HpSA: assessment of a new non-invasive diagnostic assay for Helicobacter pylori infection in an Irish population

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.

Quantitative Correlation of Helicobacter pylori Stool Antigen (HpSA) Test with the Severity of H. pylori-Related Gastritis

The Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) load in both stomach and stool and the resulting severity of gastritis are important criteria in validating the status of H. pylori infection. We aimed to assess the reliability of the H. pylori stool antigen (HpSA) test for the primary diagnosis of H. pylori infection by calculating the best cut-off value to obtain the highest sensitivity and specificity in dyspeptic patients. We also investigated the correlation of HpSA test with the severity of gastritis and H. pylori load. The H. pylori statuses of 95 patients were evaluated by the positivity of both rapid urease test and microscopic detection of H. pylori in biopsy specimens, 88 subjects of whom were H. pylori positive. The sensitivity and specificity of the HpSA test were 51.1% (45/88) and 100% (7/7), respectively, according to the manufacturer's recommended cut-off value of 0.16. However, with the best cut-off value of 0.048, calculated by receiver operator characteristics analysis, the sensitivity of the test increased to 92.0% (81/88) with the same specificity. High values of the HpSA test were correlated with high scores of corpus H. pylori load and the severity of antrum and corpus inflammation (p < 0.05). With the best cut-off value of the HpSA test, the primary diagnosis of H. pylori infection can be made with higher sensitivity and specificity. The HpSA test is a helpful tool that evaluates the severity of H. pylori infection and the degree of gastric inflammatory activity and gastric H. pylori load.

Stool antigen test for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection: a systematic review

Our aim was to review systematically the diagnostic accuracy of the Helicobacter pylori stool antigen test. Bibliographical searches were performed in several electronic databases and abstracts from congresses up to May 2003. Eighty-nine studies (10,858 patients) evaluated the stool antigen test in untreated patients. Mean sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 91%, 93%, 92% and 87%, respectively. Analysis of the eight studies (1399 patients) in which pretreatment evaluation of the monoclonal stool antigen test was performed showed better (p < .001) results (96%, 97%, 96% and 97%, respectively), with a clearer distinction between positive and negative results. Thirty-nine studies (3147 patients) evaluated the stool antigen test for the confirmation of H. pylori eradication 4-8 weeks after therapy, with accuracies of 86%, 92%, 76% and 93% for mean sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value, respectively. Results were similar when a gold standard based on at least two methods was used. Relatively low accuracy was reported in some posttreatment studies with the polyclonal stool antigen test. However, excellent results (p < .001) were achieved in all the six studies evaluating the monoclonal stool antigen test 4-8 weeks posttreatment. Results evaluating the stool antigen test < 4 weeks posttreatment are contradictory. Proton-pump inhibitors seem to affect the accuracy of the stool antigen test. Sensitivity and/or specificity in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding may be suboptimal. The stool antigen test performs well in children. Finally, the stool antigen test seems to be a cost-effective method.

Helicobacter pylori antigens in stool specimens of gastritis children before and after treatment

BACKGROUND

Various testing methods are successfully applied to the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection, but noninvasive techniques are still needed for therapeutic monitoring, especially in children. In the search for new noninvasive techniques for the diagnosis of H. pylori infection, the authors evaluated an enzyme immunoassay for the detection of H. pylori antigen in stool (HpSA).

METHODS

The authors studied 62 H. pylori-positive children with chronic gastritis and 45 control subjects. H. pylori infection was diagnosed using cultures and histology of gastric biopsy specimens and a stool antigen test before treatment (clarithromycin, amoxicillin, omeprazole for 7 days) and 4 weeks to 6 weeks after treatment.

RESULTS

Before therapy, antigen in stool was detected in 55 of 62 H. pylori-positive patients, which indicates that the sensitivity of the HpSA test was 88.7%. Of the 45 control subjects (with negative culture and histology results), 43 had negative results for H. pylori in the stool test (specificity, 95.5%). After completion of therapy, eradication was obtained (and confirmed by culture and histology) in 53 of the 62 H. pylori-positive children (85.5%). Four weeks to 6 weeks after eradication therapy, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the stool antigen (HpSA) test were 88.9%, 96.2%, 80%, and 98%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of the HpSA test for the detection of H. pylori in human stool 4 weeks to 6 weeks after treatment is comparable with the accuracy of the culture results. The stool antigen (HpSA) test was found to be a useful method for posttreatment eradication testing of infection in children.

Diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection by stool antigen determination: a systematic review

Recently a new, noninvasive diagnostic test based on the detection of Helicobacter pylori stool antigen (SA) has been developed. The aim of this study was to systematically review the experience on H. pylori SA test for the diagnosis of H. pylori infection. Bibliographic searches were performed in the PubMed database and abstracts from several congresses. A total of 43 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and evaluated H. pylori SA test accuracy for the diagnosis of H. pylori infection in nontreated patients. Overall, 4769 patients were included. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) (weighted mean) were, respectively: 92.4% (95% CI = 91-93%), 91.9% (91-92%), 92.1% (91-93%), and 90.5% (90-91%). Therefore the SA test can definitively be considered an accurate noninvasive method for the diagnosis of H. pylori infection in untreated patients. A total of 25 studies including 2078 patients evaluated H. pylori SA test for the confirmation of H. pylori eradication > or = 4 wk after completion of therapy. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV (weighted mean) were: 88.3% (87-90%), 92% (91-93%), 75.1% (73-77%), and 94.8% (94-96%). Although most studies showed that SA test is an accurate method to confirm H. pylori eradication > or = 4 wk after treatment, these favorable results were not confirmed in other studies. Further investigation is necessary to explain these discrepancies, as well as to clarify the precise time for confirmation of eradication after therapy, the appropriate cutoff point for the SA test, and which factors influence it. Proton pump inhibitors seem to affect the accuracy of SA test, but the negative effect disappears 1-2 wk after stopping treatment. The SA test is technically feasible in patients with upper GI bleeding. although the true diagnostic accuracy in this group of patients remains to be more fully assessed. Finally, the SA test seems to be a highly cost-effective method for the diagnosis of H. pylori infection.

Posttreatment follow-up of Helicobacter pylori infection using a stool antigen immunoassay

The Helicobacter pylori stool antigen enzyme immunoassay (HpSA) was evaluated during posttreatment follow-up of patients in a country with a very high prevalence of H. pylori infection. From among 273 dyspeptic individuals (18 to 55 years) initially recruited from a shantytown in Lima, Peru, 238 participants who met the inclusion criteria and were suspected to be H. pylori positive based on (14)C urea breath test (UBT) results underwent endoscopy. Participants with endoscopy-proven infections received standard eradication therapy and were monitored by UBT and HpSA at 1 month following treatment and at 3-month intervals for 9 months posttreatment. A second endoscopy was performed if UBT results showed evidence of treatment failure or H. pylori recurrence. Biopsy results were considered the "gold standard" in all analyses. Among patients who underwent endoscopy, HpSA had a pretreatment sensitivity of 93%. Two-hundred thirty patients completed the treatment regimen, of whom 201 (93%) were considered to have had successful treatment outcomes based on a negative follow-up UBT. Thirty-two patients with UBT-defined treatment failures or H. pylori recurrences at any point during the 9-month follow-up underwent a second endoscopy. In the posttreatment setting, HpSA had an overall sensitivity of 73% and a specificity of 67%. Agreement between UBT and HpSA diminished throughout the follow-up. Among 14 participants in whom HpSA remained positive at 1 month following treatment despite UBT evidence of treatment success, 12 (86%) became HpSA negative within 3 months posttreatment. Although this study confirmed the validity of the HpSA in the initial assessment of dyspeptic patients, the test demonstrated a reduced overall accuracy in the detection of treatment failures and H. pylori recurrences during 9 months of posttreatment follow-up. Furthermore, in some patients it may take up to 3 months after successful eradication for antigen shedding to diminish to levels within the negative HpSA range.

Validity of a Helicobacter pylori stool antigen assay for the assessment of H. pylori status following eradication therapy

BACKGROUND

A Helicobacter pylori stool antigen (HpSA) test has been proposed as a valid alternative to the 13C-urea breath test (13C-UBT) for the non-invasive detection of H. pylori infection in primary diagnosis. Published reports show conflicting results with regard to the test's diagnostic accuracy after eradication therapy. The aim of the present study was to assess the diagnostic value of the HpSA test and to determine the optimal discriminating cut-off value in patients following H. pylori eradication therapy.

METHOD

Stool samples were collected and the 13C-UBT was performed in 113 patients 4-6 weeks after eradication therapy. A validated test protocol for the 13C-UBT was used. Stool specimens were analysed with the Premier Platinum HpSA enzyme immunoassay (EIA). A receiver operator characteristics (ROC) analysis was performed to define the optimal cut-off value on the basis of the results of the 13C-UBT.

RESULTS

The results of the 13C-UBT showed that H. pylori eradication was successful in 83/113 (73%) patients. According to the manufacturer, the cut-off value for the HpSA test is 0.14 optical density, but this does not appear to be valid after eradication therapy (sensitivity 76.7%, specificity 98.8%). On the basis of ROC analysis, the optimal cut-off value after therapy was determined to be 0.11 optical density, giving a sensitivity of 93.3% and a specificity of 93.9%.

CONCLUSION

The HpSA test is a valid test for the assessment of H. pylori status after eradication therapy, provided an adjusted cut-off value is applied.

[Diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infections]

Hardly any other bacterial infection can be diagnosed with a similar variety of non-invasive and invasive tests as infection with H. pylori. Efficacy and specificity of well-proven tests such as urease test in biopsy specimens, histology, culture, and 13C breath test have been uniformly evidenced in numerous studies. Novel tests include molecular microbiological procedures, providing new opportunities for rapid detection of virulence factors and resistance genes, as well as antigen detection in feces. Though some open questions still need to be clarified, the latter test will gain major importance in the future. With the availability of the breath test and antigen detection in stool the need for the use of serological tests has been reduced, all the more so as the majority of the available quick tests have been shown to be of inadequate reliability. Well defined indications for the treatment of H. pylori infections are a major prerequisite for a reasonable use of this diagnostic armory.

Comparison of an enzyme immunoassay for the detection of Helicobacter pylori antigens in the faeces with the urea breath test

BACKGROUND

Current diagnostic tests for Helicobacter pylori are invasive (endoscopy) or indirect (urea breath test, serology).

AIMS

To evaluate a new enzyme immunoassay (EIA) which detects H pylori antigens in faeces, by comparing its sensitivity and specificity in children with the (13)C urea breath test (UBT).

METHODS

A total of 119 children underwent a UBT and provided a faecal sample for antigen testing within seven days. After an overnight fast each child provided a pretest breath sample, and samples at 30 and 40 minutes after ingestion of 100 mg (13)C labelled urea. (13)C enrichment of breath was measured by isotope ratio mass spectrometry. Faeces were stored at -70 degrees C until antigen testing, using the EIA. Samples were read spectrophotometrically at 450 nm and results were interpreted using recommended cut offs of optical density <0.14 as negative, >/=0.16 as positive, with >/=0.14 and <0. 16 representing equivocal results. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated using the manufacturer's cut off compared with UBT.

RESULTS

Sensitivity and specificity were 88% and 82%, respectively. Negative and positive predictive values were 97% and 58%.

CONCLUSIONS

The EIA is an alternative, non-invasive, and easy to use method for the detection of H pylori in children. Its high negative predictive value suggests a role in screening out uninfected children.

Characterization of a culture method to recover Helicobacter pylori from the feces of infected patients

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori is difficult to culture from stool. Multiple efforts from multiple laboratories have been unsuccessful, and the optimal conditions to recover H. pylori from stool are still not known. Recovery of H. pylori from feces of infected individuals is important for the performance of molecular epidemiological investigations, especially in children, where their symptoms do not warrant endoscopy to recover the organism.

METHODS

Fresh fecal specimens (noncathartic) were obtained from 19 known H. pylori-infected patients and were processed to recover the organism. Fresh fecal specimens (noncathartic) were also obtained from three known H. pylori-negative individuals (controls) to determine whether H. pylori could be isolated from stools seeded with known concentrations of the organism. Treatment of the fecal suspensions with cholestyramine, a basic anion exchange resin that binds bile acids, was used in an attempt to enhance recovery of H. pylori by sequestering bile acids that are inhibitory to H. pylori growth. H. pylori was identified based on colony morphology, cell morphology, Gram's stain, biochemical reactions, and polymerase chain reaction for two H. pylori genes.

RESULTS

Among 19 patients, H. pylori was cultured at least once from 3 and three times from 2 (5 of 19). Feces that were seeded with H. pylori and obtained from three H. pylori-negative volunteer controls yielded positive recovery in all instances.

CONCLUSION

We have confirmed that it is possible to culture H. pylori from human stool, but the procedure for optimal recovery has still not been defined.

The cost-effectiveness of diagnostic testing strategies for Helicobacter pylori

OBJECTIVE

Several noninvasive methods are now available for diagnosing Helicobacter pylori infection. Because the prevalence of H. pylori infection is variable in patients requiring testing, the optimal testing strategies may vary under different conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of competing diagnostic strategies for H. pylori in patients with varying H. pylori prevalence.

METHODS

A decision analysis was performed comparing the costs per number of correct diagnoses achieved by alternative sequential testing strategies. Estimates of H. pylori prevalence and test characteristics were derived from a systematic review of the MEDLINE bibliographic database. Cost estimates were derived from the 2000 Medicare Fee Schedule.

RESULTS

The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test had the lowest cost per correct diagnosis at low (30%), intermediate (60%), and high (90%) prevalence ($90-$95/correct diagnosis), but its diagnostic accuracy was low (80-84%). At low and intermediate prevalence the stool test was more accurate (93%), with an average cost of $126-$127 per correct diagnosis. Additional confirmatory testing of positive or negative tests increased the diagnostic accuracy of the stool test, but had high incremental costs. ELISA testing was preferable when prevalence rates were very high (90%), and using a confirmatory urea breath test for negative ELISA tests increased the diagnostic accuracy to 96%, with modest incremental costs. If the cost of the breath test was <$50 or if the cost of the stool test is >$82, breath testing became preferable to stool testing. If the cost of the stool test fell to <$20, it became preferable to ELISA. Similarly, if the cost of the ELISA serology was >$39 then stool testing became preferable at all prevalence rates. Fingerstick whole blood tests were not cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of an initial test for H. pylori detection depends on the prevalence of H. pylori infection and the value placed on increased diagnostic accuracy. Although ELISA results in the lowest cost-effectiveness ratios, in patients at low-intermediate pretest probability of infection, the stool test provides increased accuracy, with modest incremental costs.

Prospective blinded trial of a fecal antigen test for the detection of Helicobacter pylori infection

OBJECTIVE

We prospectively studied an FDA-approved stool test for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection based on the detection of antigens shed in stool.

METHODS

We studied 108 patients undergoing endoscopy. Stool samples were collected on the day of the endoscopy and read in a blinded manner by a technician who was unaware of the findings of the endoscopy. The results of stool testing were compared to those of the rapid urease test (Pyloritek).

RESULTS

There were 51 patients infected with H. pylori by rapid urease testing and 57 who were not. The sensitivity of the stool test was 86% (95% confidence interval: 77-96%), the specificity was 91% (81-97%), with a positive predictive value of 89% (77-96%) and a negative predictive value of 88% (81-97%). The likelihood ratio for a positive test was 10.18 and the likelihood ratio for a negative test was 0.11.

CONCLUSIONS

The stool test was sensitive and specific for the detection of H. pylori in a U.S. population.