ParaSight-F test results in cerebral malaria patients before and after treatment in Chittagong Medical College Hospital, Bangladesh

Rapid diagnostic tests for diagnosing uncomplicated non-falciparum or Plasmodium vivax malaria in endemic countries

BACKGROUND

In settings where both Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparum infection cause malaria, rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) need to distinguish which species is causing the patients' symptoms, as different treatments are required. Older RDTs incorporated two test lines to distinguish malaria due to P. falciparum, from malaria due to any other Plasmodium species (non-falciparum). These RDTs can be classified according to which antibodies they use: Type 2 RDTs use HRP-2 (for P. falciparum) and aldolase (all species); Type 3 RDTs use HRP-2 (for P. falciparum) and pLDH (all species); Type 4 use pLDH (fromP. falciparum) and pLDH (all species).More recently, RDTs have been developed to distinguish P. vivax parasitaemia by utilizing a pLDH antibody specific to P. vivax.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of RDTs for detecting non-falciparum or P. vivax parasitaemia in people living in malaria-endemic areas who present to ambulatory healthcare facilities with symptoms suggestive of malaria, and to identify which types and brands of commercial test best detect non-falciparum and P. vivax malaria.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases up to 31 December 2013: Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; MEDLINE; EMBASE; MEDION; Science Citation Index; Web of Knowledge; African Index Medicus; LILACS; and IndMED.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies comparing RDTs with a reference standard (microscopy or polymerase chain reaction) in blood samples from a random or consecutive series of patients attending ambulatory health facilities with symptoms suggestive of malaria in non-falciparum endemic areas.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For each study, two review authors independently extracted a standard set of data using a tailored data extraction form. We grouped comparisons by type of RDT (defined by the combinations of antibodies used), and combined in meta-analysis where appropriate. Average sensitivities and specificities are presented alongside 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 47 studies enrolling 22,862 participants. Patient characteristics, sampling methods and reference standard methods were poorly reported in most studies. RDTs detecting 'non-falciparum' parasitaemiaEleven studies evaluated Type 2 tests compared with microscopy, 25 evaluated Type 3 tests, and 11 evaluated Type 4 tests. In meta-analyses, average sensitivities and specificities were 78% (95% CI 73% to 82%) and 99% (95% CI 97% to 99%) for Type 2 tests, 78% (95% CI 69% to 84%) and 99% (95% CI 98% to 99%) for Type 3 tests, and 89% (95% CI 79% to 95%) and 98% (95% CI 97% to 99%) for Type 4 tests, respectively. Type 4 tests were more sensitive than both Type 2 (P = 0.01) and Type 3 tests (P = 0.03).Five studies compared Type 3 tests with PCR; in meta-analysis, the average sensitivity and specificity were 81% (95% CI 72% to 88%) and 99% (95% CI 97% to 99%) respectively. RDTs detecting P.vivax parasitaemiaEight studies compared pLDH tests to microscopy; the average sensitivity and specificity were 95% (95% CI 86% to 99%) and 99% (95% CI 99% to 100%), respectively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

RDTs designed to detect P. vivax specifically, whether alone or as part of a mixed infection, appear to be more accurate than older tests designed to distinguish P. falciparum malaria from non-falciparum malaria. Compared to microscopy, these tests fail to detect around 5% ofP. vivax cases. This Cochrane Review, in combination with other published information about in vitro test performance and stability in the field, can assist policy-makers to choose between the available RDTs.

An epidemiological overview of malaria in Bangladesh

Bangladesh is one of the four major malaria-endemic countries in South-East Asia having approximately 34% of its population at risk of malaria. This paper aims at providing an overview of the malaria situation in this country. Relevant information was retrieved from published articles and reports in PubMed and Google Scholar. Malaria in Bangladesh is concentrated in 13 districts with a prevalence ranging between 3.1% and 36%, and is mostly caused by Plasmodium falciparum. Geographical conditions pose a potential risk for Plasmodium knowlesi malaria. Resistance to a number of drugs previously recommended for treatment has been reported. Low socio-economic status, poor schooling and close proximity to water bodies and forest areas comprise important risk factors. Despite the significant steps in Long Lasting Insecticide Net (LLIN)/Insecticide Treated Net (ITN) coverage in Bangladesh, there are still many challenges including the extension of malaria support to the remote areas of Bangladesh, where malaria prevalence is higher, and further improvements in the field of referral system and treatment.

Rapid diagnostic tests for diagnosing uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria in endemic countries

BACKGROUND

Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for Plasmodium falciparum malaria use antibodies to detect either HRP-2 antigen or pLDH antigen, and can improve access to diagnostics in developing countries.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of RDTs for detecting P. falciparum parasitaemia in persons living in endemic areas who present to ambulatory healthcare facilities with symptoms suggestive of malaria by type and brand.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases: Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; MEDLINE; EMBASE; MEDION; Science Citation Index; Web of Knowledge; African Index Medicus; LILACS; IndMED; to January 14, 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies comparing RDTs with a reference standard (microscopy or polymerase chain reaction) in blood samples from a random or consecutive series of patients attending ambulatory health facilities with symptoms suggestive of malaria in P. falciparum endemic areas.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For each study, a standard set of data was extracted independently by two authors, using a tailored data extraction form. Comparisons were grouped hierarchically by target antigen, and type and brand of RDT, and combined in meta-analysis where appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 74 unique studies as eligible for this review and categorized them according to the antigens they detected. Types 1 to 3 include HRP-2 (from P. falciparum) either by itself or with other antigens. Types 4 and 5 included pLDH (from P. falciparum) either by itself or with other antigens. In comparisons with microscopy, we identified 71 evaluations of Type 1 tests, eight evaluations of Type 2 tests and five evaluations of Type 3 tests. In meta-analyses, average sensitivities and specificities (95% CI) were 94.8% (93.1% to 96.1%) and 95.2% (93.2% to 96.7%) for Type 1 tests, 96.0% (94.0% to 97.3%) and 95.3% (87.3% to 98.3%) for Type 2 tests, and 99.5% (71.0% to 100.0%) and 90.6% (80.5% to 95.7%) for Type 3 tests, respectively. Overall for HRP-2, the meta-analytical average sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) were 95.0% (93.5% to 96.2%) and 95.2% (93.4% to 99.4%), respectively. For pLDH antibody-based RDTs verified with microscopy, we identified 17 evaluations of Type 4 RDTs and three evaluations of Type 5 RDTs. In meta-analyses, average sensitivity for Type 4 tests was 91.5% (84.7% to 95.3%) and average specificity was 98.7% (96.9% to 99.5%). For Type 5 tests, average sensitivity was 98.4% (95.1% to 99.5%) and average specificity was 97.5% (93.5% to 99.1%). Overall for pLDH, the meta-analytical average sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) were 93.2% (88.0% to 96.2%) and 98.5% (96.7% to 99.4%), respectively. For both categories of test, there was substantial heterogeneity in study results. Quality of the microscopy reference standard could only be assessed in 40% of studies due to inadequate reporting, but results did not seem to be influenced by the reporting quality.Overall, HRP-2 antibody-based tests (such as the Type 1 tests) tended to be more sensitive and were significantly less specific than pLDH-based tests (such as the Type 4 tests). If the point estimates for Type 1 and Type 4 tests are applied to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients where 30% of those presenting with symptoms have P. falciparum, Type 1 tests will miss 16 cases, and Type 4 tests will miss 26 cases. The number of people wrongly diagnosed with P. falciparum would be 34 with Type 1 tests, and nine with Type 4 tests.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity and specificity of all RDTs is such that they can replace or extend the access of diagnostic services for uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria. HRP-2 antibody types may be more sensitive but are less specific than pLDH antibody-based tests, but the differences are small. The HRP-2 antigen persists even after effective treatment and so is not useful for detecting treatment failures. 

PCR -- based diagnosis to evaluate the performance of malaria reference centers

Although the Giemsa-stained thick blood smear (GTS) remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of malaria, molecular methods are more sensitive and specific to detect parasites and can be used at reference centers to evaluate the performance of microscopy. The description of the Plasmodium falciparum, P. vivax, P. malariae and P. ovale ssrRNA gene sequences allowed the development of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) that had been used to differentiate the four species. The objective of this study was to determine Plasmodium species through PCR in 190 positive smears from patients in order to verify the quality of diagnosis at SUCEN's Malaria Laboratory. Considering only the 131 positive results in both techniques, GTS detected 4.6% of mixed and 3.1% of P. malariae infections whereas PCR identified 19.1% and 13.8%, respectively.

Performance of an immunochromatography test for vivax malaria in the Amazon region, Brazil

The study was carried out to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the ICT malaria Pf/Pv test for vivax malaria diagnosis in Bel m, Amazon region, Brazil. The results of blood malaria parasites examination using an immunochromatography test were compared with thick blood film (TBF) examination. It was also evaluated the performance of this test storaged at three different temperatures (25 degree C, 30 degree C, and 37 degree C) for 24 hours before use. Overall sensitivity of ICT Pf/Pv was 61.8% with a specificity of 100%, positive and negative predictive value of 100% and 71.8%, respectively and accuracy of 80.6%. The test sensitivity was independent of the parasite density. This test needs to be further reviewed in order to have better performance for P. vivax malaria diagnosis.

Evaluation of a rapid dipstick test, Malar-Check, for the diagnosis of Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Brazil

The present study was carried out to evaluate the Malar-Check trade mark Pf test, an immunochromatographic assay that detects Plasmodium falciparum Histidine Rich Protein II, does not require equipment, and is easy and rapid to perform. In dilution assays performed to test sensitivity against known parasite density, Malar-Check were compared with thick blood smear (TBS), the gold standard for diagnosis. Palo Alto isolate or P. falciparum blood from patients with different parasitemias was used. The average cut-off points for each technique in three independent experiments were 12 and 71 parasites/mm3 (TBS and Malar-Check, respectively). In the field assays, samples were collected from patients with fever who visited endemic regions. Compared to TBS, Malar-Check yielded true-positive results in 38 patients, false-positive results in 3, true-negative results in 23, and false-negative result in 1. Malar-Check performed with samples from falciparum-infected patients after treatment showed persistence of antigen up to 30 days. Malar-Check should aid the diagnosis of P. falciparum in remote areas and improve routine diagnosis even when microscopy is available. Previous P. falciparum infection, which can determine a false-positive test in cured individuals, should be considered. The prompt results obtained with the Malar-Check for early diagnosis could avoid disease evolution to severe cases.

Malaria screening of blood donors in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Transfusion-associated malaria is a potentially serious complication that continues to pose risks in blood bank settings. There is a need for effective malaria screening of blood donations to improve on the current exclusion policies of potentially infected carriers on the basis of clinical and travel history. We evaluated the potential usefulness of ELISA screening for malaria antibody and P. falciparum antigen among Saudi blood donors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 1756 donors were studied, 1100 from the malaria endemic Southern Region and 656 donors from the known malaria-free Riyadh area.

RESULTS

The overall antibody prevalence for the antibody was 7.6%, in comparison to only 0.17% for the antigen. In the endemic region, the antibody positivity rate of 9.1% was almost double the rate in the non-endemic area (4.8%). There was no difference in the antigen prevalence rates; 0.18% in endemic and 0.15% in nonendemic areas.

CONCLUSIONS

In malaria endemic countries like Saudi Arabia, excluding antibody-positive donations would result in too much wastage of blood units. However, antigen malaria testing appears to offer a potential utility, as only few donations would be rejected.

Malaria rapid diagnostic devices: performance characteristics of the ParaSight F device determined in a multisite field study

Microscopic detection of parasites has been the reference standard for malaria diagnosis for decades. However, difficulty in maintaining required technical skills and infrastructure has spurred the development of several nonmicroscopic malaria rapid diagnostic devices based on the detection of malaria parasite antigen in whole blood. The ParaSight F test is one such device. It detects the presence of Plasmodium falciparum-specific histidine-rich protein 2 by using an antigen-capture immunochromatographic strip format. The present study was conducted at outpatient malaria clinics in Iquitos, Peru, and Maesod, Thailand. Duplicate, blinded, expert microscopy was employed as the reference standard for evaluating device performance. Of 2,988 eligible patients, microscopy showed that 547 (18%) had P. falciparum, 658 (22%) had P. vivax, 2 (0.07%) had P. malariae, and 1,750 (59%) were negative for Plasmodium. Mixed infections (P. falciparum and P. vivax) were identified in 31 patients (1%). The overall sensitivity of ParaSight F for P. falciparum was 95%. When stratified by magnitude of parasitemia (no. of asexual parasites per microliter of whole blood), sensitivities were 83% (>0 to 500 parasites/microl), 87% (501 to 1,000/microl), 98% (1,001 to 5,000/microl), and 98% (>5,000/microl). Device specificity was 86%.