Field evaluation of the Bioline Malaria Ag P.f/Pan rapid diagnostic test: causes of microscopy discordance and performance in Uganda.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Kisakye Diana Kabbale, Bienvenu Nsengimaana, Francis D Semakuba, Brian A Kagurusi, Caroline Mwubaha, Innocent Wiringilimaana, Thomas Katairo, Shahiid Kiyaga, Monica Mbabazi, Samuel Gonahasa, Moses R Kamya, Stephen Tukwasibwe, Sam L Nsobya, Victor Asua, Daudi Jjingo, Bosco Agaba, Catherine Maiteki-Sebuguzi, Jimmy Opigo, Kylie Hilton, Sarah G Staedke, Grant Dorsey, Melissa D Conrad, Bryan Greenhouse, Isaac Ssewanyana, Jessica Briggs
{"title":"Field evaluation of the Bioline Malaria Ag P.f/Pan rapid diagnostic test: causes of microscopy discordance and performance in Uganda.","authors":"Kisakye Diana Kabbale, Bienvenu Nsengimaana, Francis D Semakuba, Brian A Kagurusi, Caroline Mwubaha, Innocent Wiringilimaana, Thomas Katairo, Shahiid Kiyaga, Monica Mbabazi, Samuel Gonahasa, Moses R Kamya, Stephen Tukwasibwe, Sam L Nsobya, Victor Asua, Daudi Jjingo, Bosco Agaba, Catherine Maiteki-Sebuguzi, Jimmy Opigo, Kylie Hilton, Sarah G Staedke, Grant Dorsey, Melissa D Conrad, Bryan Greenhouse, Isaac Ssewanyana, Jessica Briggs","doi":"10.1186/s12936-025-05379-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Histidine Rich Protein 2 (HRP2)/pan-Lactate Dehydrogenase (pLDH) combination rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) may address the shortcomings of RDTs that detect HRP2 alone. However, the relative contribution of the possible causes of discordant results (RDT-negative and microscopy-positive) and performance in field settings across Uganda are poorly quantified.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study utilized samples from two cross-sectional surveys conducted in 32 districts at 64 sites across Uganda between November 2021 and March 2023 that enrolled 6354 febrile participants  ≥ two years of age. Discordant samples (negative by HRP2/pLDH RDT and positive by microscopy) underwent quantitative PCR (qPCR) to detect and quantify parasitaemia. Those confirmed to be positive for Plasmodium falciparum at > 1 parasites/microlitre (p/µL) were tested for pfhrp2 and pfhrp3 deletions using digital PCR. Those that were negative or had P. falciparum detected at ≤ 1 p/µL underwent Plasmodium species testing using nested PCR. The performance of the Bioline Malaria Ag P.f/Pan combination RDT was evaluated by comparison with microscopy and qPCR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 166 (8.4%) discordant samples out of 1988 microscopy positive samples. Of these, 90/166 (54.2%) were confirmed to contain P. falciparum at levels > 1 p/µL, whereas 76/166 (45.8%) were negative or had P. falciparum levels ≤ 1 p/µL. Only one P. falciparum positive sample was confirmed to have a deletion in pfhrp3. The primary reasons for RDT-negative, microscopy-positive discordance in samples testing negative for P. falciparum by PCR were non-falciparum species (37/76, 48.7%) or false positives by microscopy (31/76, 40.8%). The sensitivity of the Bioline Malaria Ag P.f/Pan combination RDT was high (> 91%) using either microscopy or qPCR as the gold standard. However, specificity was low (56.7%) when microscopy was used as the gold standard; it improved to 64.0% when qPCR was used as the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Bioline Malaria Ag P.f/Pan combination RDT was found to be highly sensitive in Uganda and reliable for ruling out malaria. False negative RDT results were primarily due to low density P. falciparum infections, non-falciparum infections, or incorrect microscopy results. In contrast, false positive RDT results were common, most likely due to persistent HRP2 antigenaemia in this high transmission setting though causes of false positive RDTs were not investigated. The low specificity of HRP2-based RDTs may result in overuse of anti-malarial drugs and missed diagnoses of non-malarial febrile illnesses.</p>","PeriodicalId":18317,"journal":{"name":"Malaria Journal","volume":"24 1","pages":"138"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12044711/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Malaria Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-025-05379-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Histidine Rich Protein 2 (HRP2)/pan-Lactate Dehydrogenase (pLDH) combination rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) may address the shortcomings of RDTs that detect HRP2 alone. However, the relative contribution of the possible causes of discordant results (RDT-negative and microscopy-positive) and performance in field settings across Uganda are poorly quantified.

Methods: This study utilized samples from two cross-sectional surveys conducted in 32 districts at 64 sites across Uganda between November 2021 and March 2023 that enrolled 6354 febrile participants  ≥ two years of age. Discordant samples (negative by HRP2/pLDH RDT and positive by microscopy) underwent quantitative PCR (qPCR) to detect and quantify parasitaemia. Those confirmed to be positive for Plasmodium falciparum at > 1 parasites/microlitre (p/µL) were tested for pfhrp2 and pfhrp3 deletions using digital PCR. Those that were negative or had P. falciparum detected at ≤ 1 p/µL underwent Plasmodium species testing using nested PCR. The performance of the Bioline Malaria Ag P.f/Pan combination RDT was evaluated by comparison with microscopy and qPCR.

Results: There were 166 (8.4%) discordant samples out of 1988 microscopy positive samples. Of these, 90/166 (54.2%) were confirmed to contain P. falciparum at levels > 1 p/µL, whereas 76/166 (45.8%) were negative or had P. falciparum levels ≤ 1 p/µL. Only one P. falciparum positive sample was confirmed to have a deletion in pfhrp3. The primary reasons for RDT-negative, microscopy-positive discordance in samples testing negative for P. falciparum by PCR were non-falciparum species (37/76, 48.7%) or false positives by microscopy (31/76, 40.8%). The sensitivity of the Bioline Malaria Ag P.f/Pan combination RDT was high (> 91%) using either microscopy or qPCR as the gold standard. However, specificity was low (56.7%) when microscopy was used as the gold standard; it improved to 64.0% when qPCR was used as the gold standard.

Conclusion: The Bioline Malaria Ag P.f/Pan combination RDT was found to be highly sensitive in Uganda and reliable for ruling out malaria. False negative RDT results were primarily due to low density P. falciparum infections, non-falciparum infections, or incorrect microscopy results. In contrast, false positive RDT results were common, most likely due to persistent HRP2 antigenaemia in this high transmission setting though causes of false positive RDTs were not investigated. The low specificity of HRP2-based RDTs may result in overuse of anti-malarial drugs and missed diagnoses of non-malarial febrile illnesses.

生物线疟疾抗原P.f/Pan快速诊断试验的现场评价:乌干达显微镜检查不一致的原因和表现。
背景:组氨酸富蛋白2 (HRP2)/泛乳酸脱氢酶(pLDH)联合快速诊断试验(RDTs)可以解决单独检测HRP2的RDTs的不足。然而,在乌干达各地的实地环境中,不一致结果(rdt阴性和显微镜阳性)和表现的可能原因的相对贡献没有得到很好的量化。方法:本研究利用了2021年11月至2023年3月期间在乌干达32个地区64个地点进行的两次横断面调查的样本,共招募了6354名年龄≥2岁的发热参与者。不一致的样本(HRP2/pLDH RDT阴性,镜检阳性)采用定量PCR (qPCR)检测和定量寄生虫血症。对恶性疟原虫检测呈阳性(p/µL)者,采用数字PCR检测pfhrp2和pfhrp3缺失。阴性或恶性疟原虫检测≤1 p/µL的患者采用巢式PCR进行疟原虫种类检测。通过显微镜和qPCR对Bioline Malaria Ag P.f/Pan联合RDT的性能进行比较。结果:1988例镜检阳性标本中有166例(8.4%)不一致。其中,90/166(54.2%)的检测结果为恶性疟原虫水平为1 p/µL, 76/166(45.8%)的检测结果为阴性或恶性疟原虫水平≤1 p/µL。只有一个恶性疟原虫阳性样本被证实有pfhrp3缺失。恶性疟原虫PCR阴性样本rdt阴性、镜检阳性不一致的主要原因是非恶性疟原虫(37/76,48.7%)或镜检假阳性(31/76,40.8%)。以显微镜和qPCR为金标准,Bioline Malaria Ag P.f/Pan联合RDT的灵敏度都很高(约为91%)。然而,当显微镜作为金标准时,特异性较低(56.7%);以qPCR为金标准,扩增率提高到64.0%。结论:Bioline Malaria Ag P.f/Pan联合RDT在乌干达具有较高的敏感性和可靠的排除疟疾的方法。假阴性RDT结果主要是由于低密度恶性疟原虫感染、非恶性疟原虫感染或不正确的显微镜检查结果。相比之下,假阳性RDT结果很常见,很可能是由于在这种高传播环境中持续的HRP2抗原血症,尽管假阳性RDT的原因尚未调查。基于hrp2的RDTs的低特异性可能导致抗疟药物的过度使用和非疟疾热性疾病的漏诊。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Malaria Journal
Malaria Journal 医学-寄生虫学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
23.30%
发文量
334
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Malaria Journal is aimed at the scientific community interested in malaria in its broadest sense. It is the only journal that publishes exclusively articles on malaria and, as such, it aims to bring together knowledge from the different specialities involved in this very broad discipline, from the bench to the bedside and to the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信