Literature DB >> 9665987

Evaluation of the Biostar Chlamydia OIA assay with specimens from women attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic.

M S Pate1, P B Dixon, K Hardy, M Crosby, E W Hook.   

Abstract

Chlamydia trachomatis infections are the most prevalent sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) in the United States. In acute-care settings such as clinics and emergency rooms, a desirable chlamydia screening assay should exhibit good sensitivity and good specificity and should provide test results while the patient is still present. The Biostar Chlamydia OIA (Biostar, Inc., Boulder, Colo.) is an optical immunoassay (OIA) that provides test results in less than 30 min and that uses a test format that allows office-based testing. This assay is performed entirely at room temperature without the need for rotators or other specialized equipment. The goal of this study was to compare the performance of the Biostar Chlamydia OIA for the detection of C. trachomatis with the performance of cell culture, direct fluorescent-antibody (DFA) assay (Syva MicroTrak; Syva Co., Palo Alto, Calif.), and PCR (Roche Amplicor Chlamydia trachomatis; Roche, Branchburg, N.J.) for the detection of C. trachomatis infections in women attending an urban STD clinic. For calculations of relative test performance (sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values), patient specimens that yielded positive results by two or more of the four assays (cell culture, DFA assay, PCR, and OIA) were classified as "true infections." By these criteria, 42 of 306 total specimens were classified as positive for C. trachomatis (positive prevalence, 13.7%), 11 (3.6%; 10 by PCR and 1 by DFA assay) were positive by a single assay, and 253 (82.7%) were negative by all four tests. All culture-positive specimens were also positive by at least one other assay. Among the culture-negative specimens, 14(5%) specimens were positive by two of the three non-culture-based assays used. By using the criterion that positivity by at least two of the tests indicated a true infection,the relative sensitivities were as follows: culture and PCR, 92.9% each; Biostar Chlamydia OIA, 73.8%; and DFA assay, 59.5%.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9665987      PMCID: PMC105001     

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


  15 in total

1.  Impact of endocervical specimen quality on apparent prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infections diagnosed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method.

Authors:  J A Kellogg; J W Seiple; J L Klinedinst; J S Levisky
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 5.534

Review 2.  The discrepancy in discrepant analysis.

Authors:  A Hadgu
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-08-31       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Ligase chain reaction to detect Chlamydia trachomatis infection of the cervix.

Authors:  J Schachter; W E Stamm; T C Quinn; W W Andrews; J D Burczak; H H Lee
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Comparison of cell culture with two direct Chlamydia tests using immunofluorescence or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

Authors:  P Pothier; A Kazmierczak
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 3.267

5.  Correlation of the percent of positive Chlamydia trachomatis direct fluorescent antibody detection tests with the adequacy of specimen collection.

Authors:  C Howard; D L Friedman; J K Leete; M L Christensen
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1991 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.803

6.  Transmission of Chlamydia trachomatis among sex partners assessed by polymerase chain reaction.

Authors:  R P Viscidi; L Bobo; E W Hook; T C Quinn
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 5.226

Review 7.  Impact of variation in endocervical specimen collection and testing techniques on frequency of false-positive and false-negative Chlamydia detection results.

Authors:  J A Kellogg
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 2.493

8.  A comparison of nonculture-dependent methods for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis infections in pregnant women.

Authors:  V S Baselski; S G McNeeley; G Ryan; M Robison
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1987-07       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Use of cell culture and a rapid diagnostic assay for Chlamydia trachomatis screening.

Authors:  E W Hook; C Spitters; C A Reichart; T M Neumann; T C Quinn
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-09-21       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Expanded gold standard in the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis in a low prevalence population: diagnostic efficacy of tissue culture, direct immunofluorescence, enzyme immunoassay, PCR and serology.

Authors:  H Thejls; J Gnarpe; H Gnarpe; P G Larsson; J J Platz-Christensen; L Ostergaard; A Victor
Journal:  Genitourin Med       Date:  1994-10
View more
  12 in total

1.  Testing for sexually transmitted infections: a brave new world?

Authors:  R W Peeling
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.519

2.  Near-patient testing will not improve the control of sexually transmitted infections.

Authors:  G L Dean
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.519

3.  Evaluation of the rapid BioStar optical immunoassay for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in adolescent women.

Authors:  Claudiu I Bandea; Emilia H Koumans; Mary K Sawyer; Jason Dover; Angelica O'Connor; John R Papp; Elizabeth R Unger; Jim Braxton; Carolyn M Black
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2008-11-12       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Impact of reference standard sensitivity on accuracy of rapid antigen detection assays and a leukocyte esterase dipstick for diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in first-void urine specimens from men.

Authors:  M Chernesky; D Jang; J Krepel; J Sellors; J Mahony
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Decision analysis: point-of-care Chlamydia testing vs. laboratory-based methods.

Authors:  Geoffrey R Swain; Roberta A McDonald; John R Pfister; M Stephen Gradus; Gerald V Sedmak; Ajaib Singh
Journal:  Clin Med Res       Date:  2004-02

Review 6.  Point of care diagnostics for sexually transmitted infections: perspectives and advances.

Authors:  Charlotte Gaydos; Justin Hardick
Journal:  Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther       Date:  2014-02-03       Impact factor: 5.091

7.  What's the Point? How Point-of-Care STI Tests Can Impact Infected Patients.

Authors:  Jill Huppert; Elizabeth Hesse; Charlotte A Gaydos
Journal:  Point Care       Date:  2010-03-01

8.  Rapid tests for sexually transmitted diseases.

Authors:  Charlotte Ann Gaydos
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.725

9.  New point of care Chlamydia Rapid Test--bridging the gap between diagnosis and treatment: performance evaluation study.

Authors:  Lourdes Mahilum-Tapay; Vivian Laitila; James J Wawrzyniak; Helen H Lee; Sarah Alexander; Catherine Ison; Alison Swain; Penelope Barber; Ines Ushiro-Lumb; Beng T Goh
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-11-30

10.  Molecular Diagnosis of Sexually Transmitted Chlamydia trachomatis in the United States.

Authors:  April L Harkins; Erik Munson
Journal:  ISRN Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-06-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.