Validation of COBAS Taqman CT for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in vulvo-vaginal swabs

Screening for Chlamydia and Gonorrhea: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Chlamydia and gonorrhea are among the most common sexually transmitted infections in the US. Infection rates are highest among adolescents and young adults of both sexes. Chlamydial and gonococcal infections in women are usually asymptomatic and may lead to pelvic inflammatory disease and its associated complications. Newborns of pregnant persons with untreated infection may develop neonatal chlamydial pneumonia or gonococcal or chlamydial ophthalmia. Infection in men may lead to urethritis and epididymitis. Both types of infection can increase risk of acquiring or transmitting HIV.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in sexually active adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic, sexually active adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for chlamydia in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for gonorrhea in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in men.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends screening for chlamydia in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for gonorrhea in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in men. (I statement).

Screening for Chlamydial and Gonococcal Infections: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

The 2014 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement supported the effectiveness of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in asymptomatic, sexually active women 24 years or younger and in older women at increased risk for infection, although evidence for screening in men was insufficient.

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2014 USPSTF review on screening for chlamydial and gonococcal infection in adults and adolescents, including those who are pregnant.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Ovid MEDLINE (January 1, 2014, through May 28, 2020) with surveillance through May 21, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials and observational studies of screening effectiveness, accuracy of risk stratification and alternative screening methods, accuracy of tests, and screening harms.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently assessed study quality.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Complications of infection; infection transmission or acquisition; diagnostic accuracy of anatomical site-specific testing and collection methods; screening harms.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies were included (N = 179 515). Chlamydia screening compared with no screening was significantly associated with reduced risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in 2 of 4 trials and with reduced hospital-diagnosed PID (0.24% vs 0.38%); relative risk, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.4-1.0]), but not clinic-diagnosed PID or epididymitis, in the largest trial. In studies of risk prediction instruments in asymptomatic women, age younger than 22 years demonstrated comparable accuracy to extensive criteria. Sensitivity of chlamydial testing was similar at endocervical (89%-100%) and self- and clinician-collected vaginal (90%-100%) sites for women and at meatal (100%), urethral (99%), and rectal (92%) sites for men but lower at pharyngeal sites (69.2%) for men who have sex with men. Sensitivity of gonococcal testing was 89% or greater for all anatomical samples. False-positive and false-negative testing rates were low across anatomical sites and collection methods.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Screening for chlamydial infection was significantly associated with a lower risk of PID in young women. Risk prediction criteria demonstrated limited accuracy beyond age. Testing for asymptomatic chlamydial and gonococcal infections was highly accurate at most anatomical sites, including urine and self-collected specimens. Effectiveness of screening in men and during pregnancy, optimal screening intervals, and adverse effects of screening require further evaluation.

Self-Collected versus Clinician-Collected Sampling for Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Screening: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The increases in STI rates since the late 1990s in Canada have occurred despite widespread primary care and targeted public health programs and in the setting of universal health care. More innovative interventions are required that would eliminate barriers to STI testing such as internet-based or mail-in home and community service testing for patients that are hard to reach, who refuse to go for clinician-based testing, or who decline an examination. Jurisdictions such as New Zealand and some American states currently use self-collected sampling, but without the required evidence to determine whether self-collected specimens are as accurate as clinician-collected specimens in terms of chlamydia and gonorrhea diagnostic accuracy. The objective of the review is to compare self-collected vaginal, urine, pharyngeal and rectal samples to our reference standard - clinician-collected cervical, urethral, pharyngeal and rectal sampling techniques to identify a positive specimen using nucleic acid amplification test assays.

METHODS

The hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic and the fixed effect models were used to assess the accuracy of comparable specimens that were collected by patients compared to clinicians. Sensitivity and specificity estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported as our main outcome measures.

FINDINGS

We included 21 studies based on over 6100 paired samples. Fourteen included studies examined chlamydia only, 6 compared both gonorrhea and chlamydia separately in the same study, and one examined gonorrhea. The six chlamydia studies comparing self-collection by vaginal swab to a clinician-collected cervical swab had the highest sensitivity (92%, 95% CI 87-95) and specificity (98%, 95% CI 97-99), compared to other specimen-types (urine/urethra or urine/cervix). Six studies compared urine self-samples to urethra clinician-collected samples in males and produced a sensitivity of 88% (95% CI 83-93) and a specificity of 99% (95% CI 0.94-0.99). Taking into account that urine samples may be less sensitive than cervical samples, eight chlamydia studies that compared urine self-collected verses clinician-collected cervical samples had a sensitivity of 87% (95% CI 81-91) and high specificity of 99% (95% CI 0.98-1.00). For gonorrhea testing, self-collected urine samples compared to clinician-collected urethra samples in males produced a sensitivity of 92% (95% CI 83-97) and specificity of 99% (95% CI 0.98-1.00).

CONCLUSION

The sensitivity and specificity of vaginal self-collected swabs compared to swabs collected by clinicians supports the use of vaginal swab as the recommended specimen of choice in home-based screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea. Urine samples for gonorrhea collected by men had comparably high sensitivity and specificity, so could be recommended as they can be left at room temperature for several days, allowing for the possibility of mail-in home-based testing. In populations that may not go for testing at all, do not have the option of clinical testing, or who refuse a clinical examination, self-collected screening would be a good alternative. We recommend that guidelines on how to self-collect gonorrhea and chlamydia urine, vaginal, rectal and pharyngeal specimens be published.

Poor uptake of self-sample collection kits for Chlamydia testing outside primary care

OBJECTIVES

New strategies are needed to reach at-risk populations for Chlamydia screening.

METHOD

Self-sample collection kits containing instructions and all items required for testing were developed and piloted in a three-month trial in primary care. Practice staff offered kits to young people receiving opportunistic Chlamydia screening to pass on to their 'social contacts.'

RESULTS

The 'pass it on' approach failed to reach adequate numbers of youth for testing: of 67 kits distributed, three specimens were sent to the laboratory (4.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The method of kit distribution trialled here was not successful in reaching at-risk youth for testing outside the primary care setting.

IMPLICATIONS

Use of self-sample collection for chlamydia testing outside healthcare settings is likely to be important for increased access to testing. The importance of chlamydia testing needs to be widely promoted and methods for kit distribution to reach at-risk youth identified.

Sampling for Chlamydia trachomatis infection - a comparison of vaginal, first-catch urine, combined vaginal and first-catch urine and endocervical sampling

The aim of the study was to evaluate the sensitivity of patients' self-sampled vaginal specimens, first-catch urine (FCU), combined vaginal/FCU specimens and endocervical specimens for detecting chlamydial infection in women. Women attending sexually transmitted disease clinics, youth clinics and a women's health clinic were enrolled. They self-collected a vaginal specimen with two swabs, which were placed into a sterile tube and into a tube containing a buffer medium, respectively. An FCU sample was collected and aliquoted into both an empty tube and the tube containing the vaginal swab. A clinician collected an endocervical swab. The samples were sent to laboratories for analysis using polymerase chain reaction testing and strand displacement amplification testing, respectively. The sensitivities calculated in all 171 Chlamydia trachomatis-infected women were equal for endocervical specimens (97.1%), vaginal specimens (96.5%) and combined vaginal/FCU specimens (95.3%), whereas the sensitivity for FCU was significantly lower (87.7%). The sensitivity of vaginal specimens for the detection of C. trachomatis is as high as that of combined vaginal/FCU specimens.

Comparing urine samples and cervical swabs for Chlamydia testing in a female population by means of Strand Displacement Assay (SDA)

Background

There has been an increasing number of diagnosed cases of Chlamydia trachomatis in many countries, in particular among young people. The present study was based on a growing request to examine urine as a supplementary or primary specimen in screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in women, with the Becton Dickinson ProbeTec (BDPT) Strand Displacement Assay (SDA). Urine samples may be particularly important in screening young people who are asymptomatic.

Methods

A total of 603 women aged 15 and older were enrolled from the Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) clinic at Haukeland University Hospital, Norway, in 2007. Only 31 women were older than 35 years. Cervical swabs and urine samples were tested with BDPT for all participants. In cases of discrepant test results from a given patient, both samples were retested by Cobas TaqManCT and a Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)-method (in-house). Prevalence of C. trachomatis, sensitivity, and specificity were estimated by latent class analysis using all test results available. Bootstrap BC confidence intervals (10 000 computations) were estimated for sensitivity and specificity, and their differences in cervix vs. urine tests.

Results

A total of 1809 specimens were collected from 603 patients. 80 women (13.4%) were positive for C. trachomatis. Among these, BDPT identified 72 and 73 as positive in cervix and urine samples, respectively. Of the 523 C. trachomatis negative women, BDPT identified 519 as negative based on cervical swabs, and 514 based on urine samples. Sensitivity for cervical swabs and urine samples with the BDPT were 89.0% (95% CI 78.8, 98.6) and 90.2% (95% CI 78.1, 95.5), respectively. The corresponding values for specificity were 99.2% (95% CI 98.3, 100) and 98.3% (95% CI 96.4, 100).

Conclusions

This study indicates that urine specimens are adequate for screening high-risk groups for C. trachomatis by the SDA method (BDPT). Such an approach may facilitate early detection and treatment of the target groups for screening, and be cost-effective for patients and the health services.