Literature DB >> 23269736

Performance of Clostridium difficile toxin enzyme immunoassay and nucleic acid amplification tests stratified by patient disease severity.

Romney M Humphries1, Daniel Z Uslan, Zachary Rubin.   

Abstract

Many clinical laboratories in the United States are transitioning from toxin enzyme immunoassays (EIA) to nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) as the primary diagnostic test for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). While it is known that the analytical sensitivity of the toxin EIA is poor, there are limited clinical data on the performance of these assays for patients with mild or severe CDI. Two hundred ninety-six hospital inpatients with diarrhea and clinical suspicion for CDI were tested prospectively by toxin EIA, by C. difficile NAAT, and with a reference standard toxigenic culture. Following completion of laboratory testing, retrospective chart reviews were performed to stratify patients into mild and severe disease groups based on clinical criteria using a standard point-based system. One hundred forty-three patients with CDI confirmed by toxigenic culture were evaluated in this study. Among the patients with mild CDI, 49% tested positive by toxin EIA and 98% tested positive by NAAT. Among patients with severe CDI, 58% tested positive by toxin EIA and 98% tested positive by NAAT. Increased CDI disease severity was not associated with an increased sensitivity of EIA (P = 0.31). These data demonstrate that toxin EIA performs poorly both for patients with severe CDI and for those with mild CDI and support the routine use of NAAT for the diagnosis of CDI. The presence of stool toxin measured by EIA does not correlate with disease severity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23269736      PMCID: PMC3592059          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02970-12

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  22 in total

1.  Clinical impact of switching conventional enzyme immunoassay with nucleic acid amplification test for suspected Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea.

Authors:  Steven W Johnson; Meganne Kanatani; Romney M Humphries; Daniel Z Uslan
Journal:  Am J Infect Control       Date:  2012-10-05       Impact factor: 2.918

2.  Is repeat PCR needed for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection?

Authors:  Robert F Luo; Niaz Banaei
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2010-08-04       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Lack of value of repeat stool testing for Clostridium difficile toxin.

Authors:  Sowjanya S Mohan; Brian P McDermott; Subha Parchuri; Burke A Cunha
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.965

4.  Rapid and simple method for detecting the toxin B gene of Clostridium difficile in stool specimens by loop-mediated isothermal amplification.

Authors:  Haru Kato; Toshiyuki Yokoyama; Hideaki Kato; Yoshichika Arakawa
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Health care-associated Clostridium difficile infection in Canada: patient age and infecting strain type are highly predictive of severe outcome and mortality.

Authors:  Mark Miller; Denise Gravel; Michael Mulvey; Geoffrey Taylor; David Boyd; Andrew Simor; Michael Gardam; Allison McGeer; James Hutchinson; Dorothy Moore; Sharon Kelly
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 9.079

6.  tcdC genotypes associated with severe TcdC truncation in an epidemic clone and other strains of Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  Scott R Curry; Jane W Marsh; Carlene A Muto; Mary M O'Leary; A William Pasculle; Lee H Harrison
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2006-10-11       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Clinical practice guidelines for Clostridium difficile infection in adults: 2010 update by the society for healthcare epidemiology of America (SHEA) and the infectious diseases society of America (IDSA).

Authors:  Stuart H Cohen; Dale N Gerding; Stuart Johnson; Ciaran P Kelly; Vivian G Loo; L Clifford McDonald; Jacques Pepin; Mark H Wilcox
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.254

8.  Clostridium difficile testing in the clinical laboratory by use of multiple testing algorithms.

Authors:  Susan M Novak-Weekley; Elizabeth M Marlowe; John M Miller; Joven Cumpio; Jim H Nomura; Paula H Vance; Alice Weissfeld
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2010-01-13       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Nonutility of repeat laboratory testing for detection of Clostridium difficile by use of PCR or enzyme immunoassay.

Authors:  Elisabeth Aichinger; Cathy D Schleck; William S Harmsen; Lisa M Nyre; Robin Patel
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  A comparison of vancomycin and metronidazole for the treatment of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea, stratified by disease severity.

Authors:  Fred A Zar; Srinivasa R Bakkanagari; K M L S T Moorthi; Melinda B Davis
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2007-06-19       Impact factor: 9.079

View more
  39 in total

Review 1.  Primary Prevention of Clostridium difficile-Associated Diarrhea: Current Controversies and Future Tools.

Authors:  Zachary A Rubin; Elise M Martin; Paul Allyn
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2018-06-29       Impact factor: 3.725

2.  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

Review 3.  Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infections in Children.

Authors:  Stella Antonara; Amy L Leber
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Reply to Planche et al.

Authors:  Krishna Rao; Vincent B Young; David M Aronoff
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 9.079

5.  Point-Counterpoint: What Is the Optimal Approach for Detection of Clostridium difficile Infection?

Authors:  Ferric C Fang; Christopher R Polage; Mark H Wilcox
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2017-01-11       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 6.  Laboratory diagnosis of bacterial gastroenteritis.

Authors:  Romney M Humphries; Andrea J Linscott
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 26.132

7.  Evaluation of a new automated homogeneous PCR assay, GenomEra C. difficile, for rapid detection of Toxigenic Clostridium difficile in fecal specimens.

Authors:  Jari J Hirvonen; Silja Mentula; Suvi-Sirkku Kaukoranta
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 8.  Laboratory Tests for the Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  Karen C Carroll; Masako Mizusawa
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2020-02-25

9.  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

10.  Elevated fecal calprotectin associates with adverse outcomes from Clostridium difficile infection in older adults.

Authors:  Krishna Rao; Kavitha Santhosh; Jill A Mogle; Peter D R Higgins; Vincent B Young
Journal:  Infect Dis (Lond)       Date:  2016-05-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.