A comparison of two rapid field immunochromatographic tests to expert microscopy in the diagnosis of malaria
In Myanmar, we tested two rapid malaria immunochromatographic kits: the OptiMAL assay for the detection of parasite lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH), and the ICT Malaria P.f./P.v. test for histidine-rich protein 2 (PfHRP2) and panmalarial antigens. A total of 229 patients were examined, of whom 133 were...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Acta tropica 2002-04, Vol.82 (1), p.51-59 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 59 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 51 |
| container_title | Acta tropica |
| container_volume | 82 |
| creator | Mason, Daniel Philippe Kawamoto, Fumihiko Lin, Khin Laoboonchai, Anintita Wongsrichanalai, Chansuda |
| description | In Myanmar, we tested two rapid malaria immunochromatographic kits: the OptiMAL assay for the detection of parasite lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH), and the ICT Malaria P.f./P.v. test for histidine-rich protein 2 (PfHRP2) and panmalarial antigens. A total of 229 patients were examined, of whom 133 were found to be malaria positive by Giemsa microscopy. Both OptiMAL and ICT gave lower sensitivities than previously reported. ICT sensitivity for
Plasmodium falciparum and non-falciparum parasites were 86.2 and 2.9%, respectively; specificity was 76.9 and 100%, respectively. OptiMAL sensitivity for
P. falciparum and non-falciparum parasites were 42.6 and 47.1%, respectively; specificity was 97.0 and 96.9%, respectively. The sensitivity of both tests for the detection of both
P. falciparum and non-falciparum parasites increased with parasite density. Several explanations for these results are explored. Our results raise particular concern over batch quality variations of malaria rapid diagnostic devices (MRDDs). |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/S0001-706X(02)00031-1 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71529791</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0001706X02000311</els_id><sourcerecordid>32282825</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-47e1556b34fb386381f79ffe70208186301925788e744c6e72117974ff4f8c4d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU1v1DAQhi0EotvCTwD5AiqHgMexY-dUVRVfUiUOgMTN8jrjrlESB9sL9N_jdFf0WPkwGs_jecfzEvIC2Ftg0L37yhiDRrHuxznjb2rSQgOPyAa0apuOS_GYbP4jJ-Q0558140ryp-QEoGcCWLsh4yV1cVpsCjnONHpa_kSa7BIG6gOOAw3TtJ-j26U42RJvamkXHC2YS6YlUvy7YCp0Ci7F7OJyS8NMyw7pEOzNHHPIa9PJjlXBPiNPvB0zPj_GM_L9w_tvV5-a6y8fP19dXjdOaF0aoRCk7Lat8NtWd60Gr3rvUTHONNQLBj2XSmtUQrgOFQdQvRLeC6-dGNoz8vrQd0nx176OaqaQHY6jnTHus1Egea96eBBsOdf1yArKA7h-Myf0ZklhsunWADOrH-bOD7Mu2zBu7vwwq8DLo8B-O-Fw_-poQAVeHQGbnR19srML-Z5rpWSCr9zFgcO6t98Bk8ku4OxwCAldMUMMD4zyD6yNpyk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>32282825</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparison of two rapid field immunochromatographic tests to expert microscopy in the diagnosis of malaria</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Mason, Daniel Philippe ; Kawamoto, Fumihiko ; Lin, Khin ; Laoboonchai, Anintita ; Wongsrichanalai, Chansuda</creator><creatorcontrib>Mason, Daniel Philippe ; Kawamoto, Fumihiko ; Lin, Khin ; Laoboonchai, Anintita ; Wongsrichanalai, Chansuda</creatorcontrib><description>In Myanmar, we tested two rapid malaria immunochromatographic kits: the OptiMAL assay for the detection of parasite lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH), and the ICT Malaria P.f./P.v. test for histidine-rich protein 2 (PfHRP2) and panmalarial antigens. A total of 229 patients were examined, of whom 133 were found to be malaria positive by Giemsa microscopy. Both OptiMAL and ICT gave lower sensitivities than previously reported. ICT sensitivity for
Plasmodium falciparum and non-falciparum parasites were 86.2 and 2.9%, respectively; specificity was 76.9 and 100%, respectively. OptiMAL sensitivity for
P. falciparum and non-falciparum parasites were 42.6 and 47.1%, respectively; specificity was 97.0 and 96.9%, respectively. The sensitivity of both tests for the detection of both
P. falciparum and non-falciparum parasites increased with parasite density. Several explanations for these results are explored. Our results raise particular concern over batch quality variations of malaria rapid diagnostic devices (MRDDs).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-706X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-6254</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0001-706X(02)00031-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11904103</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ACTRAQ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Animals ; Antigens, Protozoan - blood ; Azure Stains ; Biological and medical sciences ; Chromatography ; HRP2 ; Human protozoal diseases ; Humans ; Infectious diseases ; L-Lactate Dehydrogenase - analysis ; Malaria ; Malaria - blood ; Malaria - diagnosis ; Medical sciences ; Microscopy ; Myanmar ; Parasitic diseases ; Plasmodium - chemistry ; Plasmodium - isolation & purification ; pLDH ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Protozoal diseases ; Protozoan Proteins - blood ; Rapid tests ; Reagent Kits, Diagnostic ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Tropical medicine</subject><ispartof>Acta tropica, 2002-04, Vol.82 (1), p.51-59</ispartof><rights>2002</rights><rights>2002 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-47e1556b34fb386381f79ffe70208186301925788e744c6e72117974ff4f8c4d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-47e1556b34fb386381f79ffe70208186301925788e744c6e72117974ff4f8c4d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0001-706X(02)00031-1$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=13550423$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11904103$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mason, Daniel Philippe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kawamoto, Fumihiko</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Khin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laoboonchai, Anintita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wongsrichanalai, Chansuda</creatorcontrib><title>A comparison of two rapid field immunochromatographic tests to expert microscopy in the diagnosis of malaria</title><title>Acta tropica</title><addtitle>Acta Trop</addtitle><description>In Myanmar, we tested two rapid malaria immunochromatographic kits: the OptiMAL assay for the detection of parasite lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH), and the ICT Malaria P.f./P.v. test for histidine-rich protein 2 (PfHRP2) and panmalarial antigens. A total of 229 patients were examined, of whom 133 were found to be malaria positive by Giemsa microscopy. Both OptiMAL and ICT gave lower sensitivities than previously reported. ICT sensitivity for
Plasmodium falciparum and non-falciparum parasites were 86.2 and 2.9%, respectively; specificity was 76.9 and 100%, respectively. OptiMAL sensitivity for
P. falciparum and non-falciparum parasites were 42.6 and 47.1%, respectively; specificity was 97.0 and 96.9%, respectively. The sensitivity of both tests for the detection of both
P. falciparum and non-falciparum parasites increased with parasite density. Several explanations for these results are explored. Our results raise particular concern over batch quality variations of malaria rapid diagnostic devices (MRDDs).</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Antigens, Protozoan - blood</subject><subject>Azure Stains</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Chromatography</subject><subject>HRP2</subject><subject>Human protozoal diseases</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infectious diseases</subject><subject>L-Lactate Dehydrogenase - analysis</subject><subject>Malaria</subject><subject>Malaria - blood</subject><subject>Malaria - diagnosis</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Microscopy</subject><subject>Myanmar</subject><subject>Parasitic diseases</subject><subject>Plasmodium - chemistry</subject><subject>Plasmodium - isolation & purification</subject><subject>pLDH</subject><subject>Predictive Value of Tests</subject><subject>Protozoal diseases</subject><subject>Protozoan Proteins - blood</subject><subject>Rapid tests</subject><subject>Reagent Kits, Diagnostic</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Tropical medicine</subject><issn>0001-706X</issn><issn>1873-6254</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU1v1DAQhi0EotvCTwD5AiqHgMexY-dUVRVfUiUOgMTN8jrjrlESB9sL9N_jdFf0WPkwGs_jecfzEvIC2Ftg0L37yhiDRrHuxznjb2rSQgOPyAa0apuOS_GYbP4jJ-Q0558140ryp-QEoGcCWLsh4yV1cVpsCjnONHpa_kSa7BIG6gOOAw3TtJ-j26U42RJvamkXHC2YS6YlUvy7YCp0Ci7F7OJyS8NMyw7pEOzNHHPIa9PJjlXBPiNPvB0zPj_GM_L9w_tvV5-a6y8fP19dXjdOaF0aoRCk7Lat8NtWd60Gr3rvUTHONNQLBj2XSmtUQrgOFQdQvRLeC6-dGNoz8vrQd0nx176OaqaQHY6jnTHus1Egea96eBBsOdf1yArKA7h-Myf0ZklhsunWADOrH-bOD7Mu2zBu7vwwq8DLo8B-O-Fw_-poQAVeHQGbnR19srML-Z5rpWSCr9zFgcO6t98Bk8ku4OxwCAldMUMMD4zyD6yNpyk</recordid><startdate>20020401</startdate><enddate>20020401</enddate><creator>Mason, Daniel Philippe</creator><creator>Kawamoto, Fumihiko</creator><creator>Lin, Khin</creator><creator>Laoboonchai, Anintita</creator><creator>Wongsrichanalai, Chansuda</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20020401</creationdate><title>A comparison of two rapid field immunochromatographic tests to expert microscopy in the diagnosis of malaria</title><author>Mason, Daniel Philippe ; Kawamoto, Fumihiko ; Lin, Khin ; Laoboonchai, Anintita ; Wongsrichanalai, Chansuda</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-47e1556b34fb386381f79ffe70208186301925788e744c6e72117974ff4f8c4d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Antigens, Protozoan - blood</topic><topic>Azure Stains</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Chromatography</topic><topic>HRP2</topic><topic>Human protozoal diseases</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infectious diseases</topic><topic>L-Lactate Dehydrogenase - analysis</topic><topic>Malaria</topic><topic>Malaria - blood</topic><topic>Malaria - diagnosis</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Microscopy</topic><topic>Myanmar</topic><topic>Parasitic diseases</topic><topic>Plasmodium - chemistry</topic><topic>Plasmodium - isolation & purification</topic><topic>pLDH</topic><topic>Predictive Value of Tests</topic><topic>Protozoal diseases</topic><topic>Protozoan Proteins - blood</topic><topic>Rapid tests</topic><topic>Reagent Kits, Diagnostic</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Tropical medicine</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mason, Daniel Philippe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kawamoto, Fumihiko</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Khin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laoboonchai, Anintita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wongsrichanalai, Chansuda</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Acta tropica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mason, Daniel Philippe</au><au>Kawamoto, Fumihiko</au><au>Lin, Khin</au><au>Laoboonchai, Anintita</au><au>Wongsrichanalai, Chansuda</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparison of two rapid field immunochromatographic tests to expert microscopy in the diagnosis of malaria</atitle><jtitle>Acta tropica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Trop</addtitle><date>2002-04-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>82</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>51</spage><epage>59</epage><pages>51-59</pages><issn>0001-706X</issn><eissn>1873-6254</eissn><coden>ACTRAQ</coden><abstract>In Myanmar, we tested two rapid malaria immunochromatographic kits: the OptiMAL assay for the detection of parasite lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH), and the ICT Malaria P.f./P.v. test for histidine-rich protein 2 (PfHRP2) and panmalarial antigens. A total of 229 patients were examined, of whom 133 were found to be malaria positive by Giemsa microscopy. Both OptiMAL and ICT gave lower sensitivities than previously reported. ICT sensitivity for
Plasmodium falciparum and non-falciparum parasites were 86.2 and 2.9%, respectively; specificity was 76.9 and 100%, respectively. OptiMAL sensitivity for
P. falciparum and non-falciparum parasites were 42.6 and 47.1%, respectively; specificity was 97.0 and 96.9%, respectively. The sensitivity of both tests for the detection of both
P. falciparum and non-falciparum parasites increased with parasite density. Several explanations for these results are explored. Our results raise particular concern over batch quality variations of malaria rapid diagnostic devices (MRDDs).</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>11904103</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0001-706X(02)00031-1</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0001-706X |
| ispartof | Acta tropica, 2002-04, Vol.82 (1), p.51-59 |
| issn | 0001-706X 1873-6254 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71529791 |
| source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
| subjects | Animals Antigens, Protozoan - blood Azure Stains Biological and medical sciences Chromatography HRP2 Human protozoal diseases Humans Infectious diseases L-Lactate Dehydrogenase - analysis Malaria Malaria - blood Malaria - diagnosis Medical sciences Microscopy Myanmar Parasitic diseases Plasmodium - chemistry Plasmodium - isolation & purification pLDH Predictive Value of Tests Protozoal diseases Protozoan Proteins - blood Rapid tests Reagent Kits, Diagnostic Sensitivity and Specificity Tropical medicine |
| title | A comparison of two rapid field immunochromatographic tests to expert microscopy in the diagnosis of malaria |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T04%3A18%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparison%20of%20two%20rapid%20field%20immunochromatographic%20tests%20to%20expert%20microscopy%20in%20the%20diagnosis%20of%20malaria&rft.jtitle=Acta%20tropica&rft.au=Mason,%20Daniel%20Philippe&rft.date=2002-04-01&rft.volume=82&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=51&rft.epage=59&rft.pages=51-59&rft.issn=0001-706X&rft.eissn=1873-6254&rft.coden=ACTRAQ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0001-706X(02)00031-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E32282825%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=32282825&rft_id=info:pmid/11904103&rft_els_id=S0001706X02000311&rfr_iscdi=true |