these alerts.

TB GIMS Watch List

A watch list is a user-defined search established in TB GIMS for a specific genotype and jurisdiction that will 

flag and notify the user of recent activity when an additional isolate or linked patient record is added for the 

defined genotype.
20

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

24-locus variable-number tandem repeat of mycobacterial interspersed repetitive units (MIRU-VNTR)

MIRU-VNTR distinguishes M. tuberculosis strains by the difference in the number of copies of tandem repeats 

at specific regions, or loci, of the M. tuberculosis genome. Like spoligotyping, this typing method yields 

results in a standardized code that can be easily analyzed and communicated among laboratories and TB 

programs. A total of 41 MIRU loci have been reported. The National Tuberculosis Genotyping Service include 

24 loci, which results in a 24-digit code (e.g., 223225163324561333245623).

B. How do TB contact investigations differ from genotype cluster investigations 

and outbreak investigations?

Contact investigations, genotype cluster investigations, and outbreak investigations are important activities 

in TB control. The ultimate goals of these investigations are similar—to identify, evaluate, and treat active

TB cases and their contacts in order to interrupt transmission and prevent additional TB cases. In each

investigation, understanding infectious periods for active TB cases is critical for determining where and 

when transmission may have occurred. Table 2 describes some key differences between each type

of investigation.

Because outbreak investigations assess the overall potential for ongoing transmission of M. tuberculosis, 

outbreak investigations encompass contact and cluster investigation activities that may already be in

progress. Findings from contact investigations and cluster investigations are often the earliest indications

of an outbreak. For example, a contact investigation may identify ongoing transmission when numerous 

contacts have active TB disease. Similarly, a cluster investigation may identify new epidemiologic links

between cases, leading to the identification of more recent transmission than had been previously noted.

It is important to note that not all matching genotype results represent recent transmission. Successful 

investigation of cases and contacts, however, allows state and local TB programs to promptly identify recent 

transmission and implement appropriate interventions.

Additional information on contact investigations (8,9), cluster investigations (10), and outbreak

investigations (6) are available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
21

August 2017

Table 2: Key Differences between TB Contact Investigations, Clusters Investigations, and Outbreak Investigations

TB Contact 

Investigation

Genotype Cluster

Investigation

Outbreak

Investigation

= Case

= Contact

Focus Identify and treat TB infection

and active disease among 

contacts of the single patient 

recently diagnosed with TB.

Identify recent transmission

by considering possible 

relationships among TB cases 

that are genotypically-matched 

in a defined geographic area 

and time frame.

Identify and prioritize the 

contacts of the outbreak 

patients so that they can be 

promptly and appropriately 

evaluated and treated.

Emphasis Use information about a single 

TB case to identify, evaluate, 

and treat contacts of that case 

who may have been exposed 

during the patient’s infectious 

period; this is a routine part of 

TB control.

Identify epidemiologic links to 

help determine where, when, 

and by whom recent TB cases 

may have been infected.

Implement interventions 

that interrupt ongoing 

transmission.

Time frame 

of interest

Contacts are defined based

on the patient’s infectious 

period.

While genotype clusters in 

some jurisdictions can extend 

back over many years, cluster 

investigations typically focus 

on cases diagnosed in the 

last 2–3 years in a defined 

geographic area.

Outbreak investigations 

typically focuses on cases 

diagnosed in the last 

2–3 years in a defined 

geographic area and an 

indistinguishable outbreak 

genotype.

Personnel 

involved

Local public health staff, 

including the TB program 

manager, nurse case managers, 

and field-based staff.

In addition to staff who 

routinely conduct contact 

investigations, cluster 

investigations may also 

include local staff such as 

epidemiologists, or other 

TB professionals such as TB 

controllers, TB genotype 

coordinators, laboratorians, 

and other state TB programs.

Because an outbreak 

indicates that there is 

potential for extensive 

recent transmission, an 

outbreak investigation 

should always be 

considered a public health 

emergency and involve 

combined efforts from 

multiple individuals and 

organizations, both within 

and outside the health 

department.
22

Prioritizing Tuberculosis Genotype Clusters for Further Investigation and Public Health Action

C. Additional resources

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.). GENType: New Genotyping Terminology to Integrate

24-locus MIRU-VNTR. 2012. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/tb/publications/factsheets/statistics/

genotypingterminology.pdf

2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.). Best Practices for Genotyping-Based Tuberculosis 

Outbreak Detection. 2012. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/tb/publications/factsheets/statistics/

Genotyping_BestPractices.pdf

3. Althomsons SP, Kammerer JS, Shang N, Navin TR. Using routinely reported tuberculosis genotyping and

surveillance data to predict tuberculosis outbreaks. PLoS One 2012; 7(11).

4. Djelouadji Z, Orehek J, Drancourt M. Rapid detection of laboratory cross-contamination with Mycobacterium 

tuberculosis using multispacer sequence typing. BMC Microbiol. 2009; 9:47.

5. National Tuberculosis Controllers Association, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.), 

Advisory Group on Tuberculosis Genotpying. Guide to the Application of Genotyping to Tuberculosis 

Prevention and Control. 2004. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/tb/programs/genotyping/images/

TBGenotypingGuide_June2004.pdf

6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.). Self-Study Modules 9: Tuberculosis Outbreak Detection

and Response. 2014. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/tb/education/ssmodules/pdfs/module9.pdf

7. Kamerbeek J, Schouls L, Kolk A, Van Agterveld M, Van Soolingen D, Kuijper S, et al. Simultaneous detection 

and strain differentiation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis for diagnosis and epidemiology. J Clin Microbiol. 

1997; 35(4):907–14.

8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.). Guidelines for the Investigation of Contacts of Persons

with Infectious Tuberculosis. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2005; 54 (RR-15):1–54.

9. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.). Self-Study Modules 8: Contact Investigations for 

Tuberculosis. 2014. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/tb/education/ssmodules/pdfs/module8.pdf

10. Cronin WA, Golub JE, Lathan MJ, Mukasa LN, Hooper N, Razeq JH, et al. Molecular epidemiology of 

tuberculosis in a low- to moderate-incidence state: are contact investigations enough? Emerg Infect Dis. 2002; 

8(11):1271–9.

11. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.). Targeted Tuberculin Testing and Treatment of Latent

Tuberculosis Infection. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2000; 49(RR-6):1–54.

Additional information on genotyping is available at http://www.cdc.gov/tb/programs/genotyping/default.htm

or by contacting tbgenotyping@cdc.gov.

CS273343-A