Evaluation and comparison of two immunodiagnostic assays for Helicobacter pylori antibodies with culture results

Non-invasive diagnostic tests for Helicobacter pylori infection

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) infection has been implicated in a number of malignancies and non-malignant conditions including peptic ulcers, non-ulcer dyspepsia, recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding, unexplained iron deficiency anaemia, idiopathic thrombocytopaenia purpura, and colorectal adenomas. The confirmatory diagnosis of H pylori is by endoscopic biopsy, followed by histopathological examination using haemotoxylin and eosin (H & E) stain or special stains such as Giemsa stain and Warthin-Starry stain. Special stains are more accurate than H & E stain. There is significant uncertainty about the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive tests for diagnosis of H pylori.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of urea breath test, serology, and stool antigen test, used alone or in combination, for diagnosis of H pylori infection in symptomatic and asymptomatic people, so that eradication therapy for H pylori can be started.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Science Citation Index and the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Database on 4 March 2016. We screened references in the included studies to identify additional studies. We also conducted citation searches of relevant studies, most recently on 4 December 2016. We did not restrict studies by language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy studies that evaluated at least one of the index tests (urea breath test using isotopes such as 13C or 14C, serology and stool antigen test) against the reference standard (histopathological examination using H & E stain, special stains or immunohistochemical stain) in people suspected of having H pylori infection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the references to identify relevant studies and independently extracted data. We assessed the methodological quality of studies using the QUADAS-2 tool. We performed meta-analysis by using the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model to estimate and compare SROC curves. Where appropriate, we used bivariate or univariate logistic regression models to estimate summary sensitivities and specificities.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 101 studies involving 11,003 participants, of which 5839 participants (53.1%) had H pylori infection. The prevalence of H pylori infection in the studies ranged from 15.2% to 94.7%, with a median prevalence of 53.7% (interquartile range 42.0% to 66.5%). Most of the studies (57%) included participants with dyspepsia and 53 studies excluded participants who recently had proton pump inhibitors or antibiotics.There was at least an unclear risk of bias or unclear applicability concern for each study.Of the 101 studies, 15 compared the accuracy of two index tests and two studies compared the accuracy of three index tests. Thirty-four studies (4242 participants) evaluated serology; 29 studies (2988 participants) evaluated stool antigen test; 34 studies (3139 participants) evaluated urea breath test-13C; 21 studies (1810 participants) evaluated urea breath test-14C; and two studies (127 participants) evaluated urea breath test but did not report the isotope used. The thresholds used to define test positivity and the staining techniques used for histopathological examination (reference standard) varied between studies. Due to sparse data for each threshold reported, it was not possible to identify the best threshold for each test.Using data from 99 studies in an indirect test comparison, there was statistical evidence of a difference in diagnostic accuracy between urea breath test-13C, urea breath test-14C, serology and stool antigen test (P = 0.024). The diagnostic odds ratios for urea breath test-13C, urea breath test-14C, serology, and stool antigen test were 153 (95% confidence interval (CI) 73.7 to 316), 105 (95% CI 74.0 to 150), 47.4 (95% CI 25.5 to 88.1) and 45.1 (95% CI 24.2 to 84.1). The sensitivity (95% CI) estimated at a fixed specificity of 0.90 (median from studies across the four tests), was 0.94 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.97) for urea breath test-13C, 0.92 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.94) for urea breath test-14C, 0.84 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.91) for serology, and 0.83 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.90) for stool antigen test. This implies that on average, given a specificity of 0.90 and prevalence of 53.7% (median specificity and prevalence in the studies), out of 1000 people tested for H pylori infection, there will be 46 false positives (people without H pylori infection who will be diagnosed as having H pylori infection). In this hypothetical cohort, urea breath test-13C, urea breath test-14C, serology, and stool antigen test will give 30 (95% CI 15 to 58), 42 (95% CI 30 to 58), 86 (95% CI 50 to 140), and 89 (95% CI 52 to 146) false negatives respectively (people with H pylori infection for whom the diagnosis of H pylori will be missed).Direct comparisons were based on few head-to-head studies. The ratios of diagnostic odds ratios (DORs) were 0.68 (95% CI 0.12 to 3.70; P = 0.56) for urea breath test-13C versus serology (seven studies), and 0.88 (95% CI 0.14 to 5.56; P = 0.84) for urea breath test-13C versus stool antigen test (seven studies). The 95% CIs of these estimates overlap with those of the ratios of DORs from the indirect comparison. Data were limited or unavailable for meta-analysis of other direct comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people without a history of gastrectomy and those who have not recently had antibiotics or proton ,pump inhibitors, urea breath tests had high diagnostic accuracy while serology and stool antigen tests were less accurate for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection.This is based on an indirect test comparison (with potential for bias due to confounding), as evidence from direct comparisons was limited or unavailable. The thresholds used for these tests were highly variable and we were unable to identify specific thresholds that might be useful in clinical practice.We need further comparative studies of high methodological quality to obtain more reliable evidence of relative accuracy between the tests. Such studies should be conducted prospectively in a representative spectrum of participants and clearly reported to ensure low risk of bias. Most importantly, studies should prespecify and clearly report thresholds used, and should avoid inappropriate exclusions.

Diagnostic performance of gastric imprint smear for determination of Helicobacter pylori infection

BACKGROUND

Despite the availability of several methods (invasive and noninvasive) for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection, no test is considered to be the 'gold standard'. Endoscopy-based tests are regarded as the reference method in most studies.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of imprint cytology smears of antral biopsies compared with Gram-stained smears, the rapid urease test and culture methods, separately and in combination.

METHODS

Antral biopsies were obtained from consecutive patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy at a single centre. The biopsies were examined for the presence of H pylori by Gram-stained smear, the rapid urease test, culture methods and imprint cytology smear. 

RESULTS

A total of 273 biopsies were studied. All tests were positive in 36% of the patients. Of 252 biopsies tested, 73% were positive using the imprint cytology technique. Using Gram-stained smear, the rapid urease test and culture methods individually, the sensitivity and specificity of imprint cytology smears for the detection of H pylori were found to be 92.7% and 50%; 92.7% and 49%; and 92.4% and 38.5%, respectively. Combining the three microbiological methods resulted in a sensitivity of 92.1%, a specificity of 51.0% and an efficiency of 71.7% for imprint cytology smears.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic examination provides useful clinical information. Imprint gastric cytology can be used as a rapid test to establish the diagnosis of H pylori infection at the time endoscopy is performed, enabling the endoscopist to start treatment with immediate effect.

Non-Invasive Serological Detection of Helicobacter pylori Antigens in Adult Hong Kong Chinese Non-Ulcer Dyspepsia Patients

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to evaluate the accuracy of the serology test kit (Signify H. pylori test), an office-based serological test and to compare relative performances with endoscopy, including biopsy urease tests (Clotest), histology, and culture when applied to dyspeptic adult patients in Hong Kong Chinese.

METHODS

Prospective clinical trial was conducted at the Alice Ho Miu ling Nethersole Hospital (AHNH) outpatient endoscopy center from June to December 2004 and included adult Chinese patients who attended the endoscopy center. A research nurse interviewed consenting patients and whole blood samples were obtained via simple fingerstick were then and transferred to Signify test kits. The results were read after 5 minutes. The presence of two distinct lines within the result-reading window was treated as a positive result; a single distinct line was treated as a negative result. All patients underwent upper gastroduodenal endoscopy, and antral/antrum gastric biopsy specimens were taken and then processed for microbiological cultures.

RESULTS

A total of 384 patients were recruited in the study and 131 (34.7%) patients were tested positive for H. pylori. Among them, 62 patients (47.3%) were detected by the Signify H. pylori test. The Signify serology test kit was 52.7% sensitive, 87.9% specific, and 75.7% accurate, respectively in the current study.

CONCLUSION

The Signify H. pylori test showed a sub-optimal correlation between the presence of H. pylori infection and the serological test results in a Hong Kong Chinese population.

In vitro activities of voriconazole, posaconazole, and four licensed systemic antifungal agents against Candida species infrequently isolated from blood

We determined the in vitro susceptibilities of 314 strains of Candida spp., representing 13 species rarely isolated from blood, to posaconazole and voriconazole as well as four licensed systemic antifungal agents (amphotericin B, flucytosine, fluconazole, and itraconazole). The organisms included 153 isolates of C. krusei, 67 isolates of C. lusitaniae, 48 isolates of C. guilliermondii, 10 isolates of C. famata, 10 isolates of C. kefyr, 6 isolates of C. pelliculosa, 5 isolates of C. rugosa, 4 isolates of C. lipolytica, 3 isolates of C. dubliniensis, 3 isolates of C. inconspicua, 2 isolates of C. sake, and 1 isolate each of C. lambica, C. norvegensis, and C. zeylanoides. MIC determinations were made by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards reference broth microdilution method and Etest (amphotericin B). Resistance to both amphotericin B and fluconazole was observed in strains of C. krusei, C. lusitaniae, C. guilliermondii, C. inconspicua, and C. sake. Resistance to amphotericin B, but not to fluconazole, was also observed among isolates of C. kefyr and C. rugosa. Posaconazole and voriconazole were active (MIC, < or = 1 micro g/ml) against 94 to 100% of these isolates. In contrast to the more common species of Candida causing bloodstream infection, these rare species appear to be less susceptible to the currently licensed systemic antifungal agents, with the exception of voriconazole. Continued surveillance will be necessary to detect the emergence of these species as more prevalent, resistant pathogens. The new triazoles appear to offer acceptable coverage of uncommon Candida sp. bloodstream infections.

Comparison of two new rapid serology tests for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in Chinese patients

BACKGROUND

Rapid serology test is a simple and convenient way for diagnosing Helicobacter pylori infection. However performances of these tests are usually less satisfactory than expected, particularly in developing countries.

AIM

To evaluate the performances of two newly developed rapid serology tests for Helicobacter pylori infection.

PATIENTS

Consecutive Chinese dyspeptic patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHODS

Gastric biopsies were obtained from antrum and corpus for rapid urease test and histological examination. Diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection was based on two or more positive results in rapid urease test, histology and [13C] urea breath test. Patients' sera were tested against two rapid serology tests: ASSURE Hp Rapid Test (Genelabs Diagnostics, Singapore) and SureStep (Applied Biotech, San Diego, CA, USA).

RESULTS

A total of 148 patients were evaluated and Helicobacter pylori infection was diagnosed in 78 (53%) patients by gold standard. The sensitivities of ASSURE Hp and SureStep were, respectively, 94% and 71% (p=0.0003). Specificities of the two test kits were both 90%. The overall accuracy of ASSURE Hp was significantly higher than SureStep (92% versus 80%, p=0.004).

CONCLUSION

Both rapid serology tests appear to be specific in diagnosing Helicobacter pylori infection in the Chinese populations. However the ASSURE Hp test is more sensitive and accurate than the SureStep test.

Validation of a new immunoblot assay for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori in the Asian population

BACKGROUND

Performance of commercial serological tests for Helicobacter pylori varies in different populations, largely due to strain heterogeneity and variations in antigenic preparations. Currently available serology tests often show sub-optimal accuracy when used for Asian patients.

AIM

This study evaluated a recombinant antigen-based immunoblot for the diagnosis of H. pylori infection in Chinese patients, and compared it with a conventional ELISA test.

METHODS

Dyspeptic patients referred for diagnostic endoscopy were recruited. The gold standard for H. pylori infection was based on two or more positive results among rapid urease test, histology and (13)C-urea breath test. Serological diagnosis of H. pylori infection was conducted by an ELISA test (pylori DTect; Diagnostic Technology) and an immunoblotting against a novel recombinant antigen (C1S; Genelab), which was constructed by immunological screening of the genomic DNA library of H. pylori.

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients were evaluated and H. pylori infection was diagnosed in 40 (46%) by the reference tests. The sensitivities of the ELISA and immunoblot were 80% (95% CI: 64--91%) and 90% (95% CI: 76--97%), whilst the specificities were 96% (95% CI: 86--96%) and 87% (95% CI: 74--95%), respectively. The respective likelihood ratios of the two tests were 18.6 and 7.0.

CONCLUSIONS

Satisfactory performance is obtained by the use of the new recombinant antigen-based immunoblot for diagnosing H. pylori infection in Chinese patients.

Evaluation of three commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori in Chinese patients

Most of the commercial serological assays for H. pylori are developed and validated in western countries. We evaluated the accuracy of three popular commercial ELISA tests for H. pylori in the Chinese population. Eighty dyspeptic patients were recruited and diagnosis of H. pylori infection was based on biopsy urease test, histology and urea breath test. Thirty-six patients (45%) were positive for H. pylori infection by two or more positive reference tests. Anti-H. pylori IgG antibody was detected by three commercial ELISA tests: GAP IgG (Bio-Rad), HM-CAP (Enteric Products) and Pyloriset EIA-G (Orion). The respective sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the three tests were: GAP IgG (50%, 97.4%, 93.8%, 71.7%), HM-CAP (72.7%, 68.4%, 66.7%, 74.3%) and Pyloriset EIA-G (75%, 86.4%, 81.8%, 80.9%). Despite the high accuracy reported in the West, the performance of these commercial serological tests was unsatisfactory when used in Chinese patients.