Sacramento & San Jose, California; Denver, Colorado ; Wallingford, Connecticut; Wood Dale, Illinois; Indianapolis, Indiana; Lenexa, Kansas; Cambridge, Massachusetts; Maryland Heights, Missouri; Dayton, Ohio; Portland, Oregon; Horsham & Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Houston & Irving, Texas; Chantilly, Virginia; Seattle, Washington
Depending on how you count them there could be 17 or 19 regional labs processing QFT; Wallingford, Connecticut and Cambridge, Massachusetts are listed twice as Quest regional labs yet have different codes indicating possible multiple locations.
Various codes indicate that whilst some labs are able to fully process QFT-GIT others only incubate before transporting to a processing lab whilst others act only as collection points.
This would fit in with earlier advice that distance was a major factor with labs, an issue that QFT-GIT was able to resolve.
As the list of labs and codes appear to be under revision it would appear that the lab operators are evaluating the size and logistics of their market and are responding accordingly.
Latent TB diagnosis is a new field for labs and in low TB areas there may be few if any samples to process; as the CDC/TBESC found in their Laboratory Surveys Report
The scarcity of (public health) laboratories offering mycobacteriological services may be a result of a low demand for these services in a low-TB incidence area. Laboratorians then have few opportunities to build their expertise in mycobacterial services, which adversely affect the timeliness and accuracy of TB diagnosis and drug susceptibility testing. Data on public health reporting of results, especially from the first survey, suggest a high degree of uncertainty on this matter.
