Alphaxard Manjurano1, Justin J Omolo2, Eric Lyimo3, Donald Miyaye3, Coleman Kishamawe3, Lucas E Matemba4, Julius J Massaga2, John Changalucha3, Paul E Kazyoba2. 1. Mwanza Medical Research Center, National Institute for Medical Research, Mwanza, Tanzania. amanjurano@yahoo.co.uk. 2. National Institute of Medical Research, Head Quarters, P.O. Box 9653, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. 3. Mwanza Medical Research Center, National Institute for Medical Research, Mwanza, Tanzania. 4. Dodoma Medical Research Center, National Institute for Medical Research, Dodoma, Tanzania.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Precise detection of Plasmodium infections in community surveys is essential for effective malaria control. Microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are the major techniques used to identify malaria infections in the field-based surveys. Although microscopy is still considered as the gold standard, RDTs are increasingly becoming versatile due to their rapid and adequate performance characteristics. METHODS: A malaria prevalence cross-sectional survey was carried out in north-western Tanzania in 2016, aimed at appraising the performance of high sensitivity Plasmodium falciparum (HSPf) tests compared to SD Bioline Pf and microscopy in detecting P. falciparum infections. A total of 397 individuals aged five years and above were tested for P. falciparum infections. The sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) of microscopy, Pf RDT and HSPf RDT was determined using PCR as the gold standard method. RESULTS: The prevalence of P. falciparum infections determined by microscopy, SD Bioline Pf, HSPf and PCR was 21.9, 27.7, 33.3 and 43.2%, respectively. The new HSPf RDT had significantly higher sensitivity (98.2%) and specificity (91.6%) compared to the routinely used SD Bioline Pf RDT(P < 0.001). The positive predictive value (PPV) was 81.8% and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 99.2% for the routinely used SD Bioline Pf RDT. Moreover, HSPf RDT had sensitivity of 69% and specificity of 76.8% compared to microscopy. The PPV was 45.5% and the NPV was 89.8% for microscopy. Furthermore, the analytical sensitivity test indicated that the newly developed HSPf RDT had lower detection limits compared to routinely used SD Bioline RDT. CONCLUSIONS: HSPf RDT had better performance when compared to both microscopy and the currently used malaria RDTs. The false negativity could be associated with the low parasite density of the samples. False positivity may be related to the limitations of the expertise of microscopists or persistent antigenicity from previous infections in the case of RDTs. Nevertheless, HS PfRDT performed better compared to routinely used Pf RDT, and microscopy in detecting malaria infections. Therefore, HS Pf RDT presents the best alternative to the existing commercial/regularly available RDTs due to its sensitivity and specificity, and reliability in diagnosing malaria infections.
BACKGROUND: Precise detection of Plasmodiuminfections in community surveys is essential for effective malaria control. Microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are the major techniques used to identify malaria infections in the field-based surveys. Although microscopy is still considered as the gold standard, RDTs are increasingly becoming versatile due to their rapid and adequate performance characteristics. METHODS: A malaria prevalence cross-sectional survey was carried out in north-western Tanzania in 2016, aimed at appraising the performance of high sensitivity Plasmodium falciparum (HSPf) tests compared to SD Bioline Pf and microscopy in detecting P. falciparum infections. A total of 397 individuals aged five years and above were tested for P. falciparum infections. The sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) of microscopy, Pf RDT and HSPf RDT was determined using PCR as the gold standard method. RESULTS: The prevalence of P. falciparum infections determined by microscopy, SD Bioline Pf, HSPf and PCR was 21.9, 27.7, 33.3 and 43.2%, respectively. The new HSPf RDT had significantly higher sensitivity (98.2%) and specificity (91.6%) compared to the routinely used SD Bioline Pf RDT(P < 0.001). The positive predictive value (PPV) was 81.8% and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 99.2% for the routinely used SD Bioline Pf RDT. Moreover, HSPf RDT had sensitivity of 69% and specificity of 76.8% compared to microscopy. The PPV was 45.5% and the NPV was 89.8% for microscopy. Furthermore, the analytical sensitivity test indicated that the newly developed HSPf RDT had lower detection limits compared to routinely used SD Bioline RDT. CONCLUSIONS: HSPf RDT had better performance when compared to both microscopy and the currently used malaria RDTs. The false negativity could be associated with the low parasite density of the samples. False positivity may be related to the limitations of the expertise of microscopists or persistent antigenicity from previous infections in the case of RDTs. Nevertheless, HS PfRDT performed better compared to routinely used Pf RDT, and microscopy in detecting malaria infections. Therefore, HS Pf RDT presents the best alternative to the existing commercial/regularly available RDTs due to its sensitivity and specificity, and reliability in diagnosing malaria infections.
Authors: Karen I Barnes; David N Durrheim; Francesca Little; Amanda Jackson; Ushma Mehta; Elizabeth Allen; Sicelo S Dlamini; Joyce Tsoka; Barry Bredenkamp; D Jotham Mthembu; Nicholas J White; Brian L Sharp Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2005-10-04 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Eric O Ochomo; Nabie M Bayoh; Edward D Walker; Bernard O Abongo; Maurice O Ombok; Collins Ouma; Andrew K Githeko; John Vulule; Guiyun Yan; John E Gimnig Journal: Malar J Date: 2013-10-24 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Natacha Protopopoff; Jacklin F Mosha; Eliud Lukole; Jacques D Charlwood; Alexandra Wright; Charles D Mwalimu; Alphaxard Manjurano; Franklin W Mosha; William Kisinza; Immo Kleinschmidt; Mark Rowland Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-04-11 Impact factor: 202.731
Authors: Asia Mohammed; Arnold Ndaro; Akili Kalinga; Alphaxard Manjurano; Jackline F Mosha; Dominick F Mosha; Marco van Zwetselaar; Jan B Koenderink; Frank W Mosha; Michael Alifrangis; Hugh Reyburn; Cally Roper; Reginald A Kavishe Journal: Malar J Date: 2013-11-14 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Reginald A Kavishe; Robert D Kaaya; Sidsel Nag; Camilla Krogsgaard; Jakob Ginsbak Notland; Adellaida A Kavishe; Deus Ishengoma; Cally Roper; Michael Alifrangis Journal: Malar J Date: 2016-06-23 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Thomas L Richie; Claudia A Daubenberger; Maxmillian Mpina; Thomas C Stabler; Tobias Schindler; Jose Raso; Anna Deal; Ludmila Acuche Pupu; Elizabeth Nyakarungu; Maria Del Carmen Ovono Davis; Vicente Urbano; Ali Mtoro; Ali Hamad; Maria Silvia A Lopez; Beltran Pasialo; Marta Alene Owono Eyang; Matilde Riloha Rivas; Carlos Cortes Falla; Guillermo A García; Juan Carlos Momo; Raul Chuquiyauri; Elizabeth Saverino; L W Preston Church; B Kim Lee Sim; Bonifacio Manguire; Marcel Tanner; Carl Maas; Salim Abdulla; Peter F Billingsley; Stephen L Hoffman; Said Jongo Journal: Malar J Date: 2022-03-24 Impact factor: 2.979