Literature DB >> 31434724

Ultrasensitive Detection of Clostridioides difficile Toxins in Stool by Use of Single-Molecule Counting Technology: Comparison with Detection of Free Toxin by Cell Culture Cytotoxicity Neutralization Assay.

Glen Hansen1,2, Stephen Young3,4, Alan H B Wu5, Emily Herding1,2, Vickie Nordberg1,2, Ray Mills3, Christen Griego-Fullbright3, Aaron Wagner3, Chui Mei Ong5, Shawna Lewis6, Joseph Yoon6, Joel Estis7, Johanna Sandlund7, Emily Friedland7, Karen C Carroll8.   

Abstract

Laboratory tests for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) rely on the detection of free toxin or molecular detection of toxin genes. The Singulex Clarity C. diff toxins A/B assay is a rapid, automated, and ultrasensitive assay that detects C. difficile toxins A and B in stool. We compared CDI assays across two prospective multicenter studies to set a cutoff for the Clarity assay and to independently validate the performance compared with that of a cell culture cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCCNA). The cutoff was set by two sites testing fresh samples from 897 subjects with suspected CDI and then validated at four sites testing fresh samples from 1,005 subjects with suspected CDI. CCCNA testing was performed at a centralized laboratory. Samples with discrepant results between the Clarity assay and CCCNA were retested with CCCNA when the Clarity result agreed with that of at least one comparator method; toxin enzyme immunoassays (EIA), glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) detection, and PCR were performed on all samples. The cutoff for the Clarity assay was set at 12.0 pg/ml. Compared to results with CCCNA, the Clarity assay initially had 85.2% positive agreement and 92.4% negative agreement. However, when samples with discrepant results between the Clarity assay and CCCNA in the validation study were retested by CCCNA, 13/17 (76.5%) Clarity-negative but CCCNA-positive samples (Clarity+/CCCNA-) became CCCNA-, and 5/26 (19.2%) Clarity+/CCCNA- samples became CCCNA+, resulting in a 96.3% positive agreement and 93.0% negative agreement between Clarity and CCCNA results. The toxin EIA had 59.8% positive agreement with CCCNA. The Clarity assay was the most sensitive free-toxin immunoassay, capable of providing CDI diagnosis in a single-step solution. A different CCCNA result was reported for 42% of retested samples, increasing the positive agreement between Clarity and CCCNA from 85.2% to 96.3% and indicating the challenges of comparing free-toxin results to CCCNA results as a reference standard.
Copyright © 2019 American Society for Microbiology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  C. difficile; single-molecule counting technology; toxins A and B; ultrasensitive; ultrasensitivity

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31434724      PMCID: PMC6812992          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.00719-19

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


  30 in total

1.  Laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea and colitis: usefulness of Premier Cytoclone A+B enzyme immunoassay for combined detection of stool toxins and toxigenic C. difficile strains.

Authors:  A Lozniewski; C Rabaud; E Dotto; M Weber; F Mory
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  "Second-look" cytotoxicity: an evaluation of culture plus cytotoxin assay of Clostridium difficile isolates in the laboratory diagnosis of CDAD.

Authors:  E Bouza; T Peláez; R Alonso; P Catalán; P Muñoz; M R Créixems
Journal:  J Hosp Infect       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 3.926

3.  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 4.  Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of Clostridium difficile infections.

Authors:  Christina M Surawicz; Lawrence J Brandt; David G Binion; Ashwin N Ananthakrishnan; Scott R Curry; Peter H Gilligan; Lynne V McFarland; Mark Mellow; Brian S Zuckerbraun
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-02-26       Impact factor: 10.864

5.  Contamination of the Hospital Environment From Potential Clostridium difficile Excretors Without Active Infection.

Authors:  Jason S Biswas; Amita Patel; Jonathan A Otter; Esther van Kleef; Simon D Goldenberg
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2015-04-10       Impact factor: 3.254

6.  European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases: update of the diagnostic guidance document for Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  M J T Crobach; T Planche; C Eckert; F Barbut; E M Terveer; O M Dekkers; M H Wilcox; E J Kuijper
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 8.067

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: A reply.

Authors:  Stephanie Wilmore; Simon D Goldenberg
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 6.072

8.  Reference assays for Clostridium difficile infection: one or two gold standards?

Authors:  Timothy Planche; Mark Wilcox
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2010-11-30       Impact factor: 3.411

9.  Comparison of Clostridioides difficile Stool Toxin Concentrations in Adults With Symptomatic Infection and Asymptomatic Carriage Using an Ultrasensitive Quantitative Immunoassay.

Authors:  Nira R Pollock; Alice Banz; Xinhua Chen; David Williams; Hua Xu; Christine A Cuddemi; Alice X Cui; Matthew Perrotta; Eaman Alhassan; Brigitte Riou; Aude Lantz; Mark A Miller; Ciaran P Kelly
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 9.079

10.  Does the handling time of unrefrigerated human fecal specimens impact the detection of Clostridium difficile toxins in a hospital setting?

Authors:  Chintan Modi; Joseph R DePasquale; Nhat Q Nguyen; Judith E Malinowski; George Perez
Journal:  Indian J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-08-26
View more
  4 in total

1.  High Agreement Between an Ultrasensitive Clostridioides difficile Toxin Assay and a C. difficile Laboratory Algorithm Utilizing GDH-and-Toxin Enzyme Immunoassays and Cytotoxin Testing.

Authors:  Marie L Landry; Jeffrey E Topal; Joel Estis; Phoebe Katzenbach; Niamh Nolan; Johanna Sandlund
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2020-01-28       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Evaluation of Cycle Threshold, Toxin Concentration, and Clinical Characteristics of Clostridioides difficile Infection in Patients with Discordant Diagnostic Test Results.

Authors:  Megan D Shah; Joan-Miquel Balada-Llasat; Kelci Coe; Erica Reed; Johanna Sandlund; Preeti Pancholi
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2020-04-23       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Increased Clinical Specificity with Ultrasensitive Detection of Clostridioides difficile Toxins: Reduction of Overdiagnosis Compared to Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests.

Authors:  Johanna Sandlund; Joel Estis; Phoebe Katzenbach; Niamh Nolan; Kirstie Hinson; Jennifer Herres; Troy Pero; Gwyn Peterson; Jeung-Mi Schumaker; Craig Stevig; Rhonda Warren; Tsubasa West; Siu-Kei Chow
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 4.  Ultrasensitive Clostridioides difficile Toxin Testing for Higher Diagnostic Accuracy.

Authors:  Johanna Sandlund; Kerrie Davies; Mark H Wilcox
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 5.948

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.