Literature DB >> 22814877

Role of fecal Clostridium difficile load in discrepancies between toxin tests and PCR: is quantitation the next step in C. difficile testing?

J L Leslie1, S H Cohen, J V Solnick, C R Polage.   

Abstract

Direct tests for Clostridium difficile are 30-50 % more sensitive than tests for C. difficile toxins but the reasons for this discrepancy are incompletely understood. In addition to toxin degradation and strain differences, we hypothesized that C. difficile concentration could be important in determining whether toxins are detected in fecal samples. We performed standard curves on an FDA-approved real-time PCR test for the C. difficile tcdB gene (Xpert C. difficile/Epi, Cepheid) during a prospective comparison of a toxin immunoassay (Meridian Premier), PCR and toxigenic culture. Immunoassay-negative, PCR-positive samples were retested with a cell cytotoxin assay (TechLab). Among 107 PCR-positive samples, 46 (43.0 %) had toxins detected by immunoassay and an additional 18 (16.8 %) had toxin detected by the cytotoxin assay yielding 64 (59.8 %) toxin-positive and 43 (40.2 %) toxin-negative samples. Overall, toxin-negative samples with C. difficile had 10(1)-10(4) fewer DNA copies than toxin-positive samples and most discrepancies between toxin tests and PCR were associated with a significant difference in C. difficile quantity. Of the toxin-positive samples, 95 % had ≥ 4.1 log(10) C. difficile tcdB DNA copies/mL; 52 % of immunoassay-negative samples and 70 % of immunoassay and cytotoxin negative samples had <4.1 log(10) C. difficile tcdB DNA copies/mL. These findings suggest that fecal C. difficile concentration is a major determinant of toxin detection and C. difficile quantitation may add to the diagnostic value of existing test methods. Future studies are needed to validate the utility of quantitation and determine the significance of low concentrations of C. difficile in the absence of detectable toxin.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22814877      PMCID: PMC3753214          DOI: 10.1007/s10096-012-1695-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis        ISSN: 0934-9723            Impact factor:   3.267


  21 in total

1.  The effects of storage conditions on viability of Clostridium difficile vegetative cells and spores and toxin activity in human faeces.

Authors:  J Freeman; M H Wilcox
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 2.  Effective utilization of evolving methods for the laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Anna M Kufelnicka; Thomas J Kirn
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  Repeat stool testing to diagnose Clostridium difficile infection using enzyme immunoassay does not increase diagnostic yield.

Authors:  Abhishek Deshpande; Vinay Pasupuleti; Preethi Patel; Gati Ajani; Geraldine Hall; Bo Hu; Anil Jain; David D K Rolston
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2011-05-13       Impact factor: 11.382

4.  Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea and colitis in adults. A prospective case-controlled epidemiologic study.

Authors:  D N Gerding; M M Olson; L R Peterson; D G Teasley; R L Gebhard; M L Schwartz; J T Lee
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1986-01

5.  Quantification of Clostridium difficile in antibiotic-associated-diarrhea patients.

Authors:  Paul Naaber; Jelena Stsepetova; Imbi Smidt; Merle Rätsep; Siiri Kõljalg; Krista Lõivukene; Liis Jaanimäe; Iren H Löhr; Olav B Natås; Kai Truusalu; Epp Sepp
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-08-24       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Clinical and laboratory characteristics of Clostridium difficile infection in patients with discordant diagnostic test results.

Authors:  Anna Kaltsas; Matt Simon; Larissa H Unruh; Crystal Son; Danielle Wroblewski; Kimberlee A Musser; Kent Sepkowitz; N Esther Babady; Mini Kamboj
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Impact of clinical symptoms on interpretation of diagnostic assays for Clostridium difficile infections.

Authors:  Erik R Dubberke; Zhuolin Han; Linda Bobo; Tiffany Hink; Brenda Lawrence; Susan Copper; Joan Hoppe-Bauer; Carey-Ann D Burnham; William Michael Dunne
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-06-22       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  An evaluation of repeat stool testing for Clostridium difficile infection by polymerase chain reaction.

Authors:  Sahil Khanna; Darrell S Pardi; Jon E Rosenblatt; Robin Patel; Patricia P Kammer; Larry M Baddour
Journal:  J Clin Gastroenterol       Date:  2012 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.062

9.  Role of Clostridium difficile in antibiotic-associated pseudomembranous colitis.

Authors:  J G Bartlett; N Moon; T W Chang; N Taylor; A B Onderdonk
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1978-11       Impact factor: 22.682

10.  Isolation rates and toxigenic potential of Clostridium difficile isolates from various patient populations.

Authors:  R Viscidi; S Willey; J G Bartlett
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1981-07       Impact factor: 22.682

View more
  15 in total

1.  Clostridium difficile PCR Cycle Threshold Predicts Free Toxin.

Authors:  Fiona Senchyna; Rajiv L Gaur; Saurabh Gombar; Cynthia Y Truong; Lee F Schroeder; Niaz Banaei
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Diagnosing an Infection Control Risk.

Authors:  Preeta K Kutty; L Clifford McDonald
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  Real-time cellular analysis coupled with a specimen enrichment accurately detects and quantifies Clostridium difficile toxins in stool.

Authors:  Bin Huang; Dazhi Jin; Jing Zhang; Janet Y Sun; Xiaobo Wang; Jeffrey Stiles; Xiao Xu; Mini Kamboj; N Esther Babady; Yi-Wei Tang
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Ultrasensitive Detection of Clostridium difficile Toxins Reveals Suboptimal Accuracy of Toxin Gene Cycle Thresholds for Toxin Predictions.

Authors:  Johanna Sandlund; Mark H Wilcox
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2019-05-24       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Evaluation of Clostridium difficile fecal load and limit of detection during a prospective comparison of two molecular tests, the illumigene C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi tests.

Authors:  Clare E Gyorke; Susan Wang; Jhansi L Leslie; Stuart H Cohen; Jay V Solnick; Christopher R Polage
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2012-10-10       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Nucleic Acid Amplification Test Quantitation as Predictor of Toxin Presence in Clostridium difficile Infection.

Authors:  M J T Crobach; N Duszenko; E M Terveer; C M Verduin; E J Kuijper
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Potential of real-time PCR threshold cycle (CT) to predict presence of free toxin and clinically relevant C. difficile infection (CDI) in patients with cancer.

Authors:  Mini Kamboj; Jennifer Brite; Tracy McMillen; Elizabeth Robilotti; Alejandro Herrera; Kent Sepkowitz; N Esther Babady
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  2017-12-08       Impact factor: 6.072

8.  Ultrasensitive Detection of Clostridioides difficile Toxins A and B by Use of Automated Single-Molecule Counting Technology.

Authors:  Johanna Sandlund; Amelita Bartolome; Anna Almazan; Stanley Tam; Sheryl Biscocho; Salina Abusali; Jeffrey J Bishop; Niamh Nolan; Joel Estis; John Todd; Stephen Young; Fiona Senchyna; Niaz Banaei
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Dual Reporting of Clostridioides difficile PCR and Predicted Toxin Result Based on PCR Cycle Threshold Reduces Treatment of Toxin-Negative Patients without Increases in Adverse Outcomes.

Authors:  Matthew M Hitchcock; Marisa Holubar; Catherine A Hogan; Lucy S Tompkins; Niaz Banaei
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Correlation between Clostridium difficile bacterial load, commercial real-time PCR cycle thresholds, and results of diagnostic tests based on enzyme immunoassay and cell culture cytotoxicity assay.

Authors:  Léa-Laurence Dionne; Frédéric Raymond; Jacques Corbeil; Jean Longtin; Philippe Gervais; Yves Longtin
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2013-08-21       Impact factor: 5.948

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.