Premarket evaluations of the IMDx C. difficile for Abbott m2000 Assay and the BD Max Cdiff Assay. J Clin Microbiol. 2014;52:1423-1428. [PMID: 24554744 DOI: 10.1128/jcm.03293-13]

Evaluation of non-invasive diagnostic tools for diarrhea: a systematic review of point-of-care tests and biomarkers

Background

Diarrhea is a prevalent condition affecting millions worldwide. However, current standard diagnostic methods have many drawbacks. This review examines various non-invasive point-of-care (POC) tests and biomarkers aiding rapid diagnosis of diarrhea from different causes.

Methods

PubMed, PubMed Central, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched from 2013 to present for relevant literature. Two reviewers independently assessed included studies' quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist.

Results

The search yielded 1453 studies, of which 39 were included after screening and applying eligibility criteria. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was the POC test in 25 studies, providing consistent sensitivity and specificity. For biomarkers, C-reactive protein (CRP), fecal calprotectin, and procalcitonin offered high sensitivity and specificity for conditions like acute pediatric diarrhea, microscopic colitis, and inflammatory diarrhea, respectively.

Conclusion

PCR proved the ideal POC test for rapid diarrhea diagnosis, while the procalcitonin biomarker helps differentiate inflammatory from non-inflammatory diarrhea. Other reviewed tools also demonstrated promising diagnostic performance, though improvements in sensitivity, specificity, and usability are still needed.

Overview of current detection methods and microRNA potential in Clostridioides difficile infection screening

Clostridioides difficile (formerly called Clostridium difficile, C. difficile) infection (CDI) is listed as an urgent threat on the 2019 antibiotic resistance threats report in the United States by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Early detection and appropriate disease management appear to be essential. Meanwhile, although the majority of cases are hospital-acquired CDI, community-acquired CDI cases are also on the rise, and this vulnerability is not limited to immunocompromised patients. Gastrointestinal treatments and/or gastrointestinal tract surgeries may be required for patients diagnosed with digestive diseases. Such treatments could suppress or interfere with the patient’s immune system and disrupt gut flora homeostasis, creating a suitable microecosystem for C. difficile overgrowth. Currently, stool-based non-invasive screening is the first-line approach to CDI diagnosis, but the accuracy is varied due to different clinical microbiology detection methods; therefore, improving reliability is clearly required. In this review, we briefly summarised the life cycle and toxicity of C. difficile, and we examined existing diagnostic approaches with an emphasis on novel biomarkers such as microRNAs. These biomarkers can be easily detected through non-invasive liquid biopsy and can yield crucial information about ongoing pathological phenomena, particularly in CDI.

Accuracy of diagnostic assays for the detection of Clostridioides difficile: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Clostridioides difficile Infection (CDI) has been identified as one of the main causes of nosocomial infection all across the world. Rapid diagnosis of CDI is difficult and poses a significant challenge to physicians worldwide. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate rapid tests' diagnostic accuracy against toxigenic culture as the reference standard for CDI.

METHOD

We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for the relevant records. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the quality of the studies. Diagnostic accuracy measures [i.e., sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), positive likelihood ratios (PLR), negative likelihood ratios (NLR), and the area under the curve (AUC)] were pooled with a random-effects model. All statistical analyses were performed with Meta-DiSc (Version 1.4, Cochrane Colloquium, Barcelona, Spain) and RevMan (version 5.3; The Nordic Cochrane Centre, the Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark).

RESULTS

We reviewed retrieved records and identified 63 studies that met the inclusion criteria. 26 were about enzyme immunoassay (EIA) (our main index test). The sensitivity of GDH and Tox A/B EIAs were 82% (95% CI: 79-84) and 75% (95% CI: 70-79), respectively. On the other hand, the specificity of GDH EIA was 91% (95% CI: 90-92) and the specificity of Tox A/B EIA was 95% (95% CI: 94-96). Among other index tests, BD Max with 92% has the most sensitivity and cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA) has the most specificity (100%).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that EIAs could be reliable methods for detecting CDI based on their sensitivity, specificity, time and cost-effectiveness, and simplicity in the procedure. Further work to improve rapid tests would benefit from improvements to the methodology.

Clostridioides difficile laboratory diagnostic techniques: a comparative approach of rapid and molecular methods

Clostridioides difficile infection is a public health problem because of it is easily spread; with harmful consequences, it is essential to reduce hospital costs and prevent its dissemination by having a precise diagnosis. The gold standard for its diagnosis is polymerase chain reaction (PCR); however, the technique is not available for all laboratories due to the high cost. New approaches using non-molecular tests to detect C. difficile and toxin A/B production has been proposed to improve cost benefits. The objective of this study is to compare molecular methods (PCR) and rapid methods (immunochromatographic test and enzymatic immunoassay). A series of tests comprising these diagnostic techniques was performed with 50 patients with a clinical diagnosis for Clostridioides difficile on GeneXpert® devices test; a calculation of the sensitivity was executed, followed by a comparison of the efficiency of all techniques. Greater sensitivity was observed in the PCR-based methods (BD MAX™ and BioFire FilmArray®) and the GDH-based assays (RIDASCREEN® and Alere Techlab®). The proposed algorithm represents minor monetary disadvantages but a significant temporal optimization of 10%. Future studies concerning both positive and negative results could be advantageous because of the possibility of calculating more method concordance indexes, such as the specificity and Kappa index, in addition to being able to indicate a monetary profit if the proposed algorithm was applied due to the nonproceeding PCR cases.

Extraintestinal Clostridium difficile infection: Scrotal abscess

Clostridium difficile infection is one of the most common causes of healthcare-associated morbidity and mortality. ExtraintestinalC. difficile infection is extremely rare; though a variety of infections involving different organs have been reported. We report the first case of scrotal abscess due toC. difficile in an 84 year old male following left inguinal herniorrhaphy. Patient underwent surgical drainage of scrotal abscess and was successfully treated with culture directed antibiotic therapy.

Statistical Considerations for Bias and Protocol Deviation in Medical Device Pivotal Clinical Study

BACKGROUND

The gold standard in conducting clinical trials/studies is to follow what is prespecified in the study protocol. However, deviations from the study protocol may occur. This article discusses the issues of protocol deviation in pivotal clinical trials or studies for medical device and provides statistical approaches to mitigating bias such as selection bias specifically for diagnostic test clinical trials or studies.

METHOD

Bias correction methods are developed for 2 specific types of selection biases, prescreening bias and verification bias. Statistical approaches are discussed on how to estimate device performance adjusted for enrollment enrichment and discrepant testing results. We use an FDA-approved Roche Cobas Human Papillomavirus (HPV) test for detecting high-grade cervical disease (>CIN2) as an example to illustrate how to correct for verification bias. A recently FDA-cleared Microarray Assay in detecting copy number variation is used to illustrate how to properly estimate sensitivity and specificity for the discrepancy analysis.

RESULTS

The unadjusted sensitivity and specificity based on verified samples were 83.2% and 60.4% for the Roche's HPV test. However, using the correction method with the missing-at-random assumption, the verification bias-adjusted sensitivity and specificity were 34.5% and 93.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Protocol deviations can lead to biased estimates of device clinical performance if not handled appropriately. Statistical methods correcting for bias and protocol deviations are recommended in estimating device performance.

Profile of the triplex assay for detection of chlamydia, gonorrhea and trichomonas using the BD MAX™ System

INTRODUCTION

Chlamydia, gonorrhea and trichomonas are the most common curable STI. improved access to testing could reduce infection rates and prevent sequelae. nucleic acid amplification tests are the recommend class of diagnostic assay for these infections which are often asymptomatic. Areas covered: A description of the BD MAX™ System (MAX) and the BD MAX CT/GC/TV assay is provided along with data from a large US clinical trial. The capacity of the system for other tests and for lab developed assays is also described. Expert commentary: The CT/GC/TV assay on the MAX is a triplex PCR assay suitable for use with female urine and vaginal or endocervical swab samples. Male urine can be tested by ordering the CT/GC results but has not yet been evaluated for trichomonas. The assay performance characteristics are similar to those of assays run on high-throughput platforms with sensitivity ≥91.5% and specificity ≥98.6% for all analytes. Screening with the CT/GC/TV assay can be combined with testing for vaginitis which would provide a greater depth of coverage for common co-infections. The throughput is moderate (1-48 samples per 8-hour shift) but the menu includes assays beyond STI pathogens making this a suitable platform for moderate volume laboratories.

Current knowledge on the laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection

Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) is a spore-forming, toxin-producing, gram-positive anaerobic bacterium that is the principal etiologic agent of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Infection with C. difficile (CDI) is characterized by diarrhea in clinical syndromes that vary from self-limited to mild or severe. Since its initial recognition as the causative agent of pseudomembranous colitis, C. difficile has spread around the world. CDI is one of the most common healthcare-associated infections and a significant cause of morbidity and mortality among older adult hospitalized patients. Due to extensive antibiotic usage, the number of CDIs has increased. Diagnosis of CDI is often difficult and has a substantial impact on the management of patients with the disease, mainly with regards to antibiotic management. The diagnosis of CDI is primarily based on the clinical signs and symptoms and is only confirmed by laboratory testing. Despite the high burden of CDI and the increasing interest in the disease, episodes of CDI are often misdiagnosed. The reasons for misdiagnosis are the lack of clinical suspicion or the use of inappropriate tests. The proper diagnosis of CDI reduces transmission, prevents inadequate or unnecessary treatments, and assures best antibiotic treatment. We review the options for the laboratory diagnosis of CDI within the settings of the most accepted guidelines for CDI diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of CDI.

Evaluation of Xpert C. difficile, BD MAX Cdiff, IMDx C. difficile for Abbott m2000, and Illumigene C. difficile Assays for Direct Detection of Toxigenic Clostridium difficile in Stool Specimens

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the performance of four commercial nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs: Xpert C. difficile, BD MAX Cdiff, IMDx C. difficile for Abbott m2000, and Illumigene C. difficile) for direct and rapid detection of Clostridium difficile toxin genes.

METHODS

We compared four NAATs on the same set of 339 stool specimens (303 prospective and 36 retrospective specimens) with toxigenic culture (TC).

RESULTS

Concordance rate among four NAATs was 90.3% (306/339). Based on TC results, the sensitivity and specificity were 90.0% and 92.9% for Xpert; 86.3% and 89.3% for Max; 84.3% and 94.4% for IMDx; and 82.4% and 93.7% for Illumigene, respectively. For 306 concordant cases, there were 11 TC-negative/NAATs co-positive cases and 6 TC-positive/NAATs co-negative cases. Among 33 discordant cases, 18 were only single positive in each NAAT (Xpert, 1; Max, 12; IMDx, 1; Illumigene, 4). Positivity rates of the four NAATs were associated with those of semi-quantitative cultures, which were maximized in grade 3 (>100 colony-forming unit [CFU]) compared with grade 1 (<10 CFU).

CONCLUSIONS

Commercial NAATs may be rapid and reliable methods for direct detection of tcdA and/or tcdB in stool specimens compared with TC. Some differences in the sensitivity of the NAATs may partly depend on the number of toxigenic C. difficile in stool specimens.

Novel portable platform for molecular detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile in faeces: a diagnostic accuracy study

BACKGROUND

A novel portable platform for nucleic acid amplification enables rapid detection of diarrhoea causing toxigenic Clostridium difficile directly from faeces, even in resource-limited settings. We evaluated the accuracy and precision of the new commercial molecular test system.

METHODS

One thousand one hundred and sixty faecal samples from patients suspected of having Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) were analysed using the Orion GenRead C. difficile test system (Orion Diagnostica Oy, Espoo, Finland) and comparative methods in three teaching hospital laboratories in Finland and France. The precision of the Orion GenRead C. difficile test system was evaluated in a reproducibility study with a set of blind-coded samples. The test system is based on a new isothermal amplification technology (Strand Invasion Based Amplification, SIBA®) and detection of the tcdB gene of C. difficile. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and the overall agreement according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute recommendations.

FINDINGS

The overall agreement of the Orion GenRead C. difficile test when compared to the comparative methods in routine use in the participating laboratories was between 96.7% and 98.8%. In the reproducibility study; the total percent agreement between three laboratories was 99.8%.

INTERPRETATION

The identification of toxigenic C. difficile from faeces with the light-weight portable Orion GenRead test system was highly sensitive and specific, and the results were reproducible in the participating laboratories. This platform could enable fast and accurate molecular pathogen detection even in resource-limited or point-of-care settings.

Evaluation of a Multiplex Real-Time PCR Assay for Detecting Major Bacterial Enteric Pathogens in Fecal Specimens: Intestinal Inflammation and Bacterial Load Are Correlated in Campylobacter Infections

A total of 1,056 native or Cary-Blair-preserved stool specimens were simultaneously tested by conventional stool culturing and by enteric bacterial panel (EBP) multiplex real-time PCR for Campylobacter jejuni, Campylobacter coli, Salmonella spp., and shigellosis disease-causing agents (Shigella spp. and enteroinvasive Escherichia coli [EIEC]). Overall, 143 (13.5%) specimens tested positive by PCR for the targets named above; 3 coinfections and 109 (10.4%) Campylobacter spp., 17 (1.6%) Salmonella spp., and 20 (1.9%) Shigella spp./EIEC infections were detected. The respective positive stool culture rates were 75 (7.1%), 14 (1.3%), and 7 (0.7%). The median threshold cycle (CT) values of culture-positive specimens were significantly lower than those of culture-negative ones (CT values, 24.3 versus 28.7; P < 0.001), indicating that the relative bacterial load per fecal specimen was significantly associated with the culture results. In Campylobacter infections, the respective median fecal calprotectin concentrations in PCR-negative/culture-negative (n = 40), PCR-positive/culture-negative (n = 14), and PCR-positive/culture-positive (n = 15) specimens were 134 mg/kg (interquartile range [IQR], 30 to 1,374 mg/kg), 1,913 mg/kg (IQR, 165 to 3,813 mg/kg), and 5,327 mg/kg (IQR, 1,836 to 18,213 mg/kg). Significant differences were observed among the three groups (P < 0.001), and a significant linear trend was identified (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the fecal calprotectin concentrations and CT values were found to be correlated (r = -0.658). Our results demonstrate that molecular screening of Campylobacter spp., Salmonella spp., and Shigella spp./EIEC using the BD Max EBP assay will result in timely diagnosis and improved sensitivity. The determination of inflammatory markers, such as calprotectin, in fecal specimens may aid in the interpretation of PCR results, particularly for enteric pathogens associated with mucosal damage and colonic inflammation.

Comparison of the BD MAX® Enteric Bacterial Panel assay with conventional diagnostic procedures in diarrheal stool samples

Although infectious diarrhea is one of the most predominant diseases around the world, the identification of the causative microorganism is still challenging. The aim of this study was the evaluation of the BD MAX® Enteric Bacterial Panel assay in comparison to conventional diagnostic procedures concerning the detection of the enteric pathogens Salmonella spp., Campylobacter spp., Shigella spp., and Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli. For this purpose, 971 prospectively collected stool samples were evaluated. Utilization of the BD MAX Enteric Bacterial Panel elevated the overall detection rate from 5.26 % to 8.06 %. The positive percent agreement of the BD MAX Enteric Bacterial Panel assay and stool culture or enzyme immunoassay was 0.97 for Campylobacter spp., 0.75 for Salmonella spp., 1.00 for Shigella spp., and 0.88 for Shiga toxins. Furthermore, a negative percent agreement of 0.98 for Campylobacter spp., 0.99 for Salmonella spp., 0.99 for Shigella spp., and 0.99 for Shiga toxins has been demonstrated. This study highlighted the superior detection rate of molecular assays compared to conventional diagnostic procedures.

Evaluation of 3 automated real-time PCR (Xpert C. difficile assay, BD MAX Cdiff, and IMDx C. difficile for Abbott m2000 assay) for detecting Clostridium difficile toxin gene compared to toxigenic culture in stool specimens

We evaluated the performance of the 3 automated systems (Cepheid Xpert, BD MAX, and IMDx C. difficile for Abbott m2000) detecting Clostridium difficile toxin gene compared to toxigenic culture. Of the 254 stool specimens tested, 87 (48 slight, 35 moderate, and 4 heavy growth) were toxigenic culture positive. The overall sensitivities and specificities were 82.8% and 98.8% for Xpert, 81.6% and 95.8% for BD MAX, and 62.1% and 99.4% for IMDx, respectively. The specificity was significantly higher in IMDx than BD MAX (P= 0.03). All stool samples underwent toxin A/B enzyme immunoassay testing, and of the 254 samples, only 29 samples were positive and 2 of them were toxigenic culture negative. Considering the rapidity and high specificity of the real-time PCR assays compared to the toxigenic culture, they can be used as the first test method for C. difficile infection/colonization.

Multicenter evaluation of the BD max enteric bacterial panel PCR assay for rapid detection of Salmonella spp., Shigella spp., Campylobacter spp. (C. jejuni and C. coli), and Shiga toxin 1 and 2 genes

Diarrhea due to enteric bacterial pathogens causes significant morbidity and mortality in the United States and worldwide. However, bacterial pathogens may be infrequently identified. Currently, culture and enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) are the primary methods used by clinical laboratories to detect enteric bacterial pathogens. We conducted a multicenter evaluation of the BD Max enteric bacterial panel (EBP) PCR assay in comparison to culture for the detection of Salmonella spp., Shigella spp., Campylobacter jejuni, and Campylobacter coli and an EIA for Shiga toxins 1 and 2. A total of 4,242 preserved or unpreserved stool specimens, including 3,457 specimens collected prospectively and 785 frozen, retrospective samples, were evaluated. Compared to culture or EIA, the positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) values for the BD Max EBP assay for all specimens combined were as follows: 97.1% and 99.2% for Salmonella spp., 99.1% and 99.7% for Shigella spp., 97.2% and 98.4% for C. jejuni and C. coli, and 97.4% and 99.3% for Shiga toxins, respectively. Discrepant results for prospective samples were resolved with alternate PCR assays and bidirectional sequencing of amplicons. Following discrepant analysis, PPA and NPA values were as follows: 97.3% and 99.8% for Salmonella spp., 99.2% and 100% for Shigella spp., 97.5% and 99.0% for C. jejuni and C. coli, and 100% and 99.7% for Shiga toxins, respectively. No differences in detection were observed for samples preserved in Cary-Blair medium and unpreserved samples. In this large, multicenter study, the BD Max EBP assay showed superior sensitivity compared to conventional methods and excellent specificity for the detection of enteric bacterial pathogens in stool specimens.