| Literature DB >> 29244182 |
Onanong Sengvilaipaseuth1, Josée Castonguay-Vanier1,2, Anisone Chanthongthip1, Ooyanong Phonemixay1, Soulignasack Thongpaseuth1, Manivanh Vongsouvath1, Paul N Newton1,2, Tehmina Bharucha1,3, Audrey Dubot-Pérès1,2,4.
Abstract
Background: Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV) is a leading identified cause of encephalitis in Asia, often occurring in rural areas with poor access to laboratory diagnostics. We evaluated two rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for anti-JEV immunoglobulin M (IgM) detection.Entities:
Keywords: Central nervous system infection; Immunoassays; Japanese encephalitis virus; Laos, Rapid diagnostic tests; South-East Asia
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29244182 PMCID: PMC5914414 DOI: 10.1093/trstmh/trx067
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg ISSN: 0035-9203 Impact factor: 2.184
Summary of patients included in the study
| Study group 1 (SD-Bioline JEV IgG/IgM RDT) | Study group 2 (SD-Bioline JEV IgM RDT) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Admitting hospital | Mahosot | Luang Namtha | Salavan | Mahosot | Sethatirat | Mother and Child | Friendship |
| Number of patients | 140 | 39 | 21 | 143 | 7 | 18 | 20 |
| Age (median, interquartile range) | 26 (17–40) | 18 (10–26) | 18 (13–28) | 28 (16–40) | 35 (26–48) | 6 (3–8) | 30 (20–39) |
| Sex, n (% female) | 19 (13.6) | 19 (48.8) | 7 (33.3) | 60 (42.0) | 3 (43.0) | 5 (28.0) | 3 (15.0) |
| Clinical presentation*, n (% suspected CNS infection) | 140 (100) | 5 (12.8) | 1 (4.8) | 143 (100) | 7 (100) | 18 (100) | 20 (100) |
*The clinical inclusion criterion for study group 1 was either suspected central nervous system (CNS) infection or undifferentiated fever and for study group 2 was only suspected CNS infection.
2×2 Tables comparing anti-JEV IgM detection by Panbio ELISA kit and SD-Bioline JEV RDT results for serum, CSF, all samples and all patients
| SD-Bioline JE IgG/IgM RDTa | SD-Bioline JEV IgM RDTb | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Suspected CNS infection | Undifferentiated fever | Suspected CNS infection | ||||||||||||
| CSF | Panbio ELISAc | CSF | Panbio ELISAc | CSF | Panbio ELISAc | |||||||||
| POS | NEG | Total | POS | NEG | Total | POS | NEG | Total | ||||||
| RDT | POS | 12 | 1 | 13 | RDT | POS | 0 | 0 | 0 | RDT | POS | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| NEG | 17 | 29 | 46 | NEG | 0 | 0 | 0 | NEG | 40 | 140 | 180 | |||
| Total | 29 | 30 | 59 | Total | 0 | 0 | 0 | Total | 40 | 140 | 180 | |||
| Sensitivity (95% CI): 41.4% (23.5–61.0) | Sensitivity (95% CI): — | Sensitivity (95% CI): 0.0% (0.0–8.8) | ||||||||||||
| Specificity (95% CI): 96.7% (82.8–99.9) | Specificity (95% CI): — | Specificity (95% CI): 100% (97.4–100) | ||||||||||||
| Acute serum | Panbio ELISA | Acute serum | Panbio ELISA | Acute serum | Panbio ELISA | |||||||||
| POS | NEG | Total | POS | NEG | Total | POS | NEG | Total | ||||||
| RDT | POS | 4 | 0 | 4 | RDT | POS | 3 | 0 | 3 | RDT | POS | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| NEG | 4 | 83 | 87 | NEG | 15 | 31 | 46 | NEG | 40 | 123 | 163 | |||
| Total | 8 | 83 | 91 | Total | 18 | 31 | 49 | Total | 40 | 123 | 163 | |||
| Sensitivity (95% CI): 17.7% (15.7–84.3) | Sensitivity (95% CI): 16.7% (3.6–41.4) | Sensitivity (95% CI): 0.0% (0.0–8.8) | ||||||||||||
| Specificity (95% CI): 100% (95.7–100) | Specificity (95% CI): 100% (88.8–100) | Specificity (95% CI): 100% (97.1–100) | ||||||||||||
| Convalescent serum | Panbio ELISA | Convalescent serum | Panbio ELISA | Convalescent serum | Panbio ELISA | |||||||||
| POS | NEG | Total | POS | NEG | Total | POS | NEG | Total | ||||||
| RDT | POS | 9 | 0 | 9 | RDT | POS | 4 | 0 | 4 | RDT | POS | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| NEG | 3 | 77 | 80 | NEG | 19 | 26 | 45 | NEG | 6 | 17 | 23 | |||
| Total | 12 | 77 | 89 | Total | 23 | 26 | 49 | Total | 7 | 17 | 24 | |||
| Sensitivity (95% CI): 75.0% (42.8–94.5) | Sensitivity (95% CI): 17.4% (5.0–38.8) | Sensitivity (95% CI): 14.3% (0.4–57.9) | ||||||||||||
| Specificity (95% CI): 100% (95.3–100) | Specificity (95% CI): 100 (86.8–100) | Specificity (95% CI): 100% (80.5–100) | ||||||||||||
| All patients | Panbio ELISA | All patients | Panbio ELISA | All patients | Panbio ELISA | |||||||||
| POS | NEG | Total | POS | NEG | Total | POS | NEG | Total | ||||||
| RDT | POS | 18 | 1 | 19 | RDT | POS | 4 | 0 | 4 | RDT | POS | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| NEG | 17 | 110 | 127 | NEG | 21 | 29 | 50 | NEG | 47 | 140 | 187 | |||
| Total | 35 | 111 | 146 | Total | 25 | 29 | 54 | Total | 48 | 140 | 188 | |||
| Sensitivity (95% CI): 51.4% (34.0–68.6) | Sensitivity (95% CI): 16.0% (4.5–36.1) | Sensitivity (95% CI): 2.1% (0.1–11.1) | ||||||||||||
| Specificity (95% CI): 99.1% (95.1–100) | Specificity (95% CI): 100% (88.1–100) | Specificity (95% CI): 100% (97.4–100) | ||||||||||||
aSD-Bioline JE IgG/IgM test and bSD-Bioline JEV IgM test (RDT), both produced by Standard Diagnostics, Kyonggi-do, South Korea. Positive (POS)=‘M’ (IgM) for the IgG/IgM assay and ‘T’ (test) for the IgM assay, and ‘C’ (control) lines visible; negative (NEG)=only ‘C’ line visible. IgG results are not presented. The study was performed in two phases: (1) SD-Bioline JEV IgG/IgM RDT tested on 200 patients with assays read by four independent investigators (interreader agreement 99.4% [95% CI 97.9–99.9]) and (2) SD-Bioline JEV IgM RDT tested on 188 patients with assays read by two independent investigators (interreader agreement 100% [95% CI 99.0–100]).
cJEV-Dengue IgM Combo ELISA kit (Panbio ELISA), Inverness Medical Innovations, Brisbane, Australia (formerly Panbio Ltd). Positive (POS)=JEV IgM positive, negative (NEG)=JEV IgM negative or equivocal, with cut-offs calculated according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
For the patient data, positive (POS) refers to CSF and/or serum positive for anti-JEV IgM and negative (NEG) is all available samples negative.