Performance and time to become negative after treatment of three malaria rapid diagnostic tests in low and high malaria transmission settings

Abstract Background The performance of different malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) may be influenced by transmission intensity and by the length of time each test requires to become negative after treatment and patient’s recovery. Methods Results of three RDTs (two HRP2 and one pLDH antigen-based...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Francesco Grandesso, Carolyn Nabasumba, Dan Nyehangane, Anne-Laure Page, Mathieu Bastard, Martin De Smet, Yap Boum, Jean-François Etard
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2016-10-01
Series:Malaria Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12936-016-1529-6
id doaj-9ad58fa889f44340ba844e808201ce65
record_format Article
spelling doaj-9ad58fa889f44340ba844e808201ce652020-11-24T22:36:05ZengBMCMalaria Journal1475-28752016-10-0115111210.1186/s12936-016-1529-6Performance and time to become negative after treatment of three malaria rapid diagnostic tests in low and high malaria transmission settingsFrancesco Grandesso0Carolyn Nabasumba1Dan Nyehangane2Anne-Laure Page3Mathieu Bastard4Martin De Smet5Yap Boum6Jean-François Etard7EpicentreEpicentre Mbarara Research CentreEpicentre Mbarara Research CentreEpicentreEpicentreMédecins Sans FrontièresEpicentre Mbarara Research CentreEpicentreAbstract Background The performance of different malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) may be influenced by transmission intensity and by the length of time each test requires to become negative after treatment and patient’s recovery. Methods Results of three RDTs (two HRP2 and one pLDH antigen-based tests) were compared to blood smear microscopy (the gold standard method) in children under 5 years of age living in a high versus low malaria intensity setting in southwestern Uganda. In each setting, 212 children, who tested positive by at least one RDT and by microscopy, were treated with artemether-lumefantrine. RDTs and microscopy were then repeated at fixed intervals to estimate each test’s time to negativity after treatment and patient recovery. Results In the two settings, sensitivities ranged from 98.4 to 99.2 % for the HRP2 tests and 94.7 to 96.1 % for the pLDH test. Specificities were 98.9 and 98.8 % for the HRP2 tests and 99.7 % for the pLDH test in the low-transmission setting and 79.7, 80.7 and 93.9 %, respectively, in the high-transmission setting. Median time to become negative was 35–42 or more days for the HRP2 tests and 2 days for the pLDH test. Conclusions High transmission contexts and a long time to become negative resulted in considerably reduced specificities for the HRP2 tests. Choice of RDT for low- versus high-transmission settings should balance risks and benefits of over-treatment versus missing malaria cases. Trial registration: Registry number at ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01325974http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12936-016-1529-6MalariaFeverDiagnosticRapid diagnostic testSensitivitySpecificity
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Francesco Grandesso
Carolyn Nabasumba
Dan Nyehangane
Anne-Laure Page
Mathieu Bastard
Martin De Smet
Yap Boum
Jean-François Etard
spellingShingle Francesco Grandesso
Carolyn Nabasumba
Dan Nyehangane
Anne-Laure Page
Mathieu Bastard
Martin De Smet
Yap Boum
Jean-François Etard
Performance and time to become negative after treatment of three malaria rapid diagnostic tests in low and high malaria transmission settings
Malaria Journal
Malaria
Fever
Diagnostic
Rapid diagnostic test
Sensitivity
Specificity
author_facet Francesco Grandesso
Carolyn Nabasumba
Dan Nyehangane
Anne-Laure Page
Mathieu Bastard
Martin De Smet
Yap Boum
Jean-François Etard
author_sort Francesco Grandesso
title Performance and time to become negative after treatment of three malaria rapid diagnostic tests in low and high malaria transmission settings
title_short Performance and time to become negative after treatment of three malaria rapid diagnostic tests in low and high malaria transmission settings
title_full Performance and time to become negative after treatment of three malaria rapid diagnostic tests in low and high malaria transmission settings
title_fullStr Performance and time to become negative after treatment of three malaria rapid diagnostic tests in low and high malaria transmission settings
title_full_unstemmed Performance and time to become negative after treatment of three malaria rapid diagnostic tests in low and high malaria transmission settings
title_sort performance and time to become negative after treatment of three malaria rapid diagnostic tests in low and high malaria transmission settings
publisher BMC
series Malaria Journal
issn 1475-2875
publishDate 2016-10-01
description Abstract Background The performance of different malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) may be influenced by transmission intensity and by the length of time each test requires to become negative after treatment and patient’s recovery. Methods Results of three RDTs (two HRP2 and one pLDH antigen-based tests) were compared to blood smear microscopy (the gold standard method) in children under 5 years of age living in a high versus low malaria intensity setting in southwestern Uganda. In each setting, 212 children, who tested positive by at least one RDT and by microscopy, were treated with artemether-lumefantrine. RDTs and microscopy were then repeated at fixed intervals to estimate each test’s time to negativity after treatment and patient recovery. Results In the two settings, sensitivities ranged from 98.4 to 99.2 % for the HRP2 tests and 94.7 to 96.1 % for the pLDH test. Specificities were 98.9 and 98.8 % for the HRP2 tests and 99.7 % for the pLDH test in the low-transmission setting and 79.7, 80.7 and 93.9 %, respectively, in the high-transmission setting. Median time to become negative was 35–42 or more days for the HRP2 tests and 2 days for the pLDH test. Conclusions High transmission contexts and a long time to become negative resulted in considerably reduced specificities for the HRP2 tests. Choice of RDT for low- versus high-transmission settings should balance risks and benefits of over-treatment versus missing malaria cases. Trial registration: Registry number at ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01325974
topic Malaria
Fever
Diagnostic
Rapid diagnostic test
Sensitivity
Specificity
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12936-016-1529-6
work_keys_str_mv AT francescograndesso performanceandtimetobecomenegativeaftertreatmentofthreemalariarapiddiagnostictestsinlowandhighmalariatransmissionsettings
AT carolynnabasumba performanceandtimetobecomenegativeaftertreatmentofthreemalariarapiddiagnostictestsinlowandhighmalariatransmissionsettings
AT dannyehangane performanceandtimetobecomenegativeaftertreatmentofthreemalariarapiddiagnostictestsinlowandhighmalariatransmissionsettings
AT annelaurepage performanceandtimetobecomenegativeaftertreatmentofthreemalariarapiddiagnostictestsinlowandhighmalariatransmissionsettings
AT mathieubastard performanceandtimetobecomenegativeaftertreatmentofthreemalariarapiddiagnostictestsinlowandhighmalariatransmissionsettings
AT martindesmet performanceandtimetobecomenegativeaftertreatmentofthreemalariarapiddiagnostictestsinlowandhighmalariatransmissionsettings
AT yapboum performanceandtimetobecomenegativeaftertreatmentofthreemalariarapiddiagnostictestsinlowandhighmalariatransmissionsettings
AT jeanfrancoisetard performanceandtimetobecomenegativeaftertreatmentofthreemalariarapiddiagnostictestsinlowandhighmalariatransmissionsettings
_version_ 1725721361647665152