The impact and cost of a new rapid diagnostic test for school-based prevalence mapping and monitoring and evaluation surveys of schistosomiasis: A modelling study.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 PARASITOLOGY
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases Pub Date : 2025-05-12 eCollection Date: 2025-05-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pntd.0013071
Joshua M Chevalier, Kyra H Grantz, Sarah Girdwood, Stella Kepha, Thierry Ramos, Brooke E Nichols, Shaukat Khan, Sarah Hingel
{"title":"The impact and cost of a new rapid diagnostic test for school-based prevalence mapping and monitoring and evaluation surveys of schistosomiasis: A modelling study.","authors":"Joshua M Chevalier, Kyra H Grantz, Sarah Girdwood, Stella Kepha, Thierry Ramos, Brooke E Nichols, Shaukat Khan, Sarah Hingel","doi":"10.1371/journal.pntd.0013071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In endemic communities where the prevalence of Schistosomiasis is ≥ 10%, annual preventive chemotherapy is recommended. Traditional sampling methods determine infection prevalence through district-level surveys in school-aged-children (SAC). Recently, an alternative sampling strategy-the Schistosomiasis Practical and Precision Assessment (SPPA) protocol-was developed to aid in targeting treatment to the sub-district level. A prototype circulating anodic antigen rapid diagnostic test (CAA RDT) could avoid the pitfalls associated with current microscopy techniques and therefore be better suited to support precision-mapping.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>We modelled the ability of a CAA RDT to correctly classify sub-district prevalence above or below the 10% threshold in simulated districts under alternative sampling strategies. Each district (10 sub-districts/district) had varying mean prevalence and prevalence distributions. Test sensitivity (60-100%) and specificity (95-100%) of the CAA RDT was varied. We then determined the associated survey costs for prevalence mapping or monitoring and evaluation for each sampling strategy using the CAA RDT compared to microscopy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The CAA RDT cost/SAC was US$12.14, which was similar to Kato-Katz (US$13.23/SAC) using traditional sampling. Sampling with the CAA RDT cost the least when conducting SPPA sampling or M&E, or when both Kato-Katz and urine filtration were required. High specificity of the CAA RDT was a key determinant of performance and a test with 100% specificity and 85% sensitivity correctly classified the most sub-districts (87%) under SPPA sampling. SPPA sampling generally led to less under- and overtreatment of sub-districts compared to traditional sampling.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A CAA RDT with high specificity will lead to similar treatment success at lower costs, under either sampling strategy, as compared to Kato-Katz and urine filtration. The CAA RDT could be a valuable diagnostic tool for determining schistosomiasis prevalence and could better support precision mapping strategies through reduced costs, thereby improving mass drug administration and aiding programmes to eliminate schistosomiasis as a public health problem.</p>","PeriodicalId":49000,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases","volume":"19 5","pages":"e0013071"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12097705/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013071","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PARASITOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In endemic communities where the prevalence of Schistosomiasis is ≥ 10%, annual preventive chemotherapy is recommended. Traditional sampling methods determine infection prevalence through district-level surveys in school-aged-children (SAC). Recently, an alternative sampling strategy-the Schistosomiasis Practical and Precision Assessment (SPPA) protocol-was developed to aid in targeting treatment to the sub-district level. A prototype circulating anodic antigen rapid diagnostic test (CAA RDT) could avoid the pitfalls associated with current microscopy techniques and therefore be better suited to support precision-mapping.

Methodology: We modelled the ability of a CAA RDT to correctly classify sub-district prevalence above or below the 10% threshold in simulated districts under alternative sampling strategies. Each district (10 sub-districts/district) had varying mean prevalence and prevalence distributions. Test sensitivity (60-100%) and specificity (95-100%) of the CAA RDT was varied. We then determined the associated survey costs for prevalence mapping or monitoring and evaluation for each sampling strategy using the CAA RDT compared to microscopy.

Results: The CAA RDT cost/SAC was US$12.14, which was similar to Kato-Katz (US$13.23/SAC) using traditional sampling. Sampling with the CAA RDT cost the least when conducting SPPA sampling or M&E, or when both Kato-Katz and urine filtration were required. High specificity of the CAA RDT was a key determinant of performance and a test with 100% specificity and 85% sensitivity correctly classified the most sub-districts (87%) under SPPA sampling. SPPA sampling generally led to less under- and overtreatment of sub-districts compared to traditional sampling.

Conclusions: A CAA RDT with high specificity will lead to similar treatment success at lower costs, under either sampling strategy, as compared to Kato-Katz and urine filtration. The CAA RDT could be a valuable diagnostic tool for determining schistosomiasis prevalence and could better support precision mapping strategies through reduced costs, thereby improving mass drug administration and aiding programmes to eliminate schistosomiasis as a public health problem.

一种新的基于学校的血吸虫病流行率测绘和监测与评价调查的快速诊断测试的影响和成本:一项模型研究。
背景:在血吸虫病流行率≥10%的流行社区,建议每年进行预防性化疗。传统的抽样方法通过对学龄儿童(SAC)进行地区级调查来确定感染流行情况。最近,制定了另一种抽样策略——血吸虫病实用和精度评估(SPPA)方案,以帮助在街道一级进行有针对性的治疗。循环阳极抗原快速诊断试验(CAA RDT)的原型可以避免与当前显微镜技术相关的缺陷,因此更适合支持精确定位。方法:我们模拟了CAA RDT在不同采样策略下对模拟地区高于或低于10%阈值的街道患病率进行正确分类的能力。各区(10个街道/区)的平均患病率和患病率分布各不相同。CAA RDT的检测灵敏度(60-100%)和特异性(95-100%)各不相同。然后,我们确定了与显微镜相比,使用CAA RDT对每种采样策略进行患病率测绘或监测和评估的相关调查成本。结果:CAA RDT成本为12.14美元/SAC,与传统抽样的Kato-Katz(13.23美元/SAC)相似。当进行SPPA取样或M&E时,或同时需要加托-卡茨和尿液过滤时,使用CAA RDT取样成本最低。CAA RDT的高特异性是检测效果的关键决定因素,在SPPA抽样下,100%特异性和85%敏感性的检测正确地分类了大多数分区(87%)。与传统抽样相比,SPPA抽样总体上减少了对街道的不足和过度处理。结论:与Kato-Katz和尿液过滤相比,在任何一种采样策略下,具有高特异性的CAA RDT都将以更低的成本获得类似的治疗成功。CAA RDT可成为确定血吸虫病流行的一种有价值的诊断工具,并可通过降低成本更好地支持精确测绘战略,从而改善大规模药物管理并协助规划消除作为公共卫生问题的血吸虫病。
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
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases PARASITOLOGY-TROPICAL MEDICINE
自引率
10.50%
发文量
723
期刊介绍: PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases publishes research devoted to the pathology, epidemiology, prevention, treatment and control of the neglected tropical diseases (NTDs), as well as relevant public policy. The NTDs are defined as a group of poverty-promoting chronic infectious diseases, which primarily occur in rural areas and poor urban areas of low-income and middle-income countries. Their impact on child health and development, pregnancy, and worker productivity, as well as their stigmatizing features limit economic stability. All aspects of these diseases are considered, including: Pathogenesis Clinical features Pharmacology and treatment Diagnosis Epidemiology Vector biology Vaccinology and prevention Demographic, ecological and social determinants Public health and policy aspects (including cost-effectiveness analyses).
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信