Diagnostic accuracy of an IgM enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and comparison with 2 polymerase chain reactions for early diagnosis of human leptospirosis

Development of a new accurate lateral flow immunoassay for diagnosis of human leptospirosis

PURPOSE

The current diagnostic methods for leptospirosis diagnosis are technically complex and expensive, with limited applicability to specialized laboratories. Furthermore, they lack diagnostic accuracy in the acute stage of the disease, which coincides with a period when antibiotics are highly effective. New simple and accurate tests are mandatory to decentralize and improve diagnosis. Here, we introduced a new lateral flow immunoassay (Lepto-LF) for human leptospirosis.

METHODS

We conducted a double-blinded assay using 104 serum samples from patients with confirmed or discarded diagnosis for leptospirosis. The diagnostic performance of Lepto-LF was estimated across different ranges of days from onset of symptoms (dpo), considering the diagnostic algorithm as reference standard. Additionally, it was compared with the screening methods enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (IgM-ELISA) and the slide agglutination test using temperature-resistant antigen (SATR).

RESULTS

Lepto-LF exhibited perfect diagnostic performance with a Youden´s index J = 1 from 6 dpo in the acute phase. IgM-ELISA gave slightly lower accuracy with J = 0.91 and 95.5% of both sensitivity and specificity; while SATR showed a markedly inferior yield (J = 0.41, sensitivity = 95.5%, specificity = 45.5%). The performances remained consistent in the convalescence phase of the disease (> 10 dpo).

CONCLUSION

Lepto-LF was found to be a reliable test for simple, rapid and early diagnosis of leptospirosis, resulting a promising tool for decentralizing leptospirosis diagnosis and enabling timely treatment of patients. In addition, Lepto-LF may be employed as confirmatory test, especially in remote areas and vulnerable contexts where the standard MAT is not available.

Evaluation of diagnostic accuracy of loop-mediated isothermal amplification method (LAMP) compared with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for Leptospira spp. in clinical samples: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) test is widely used in molecular diagnostics as a point-of-care technique alternative to traditional PCR especially in resource-limited countries. LAMP has been recently used to diagnose leptospirosis. Therefore, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the accuracy of LAMP with PCR in the diagnosis of leptospirosis. Sixty-one studies were extracted from three international databases and analyzed throughout using the PRISMA guideline. The pooled sensitivity of LAMP and PCR technique was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.58-0.90) and 0.54 (95% CI: 0.35-0.67) respectively indicating that LAMP is more sensitive than PCR. The Q* value of LAMP and PCR-based technique is 274.61 and 397.95, respectively. Among the analyzed studies, significant heterogeneity was observed where I² is 90.90% for LAMP-based and 86.18% for PCR-based. Our study suggests that LAMP has better diagnostic accuracy than PCR. However, future work should be carried out to reduce heterogeneity as well as to improve and develop effective intervention strategies.

Diagnostic accuracy of genetic markers and nucleic acid techniques for the detection of Leptospira in clinical samples: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Leptospirosis is often difficult to diagnose because of its nonspecific symptoms. The drawbacks of direct isolation and serological tests have led to the increased development of nucleic acid-based assays, which are more rapid and accurate. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of genetic markers for the detection of Leptospira in clinical samples.

METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPLE FINDINGS

A literature search was performed in Scopus, PubMed, MEDLINE and non-indexed citations (via Ovid) by using suitable keyword combinations. Studies evaluating the performance of nucleic acid assays targeting leptospire genes in human or animal clinical samples against a reference test were included. Of the 1645 articles identified, 42 eligible studies involving 7414 samples were included in the analysis. The diagnostic performance of nucleic acid assays targeting the rrs, lipL32, secY and flaB genes was pooled and analyzed. Among the genetic markers analyzed, the secY gene showed the highest diagnostic accuracy measures, with a pooled sensitivity of 0.56 (95% CI: 0.50-0.63), a specificity of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.97-0.98), a diagnostic odds ratio of 46.16 (95% CI: 6.20-343.49), and an area under the curve of summary receiver operating characteristics curves of 0.94. Nevertheless, a high degree of heterogeneity was observed in this meta-analysis. Therefore, the present findings here should be interpreted with caution.

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic accuracies of the studies examined for each genetic marker showed a significant heterogeneity. The secY gene exhibited higher diagnostic accuracy measures compared with other genetic markers, such as lipL32, flaB, and rrs, but the difference was not significant. Thus, these genetic markers had no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy for leptospirosis. Further research into these genetic markers is warranted.

Nucleic acid and antigen detection tests for leptospirosis

BACKGROUND

Early diagnosis of leptospirosis may contribute to the effectiveness of antimicrobial therapy and early outbreak recognition. Nucleic acid and antigen detection tests have the potential for early diagnosis of leptospirosis. With this systematic review, we assessed the sensitivity and specificity of nucleic acid and antigen detection tests.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic test accuracy of nucleic acid and antigen detection tests for the diagnosis of human symptomatic leptospirosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched electronic databases including MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and regional databases from inception to 6 July 2018. We did not apply restrictions to language or time of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic cross-sectional studies and case-control studies of tests that made use of nucleic acid and antigen detection methods in people suspected of systemic leptospirosis. As reference standards, we considered the microscopic agglutination test alone (which detects antibodies against leptospirosis) or in a composite reference standard with culturing or other serological tests. Studies were excluded when the controls were healthy individuals or when there were insufficient data to calculate sensitivity and specificity.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently extracted data from each study. We used the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (QUADAS-2) to assess risk of bias. We calculated study-specific values for sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled the results in a meta-analysis when appropriate. We used the bivariate model for index tests with one positivity threshold, and we used the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model for index tests with multiple positivity thresholds. As possible sources of heterogeneity, we explored: timing of index test, disease prevalence, blood sample type, primers or target genes, and the real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) visualisation method. These were added as covariates to the meta-regression models.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 studies evaluating nine index tests (conventional PCR (in short: PCR), real-time PCR, nested PCR, PCR performed twice, loop-mediated isothermal amplification, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), dot-ELISA, immunochromatography-based lateral flow assay, and dipstick assay) with 5981 participants (1834 with and 4147 without leptospirosis). Methodological quality criteria were often not reported, and the risk of bias of the reference standard was generally considered high. The applicability of findings was limited by the frequent use of frozen samples. We conducted meta-analyses for the PCR and the real-time PCR on blood products.The pooled sensitivity of the PCR was 70% (95% CI 37% to 90%) and the pooled specificity was 95% (95% CI 75% to 99%). When studies with a high risk of bias in the reference standard domain were excluded, the pooled sensitivity was 87% (95% CI 44% to 98%) and the pooled specificity was 97% (95% CI 60% to 100%). For the real-time PCR, we estimated a summary receiver operating characteristic curve. To illustrate, a point on the curve with 85% specificity had a sensitivity of 49% (95% CI 30% to 68%). Likewise, at 90% specificity, sensitivity was 40% (95% CI 24% to 59%) and at 95% specificity, sensitivity was 29% (95% CI 15% to 49%). The median specificity of real-time PCR on blood products was 92%. We did not formally compare the diagnostic test accuracy of PCR and real-time PCR, as direct comparison studies were lacking. Three of 15 studies analysing PCR on blood products reported the timing of sample collection in the studies included in the meta-analyses (range 1 to 7 days postonset of symptoms), and nine out of 16 studies analysing real-time PCR on blood products (range 1 to 19 days postonset of symptoms). In PCR studies, specificity was lower in settings with high leptospirosis prevalence. Other investigations of heterogeneity did not identify statistically significant associations. Two studies suggested that PCR and real-time PCR may be more sensitive on blood samples collected early in the disease stage. Results of other index tests were described narratively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The validity of review findings are limited and should be interpreted with caution. There is a substantial between-study variability in the accuracy of PCR and real-time PCR, as well as a substantial variability in the prevalence of leptospirosis. Consequently, the position of PCR and real-time PCR in the clinical pathway depends on regional considerations such as disease prevalence, factors that are likely to influence accuracy, and downstream consequences of test results. There is insufficient evidence to conclude which of the nucleic acid and antigen detection tests is the most accurate. There is preliminary evidence that PCR and real-time PCR are more sensitive on blood samples collected early in the disease stage, but this needs to be confirmed in future studies.

Molecular characterisation of Leptospira strains in Pakistan

Introduction: Leptospirosis affects a wide range of mammals, humans, and even a few poikilothermic animal species. In Pakistan, serological studies of equine leptospirosis have reported a prevalence of over 40%, but no study has ever been conducted towards molecular detection of Leptospira in horses. Material and Methods: Blood samples from 128 horses were screened using ELISA and 41 positive samples were examined for the presence of leptospiral DNA using specific primers for 16S rRNA gene. Results: Out of 41 tested samples, 20 samples were found to be PCR-positive, revealing a fragment of 306 bp after gel electrophoresis. Sequencing and phylogenetic analysis of positive samples revealed circulation of pathogenic Leptospira spp. in Pakistani horses. No evidence of circulation of intermediate species was found in this study. Conclusion: This study reports the first molecular evidence of equine leptospirosis in Pakistan and lays ground for further research in this area. It also confirms the efficiency of 16S rRNA for the diagnosis of equine leptospirosis.