Comparison of Partec Rapid Malaria Test with Conventional Light Microscopy for Diagnosis of Malaria in Northwest Ethiopia

Imaging as a (pre)clinical tool in parasitology

Imaging of parasites is central to diagnosis of many parasitic diseases and has thus far played an important role in the development of antiparasitic strategies. The development of novel imaging technologies has revolutionized medicine in fields other than parasitology and has also opened up new avenues for the visualization of parasites. Here we review the role imaging technology has played so far in parasitology and how it may spur further advancement. We point out possibilities to improve current microscopy-based diagnostic methods and how to extend them with radiological imaging modalities. We also highlight in vivo tracking of parasites as a readout for efficacy of new antiparasitic strategies and as a source of fundamental insights for rational design.

Deletions of the Plasmodium falciparum histidine-rich protein 2/3 genes are common in field isolates from north-eastern Tanzania

Plasmodium falciparum parasites lacking histidine-rich protein 2 and 3 (pfhrp2/3) genes have been reported in several parts of the world. These deletions are known to compromise the effectiveness of HRP2-based malaria rapid diagnostic tests (HRP2-RDT). The National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP) in Tanzania adopted HRP2-RDTs as a routine tool for malaria diagnosis in 2009 replacing microscopy in many Health facilities. We investigated pfhrp2/3 deletions in 122 samples from two areas with diverse malaria transmission intensities in Northeastern Tanzania. Pfhrp2 deletion was confirmed in 1.6% of samples while pfhrp3 deletion was confirmed in 50% of samples. We did not find parasites with both pfhrp2 and pfhrp3 deletions among our samples. Results from this study highlight the need for systematic surveillance of pfhrp2/3 deletions in Tanzania to understand their prevalence and determine their impact on the performance of mRDT.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Mobile-Linked Point-of-Care Diagnostics in Sub-Saharan Africa

Mobile health devices are emerging applications that could help deliver point-of-care (POC) diagnosis, particularly in settings with limited laboratory infrastructure, such as Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The advent of Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has resulted in an increased deployment and use of mHealth-linked POC diagnostics in SSA. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of mobile-linked point-of-care diagnostics in SSA. Our systematic review and meta-analysis were guided by the Preferred Reporting Items requirements for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. We exhaustively searched PubMed, Science Direct, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, and CINAHL with full text via EBSCOhost databases, from mHealth inception to March 2021. The statistical analyses were conducted using OpenMeta-Analyst software. All 11 included studies were considered for the meta-analysis. The included studies focused on malaria infections, Schistosoma haematobium, Schistosoma mansoni, soil-transmitted helminths, and Trichuris trichiura. The pooled summary of sensitivity and specificity estimates were moderate compared to those of the reference representing the gold standard. The overall pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio of mobile-linked POC diagnostic devices were as follows: 0.499 (95% CI: 0.458–0.541), 0.535 (95% CI: 0.401–0.663), 0.952 (95% CI: 0.60–1.324), 1.381 (95% CI: 0.391–4.879), and 0.944 (95% CI: 0.579–1.538), respectively. Evidence shows that the diagnostic accuracy of mobile-linked POC diagnostics in detecting infections in SSA is presently moderate. Future research is recommended to evaluate mHealth devices’ diagnostic potential using devices with excellent sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing diseases in this setting.

Rapid diagnostic tests for Plasmodium vivax malaria in endemic countries

BACKGROUND

Plasmodium vivax (P vivax) is a focus of malaria elimination. It is important because P vivax and Plasmodium falciparum infection are co-endemic in some areas. There are asymptomatic carriers of P vivax, and the treatment for P vivax and Plasmodium ovale malaria differs from that used in other types of malaria. Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) will help distinguish P vivax from other malaria species to help treatment and elimination. There are RDTs available that detect P vivax parasitaemia through the detection of P vivax-specific lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) antigens.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of RDTs for detecting P vivax malaria infection 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 tests best detect P vivax malaria.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases up to 30 July 2019: Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (PubMed); Embase (OVID); Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S), both in the Web of Science.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For each included study, two review authors independently extracted data using a pre-piloted data extraction form. The methodological quality of the studies were assessed using a tailored Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. We grouped studies according to commercial brand of the RDT and performed meta-analysis when appropriate. The results given by the index tests were based on the antibody affinity (referred to as the strength of the bond between an antibody and an antigen) and avidity (referred to as the strength of the overall bond between a multivalent antibody and multiple antigens). All analyses were stratified by the type of reference standard. The bivariate model was used to estimate the pooled sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), this model was simplified when studies were few. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 studies that assessed the accuracy of six different RDT brands (CareStart Malaria Pf/Pv Combo test, Falcivax Device Rapid test, Immuno-Rapid Malaria Pf/Pv test, SD Bioline Malaria Ag Pf/Pv test, OnSite Pf/Pv test and Test Malaria Pf/Pv rapid test) for detecting P vivax malaria. One study directly compared the accuracy of two RDT brands. Of the 10 studies, six used microscopy, one used PCR, two used both microscopy and PCR separately and one used microscopy corrected by PCR as the reference standard. Four of the studies were conducted in Ethiopia, two in India, and one each in Bangladesh, Brazil, Colombia and Sudan. The studies often did not report how patients were selected. In the patient selection domain, we judged the risk of bias as unclear for nine studies. We judged all studies to be of unclear applicability concern. In the index test domain, we judged most studies to be at low risk of bias, but we judged nine studies to be of unclear applicability concern. There was poor reporting on lot testing, how the RDTs were stored, and background parasitaemia density (a key variable determining diagnostic accuracy of RDTs). Only half of the included studies were judged to be at low risk of bias in the reference standard domain, Studies often did not report whether the results of the reference standard could classify the target condition or whether investigators knew the results of the RDT when interpreting the results of the reference standard. All 10 studies were judged to be at low risk of bias in the flow and timing domain. Only two brands were evaluated by more than one study. Four studies evaluated the CareStart Malaria Pf/Pv Combo test against microscopy and two studies evaluated the Falcivax Device Rapid test against microscopy. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 99% (95% CI 94% to 100%; 251 patients, moderate-certainty evidence) and 99% (95% CI 99% to 100%; 2147 patients, moderate-certainty evidence) for CareStart Malaria Pf/Pv Combo test. For a prevalence of 20%, about 206 people will have a positive CareStart Malaria Pf/Pv Combo test result and the remaining 794 people will have a negative result. Of the 206 people with positive results, eight will be incorrect (false positives), and of the 794 people with a negative result, two would be incorrect (false negative). For the Falcivax Device Rapid test, the pooled sensitivity was 77% (95% CI: 53% to 91%, 89 patients, low-certainty evidence) and the pooled specificity was 99% (95% CI: 98% to 100%, 621 patients, moderate-certainty evidence), respectively. For a prevalence of 20%, about 162 people will have a positive Falcivax Device Rapid test result and the remaining 838 people will have a negative result. Of the 162 people with positive results, eight will be incorrect (false positives), and of the 838 people with a negative result, 46 would be incorrect (false negative).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The CareStart Malaria Pf/Pv Combo test was found to be highly sensitive and specific in comparison to microscopy for detecting P vivax in ambulatory healthcare in endemic settings, with moderate-certainty evidence. The number of studies included in this review was limited to 10 studies and we were able to estimate the accuracy of 2 out of 6 RDT brands included, the CareStart Malaria Pf/Pv Combo test and the Falcivax Device Rapid test. Thus, the differences in sensitivity and specificity between all the RDT brands could not be assessed. More high-quality studies in endemic field settings are needed to assess and compare the accuracy of RDTs designed to detect P vivax.

Diagnosis of clinical malaria in endemic settings

INTRODUCTION

Malaria continues to be a major global health problem, with over 228 million cases and 405,000 deaths estimated to occur annually. Rapid and accurate diagnosis of malaria is essential to decrease the burden and impact of this disease, particularly in children. We aimed to review the main available techniques for the diagnosis of clinical malaria in endemic settings and explore possible future options to improve its rapid recognition.

AREAS COVERED

literature relevant to malaria diagnosis was identified through electronic searches in Pubmed, with no language or date restrictions and limited to humans.

EXPERT OPINION

Light microscopy is still considered the gold standard method for malaria diagnosis and continues to be at the frontline of malaria diagnosis. However, technologies as rapid diagnostic tests, mainly those who detect histidine-rich protein-2, offer an accurate, rapid and affordable alternative for malaria diagnosis in endemic areas. They are now the technique most extended in endemic areas for parasitological confirmation. In these settings, PCR-based assays are usually restricted to research and they are not currently helpful in the management of clinical malaria. Other technologies, such as isothermal methods could be an interesting and alternative approach to PCR in the future.

Comparison of the fluorescence microscopy Cyscope® with light microscopy for malaria diagnosis in a small and active surveillance in Cameroon

Background

Malaria has a negative impact on the activities of companies in endemic countries especially in Cameroon. In this regard, an increasingly growing number of companies have started to include management of malarious patients in their health policies. In the present study, we will evaluate the diagnostic performances of a fluorescence microscopy (FM), Cyscope® microscope, in the detection of malaria parasites.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted among employees of two companies of the town of Douala on 21 and 22 March 2017. Sociodemographic information of employees was collected using a questionnaire form. Blood samples of ~ 10 μL were collected by venipuncture for the diagnosis of malaria using FM and light microscopy (LM). Performances of FM with respect to sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), positive and negative likelihood rates (PLR and NLR), accuracy, reliability, and Kappa index were calculated using LM as gold standard.

Results

In total, 442 employees, aged 37.8 ± 9.7 years old on average, were included in the study. Prevalence of malaria using FM and LM was 39.2% and 17%, respectively (p < 0.01). Plasmodium falciparum and P. vivax were the two species involved in malaria infection cases. In terms of developmental stages, 68%, 45.3%, and 1.3% of employees carried gametocytes, trophozoites, and schizonts, respectively. Findings on diagnostic performances of FM were as follows: Se = 84%, Sp = 69.95%, PPV = 63.58%, NPV = 95.5%, accuracy = 89.36%, and reliability = 53.95%. Sensitivity of Cyscope® microscope increased as a function of parasitemia with values ranging from 76.92% at parasitemia between 1 and 500 parasites/μL to 91.11% at parasitemia between 501 and 5000 parasites/μL. The geometric mean parasite density was1850 parasites per μL of blood (range 1600-40,000), and most of employees (60.8%) had moderate parasitemia. The performances of FM were similar between febrile and afebrile patients.

Conclusions

This study showed good performances of Cyscope® microscope and outlines that this diagnostic tool could be used in management of malaria at workplace.

Mobile Phone Devices and Handheld Microscopes as Diagnostic Platforms for Malaria and Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) in Low-Resource Settings: A Systematic Review, Historical Perspective and Future Outlook

The accurate, rapid, and cost-effective diagnosis of malaria and neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) in low-resource settings may benefit by significant technological advances in handheld and mobile phone microscopy. We systematically review the available literature in this field and discuss the future directions in which these technologies may be applied. English-language studies from the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Sciences were searched through April 2018 for observational and interventional studies reporting diagnostic characteristics of handheld and mobile phone microscopy devices as compared to field-established gold standard reference tests. Seventeen studies were included in the analysis. Findings included the high performance of the Newton Nm1 microscope in the diagnosis of Plasmodium species, Schistosoma mansoni, and soil-transmitted helminths (STHs), exhibiting sensitivity and specificity values often greater than 90%. Similarly, the CellScope was shown to have excellent diagnostic characteristics in the detection of Loa loa and Schistosoma species. Fluorescent microscopy was found to have high specificity and sensitivity in the diagnosis of Plasmodium species. Mobile phone technologies and handheld microscopes hold significant promise in the rapid and effective diagnosis of malaria and NTDs in areas where accurate diagnosis is vital. Although many of these technologies have yet to be securely embedded within the health system and studied directly in this context, the foundations for significant healthcare advances and impact have already been laid by several studies conducted within the last decade.