| Literature DB >> 25078453 |
Richard Kwizera1, Joyce Nguna1, Agnes Kiragga1, Jesca Nakavuma2, Radha Rajasingham3, David R Boulware4, David B Meya5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cryptococcal meningitis can best be diagnosed by cerebrospinal fluid India ink microscopy, cryptococcal antigen detection, or culture. These require invasive lumbar punctures. The utility of cryptococcal antigen detection in saliva is unknown. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the point-of-care cryptococcal antigen lateral flow assay (CrAg LFA) in saliva.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25078453 PMCID: PMC4117530 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103156
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1The Study enrollment and Analysis populations.
The figure displays the distribution of the participants tested, consisting of HIV-infected persons from: 1) symptomatic meningitis cohort or 2) asymptomatic outpatient cohort with CD4<100 cells/µL. Saliva cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) lateral flow assay performance was compared with the reference standard of cryptococcal antigenemia in peripheral blood (i.e. CrAg+ in serum or plasma). The level of agreement between the two sample types is better in symptomatic patients (κ = 0.82) than in asymptomatic patients (κ = 0.41).
Characteristics of the study population.
| Demographic Variable | Symptomatic Meningitis Cohort | Asymptomatic Outpatient Cohort |
| N | 130 | 399 |
| Women, n (%) | 60 (46%) | 219 (55%) |
| Age in years, mean (±SD) | 35.7 (±9.4) | 35.5 (±9.8) |
| CD4 cell count, median (IQR) cells/µL | 28 (7–70) | 38 (15–70) |
| CrAg positive in peripheral blood, n(%) | 83 (64%) | 26 (6.5%) |
Summary of diagnostic performance of Cryptococcal Antigen LFA on saliva using serum/plasma as the reference standard.
| Population | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | C-Statistic | Kappa |
|
| 88% (73/83) | 97.8% (46/47) | 98.6% (73/74) | 82.1% (46/56) | 0.929 (P = 0.021) | 0.82 (P<0.001) |
|
| (79 to 94%) | (89 to 100%) | (93 to 100%) | (70 to 91%) | (0.888–0.970) | |
|
| 26.9% (7/26) | 100% (373/373) | 100% (7/7) | 95% (373/392) | 0.635 (P = 0.044) | 0.41 (P<0.001) |
|
| (12 to 48%) | (99 to 100%) | (59 to 100%) | (92 to 97%) | (0.547–0.721) |
Data presented are the percentage, numerator/denominator, and 95% confidence interval. PPV = Positive predictive value, NPV = negative predictive value, C- statistic = receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) for sensitivity and specificity.