Buffer substitution in malaria rapid diagnostic tests causes false-positive results

Evaluating the sensitivity and specificity of Determine™ HIV-1/2 rapid test using a 0.01M phosphate-buffered saline produced at the Medical Research Council Unit The Gambia for the diagnosis of HIV

BACKGROUND

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are widely used. However, buffer stockouts commonly lead to utilising non-approved liquids, resulting in errors. Our aim was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of an alternative buffer.

METHODS

Paired Determine HIV-1/2 rapid tests with commercial buffer and locally produced 0.01M phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) were performed on consecutive consenting individuals requiring HIV testing. Serum samples were sent for confirmation through the local gold-standard algorithm (Murex HIV Ag/Ab, Hexagon HIV with/without Geenius HIV 1/2). Test accuracy, κ and exact McNemar's test were also carried out.

RESULTS

Of 167 participants, 137 had confirmatory testing. The sensitivity of the Determine HIV-1/2 test using PBS compared with the gold standard was 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 90.5 to 100) with a specificity of 98% (95% CI 92.9 to 99.8). The κ value was 0.94 compared with the gold standard and 0.92 compared with the Determine HIV-1/2 test using the commercial buffer. McNemar's test showed no evidence of differing sensitivities. Due to operational constraints, the study included 37 of the 49 positive cases as determined by the sample size calculation, resulting in an attained power of 80% instead of the intended 90%.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that 0.01M PBS is an alternative solution for Determine HIV-1/2 when buffer stockouts occur.

Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome: A COVID-19 Vaccine Reaction Case Report

The World Health Organization declared the Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) a public health emergency of international concern on 30 January 2020, and a pandemic on 11 March 2020. Vaccines have proven to be vital in the effort to control and possibly eventually eradicate this viral infection. There have been reports of thromboembolic events associated with the use of vaccine but from available information, no reported case of atypical Hemolytic Uremic syndrome (HUS) in a black male has been described. We report a case of a 43-year-old black male Sub-Saharan African c5dwho presented with chills, fever, and generalized body aches of 3 days duration after receiving the second booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. He developed thrombocytopenia, hemolytic anaemia, and acute kidney injury on admission, and an initial diagnosis of malaria was made. He was managed with parenteral artesunate and then oral artemether/lumefantrine. His hemolytic anaemia was thought to be from malaria-associated hemolysis. This diagnosis was however later re-evaluated to hemolytic uremic syndrome and managed with 50mg daily oral prednisolone which resolved, and he resumed work a week later. Although mass vaccination is a key strategy to control the spread of COVID-19, critical observations should be made to confirm the risk of trigger for abnormal complement activation. Further observations should be made especially if it is a chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored vaccine.

Generation of False-Positive SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Results with Testing Conditions outside Manufacturer Recommendations: A Scientific Approach to Pandemic Misinformation

Antigen-based rapid diagnostics tests (Ag-RDTs) are useful tools for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection. However, misleading demonstrations of the Abbott Panbio coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Ag-RDT on social media claimed that SARS-CoV-2 antigen could be detected in municipal water and food products. To offer a scientific rebuttal to pandemic misinformation and disinformation, this study explored the impact of using the Panbio SARS-CoV-2 assay with conditions falling outside manufacturer recommendations. Using Panbio, various water and food products, laboratory buffers, and SARS-CoV-2-negative clinical specimens were tested with and without manufacturer buffer. Additional experiments were conducted to assess the role of each Panbio buffer component (tricine, NaCl, pH, and Tween 20) as well as the impact of temperature (4°C, 20°C, and 45°C) and humidity (90%) on assay performance. Direct sample testing (without the kit buffer) resulted in false-positive signals resembling those obtained with SARS-CoV-2 positive controls tested under proper conditions. The likely explanation of these artifacts is nonspecific interactions between the SARS-CoV-2-specific conjugated and capture antibodies, as proteinase K treatment abrogated this phenomenon, and thermal shift assays showed pH-induced conformational changes under conditions promoting artifact formation. Omitting, altering, and reverse engineering the kit buffer all supported the importance of maintaining buffering capacity, ionic strength, and pH for accurate kit function. Interestingly, the Panbio assay could tolerate some extremes of temperature and humidity outside manufacturer claims. Our data support strict adherence to manufacturer instructions to avoid false-positive SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT reactions, otherwise resulting in anxiety, overuse of public health resources, and dissemination of misinformation. IMPORTANCE With the Panbio severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antigen test being deployed in over 120 countries worldwide, understanding conditions required for its ideal performance is critical. Recently on social media, this kit was shown to generate false positives when manufacturer recommendations were not followed. While erroneous results from improper use of a test may not be surprising to some health care professionals, understanding why false positives occur can help reduce the propagation of misinformation and provide a scientific rebuttal for these aberrant findings. This study demonstrated that the kit buffer's pH, ionic strength, and buffering capacity were critical components to ensure proper kit function and avoid generation of false-positive results. Typically, false positives arise from cross-reacting or interfering substances; however, this study demonstrated a mechanism where false positives were generated under conditions favoring nonspecific interactions between the two antibodies designed for SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection. Following the manufacturer instructions is critical for accurate test results.

A 0.85% saline as alternative detection buffer for SD-Bioline HIV rapid test in resource limited setting

Accuracy in the diagnosis is a key step to identify HIV infected individuals for appropriate management. Insufficient supply of manufacturer´s buffers in relation to the number of strips per kit has negative impact on patient´s results hence improper patient´s management. In resource limited settings, some laboratory staff use different substitute buffers which has never been validated on their reliability. This study aimed at comparing the performance of 0.85% saline and SD-Bioline manufacturer´s buffer in detection of HIV antibodies. A total of 220 whole blood specimens: 110 HIV positive specimens from patients attending care and treatment center (CTC) and 110 HIV negative specimens from blood donors were re-tested for HIV status using SD-Bioline HIV rapid test using manufacturer´s buffer and 0.85% saline separately. Data and laboratory results were recorded in Microsoft excel sheet followed by analysis using STATA version 13. For all tested samples, the level of agreement between 0.85% saline and manufacturer´s buffer was 98.64% (kappa=0.9727). The value of kappa indicates very good agreement between 0.85% saline and manufacturer´s buffer. In incidents where manufacturer´s buffer is not sufficient, 0.85% saline can give reliable results. Further studies to evaluate the suitable buffer for other rapid tests for HIV and other diseases are recommended especially in resource limited settings.

Implementing COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) Rapid Diagnostic Tests in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Review

Introduction: For the COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) response, COVID-19 antigen (Ag), and antibody (Ab) rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are expected to complement central molecular testing particularly in low-resource settings. The present review assesses requirements for implementation of COVID-19 RDTs in sub-Saharan Africa. Methods: Review of PubMed-published articles assessing COVID-19 RDTs complemented with Instructions for Use (IFU) of products. Results: In total 47 articles on two COVID-19 Ag RDTs and 54 COVID-19 Ab RDTs and IFUs of 20 COVID-19 Ab RDTs were retrieved. Only five COVID-19 Ab RDTs (9.3%) were assessed with capillary blood sampling at the point-of-care; none of the studies were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa. Sampling: Challenges for COVID-19 Ag RDTs include nasopharyngeal sampling (technique, biosafety) and sample stability; for COVID-19 Ab RDTs equivalence of whole blood vs. plasma/serum needs further validation (assessed for only eight (14.8%) products). Sensitivity-Specificity: sensitivity of COVID-19 Ag and Ab RDTs depend on viral load (antigen) and timeframe (antibody), respectively; COVID-19 Ab tests have lower sensitivity compared to laboratory test platforms and the kinetics of IgM and IgG are very similar. Reported specificity was high but has not yet been assessed against tropical pathogens. Kit configuration: For COVID-19 Ag RDTs, flocked swabs should be added to the kit; for COVID-19 Ab RDTs, finger prick sampling materials, transfer devices, and controls should be added (currently only supplied in 15, 5, and 1/20 products). Usability and Robustness: some COVID-19 Ab RDTs showed high proportions of faint lines (>40%) or invalid results (>20%). Shortcomings were reported for buffer vials (spills, air bubbles) and their instructions for use. Stability: storage temperature was ≤ 30°C for all but one RDT, in-use and result stability were maximal at 1 h and 30 min, respectively. Integration in the healthcare setting requires a target product profile, landscape overview of technologies, certified manufacturing capacity, a sustainable market, and a stringent but timely regulation. In-country deployment depends on integration in the national laboratory network. Discussion/Conclusion: Despite these limitations, successful implementation models in triage, contact tracing, and surveillance have been proposed, in particular for COVID-19 Ab RDTs. Valuable experience is available from implementation of other disease-specific RDTs in sub-Saharan Africa.

Implementation of a malaria rapid diagnostic test in a rural setting of Nanoro, Burkina Faso: from expectation to reality

Background

Malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are nowadays widely used in malaria endemic countries as an alternative to microscopy for the diagnosis of malaria. However, quality control of test performance and execution in the field are important in order to ensure proper use and adequate diagnosis of malaria. The current study compared the performance of a histidine-rich protein 2-based RDT used at peripheral health facilities level in real life conditions with that performed at central reference laboratory level with strict adherence to manufacturer instructions.

Methods

Febrile children attending rural health clinics were tested for malaria with a RDT provided by the Ministry of Health of Burkina Faso as recommended by the National Malaria Control Programme. In addition, a blood sample was collected in an EDTA tube from all study cases for retesting with the same brand of RDT following the manufacturer’s instructions with expert malaria microscopy as gold standard at the central reference laboratory. Fisher exact test was used to compare the proportions by estimating the p-value (p ≤ 0.05) as statistically significant.

Results

In total, 407 febrile children were included in the study and malaria was diagnosed in 59.9% (244/407) of the cases with expert malaria microscopy. The sensitivity of malaria RDT testing performed at health facilities was 97.5% and comparable to that achieved at the laboratory (98.8%). The number of malaria false negatives was not statistically significant between the two groups (p = 0.5209). However, the malaria RDT testing performed at health facilities had a specificity issue (52.8%) and was much lower compared to RDT testing performed at laboratory (74.2%). The number of malaria false positives was statistically significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.0005).

Conclusion

Malaria RDT testing performed at the participating rural health facilities resulted in more malaria false positives compared to those performed at central laboratory. Several factors, including storage and transportation conditions but also training of health workers, are most likely to influence test performance. Therefore, it is very important to have appropriate quality control and training programmes in place to ensure correct performance of RDT testing.

Quality issues with malaria rapid diagnostic test accessories and buffer packaging: findings from a 5-country private sector project in Africa

Background

Use of antigen-detecting malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) has increased exponentially over the last decade. WHO’s Global Malaria Programme, FIND, and other collaborators have established a quality assurance scheme to guide product selection, lot verification, transport, storage, and training procedures. Recent concerns over the quality of buffer packaging and test accessories suggest a need to include these items in product assessments. This paper describes quality problems with buffer and accessories encountered in a project promoting private sector RDT use in five African countries and suggests steps to avoid or more rapidly identify and resolve such problems.

Methods

Private provider complaints about RDT buffer vials and kit accessories were collected during supervisory visits, and a standard assessment process was developed. Using 100 tests drawn from six different lots produced by two manufacturers, lab technicians visually assessed alcohol swab packaging, blood transfer device (BTD) usability, and buffer appearance, then calculated mean blood volume from 10 BTD transfers and mean buffer volume from 10 individual buffer vials. WHO guided complaint reporting and follow-up with manufacturers.

Results

Supervisory visits confirmed user reports of dry alcohol swabs, poorly functioning BTDs, and non-uniform volumes of buffer. Lot testing revealed further evidence of quality problems, leading one manufacturer to replace buffer vials and accessories for 40,000 RDTs. In December 2014, WHO issued an Information Notice for Users regarding variable buffer volumes in single-use vials and recommended against procurement of these products until defects were addressed.

Discussion

Though not necessarily comprehensive or generalizable, the findings presented here highlight the need for extending quality assessment to all malaria RDT test kit contents. Defects such as those described in this paper could reduce test accuracy and increase probability of invalid, false positive, or false negative results. Such deficiencies could undermine provider confidence in RDTs, prompting a return to presumptive treatment or reliance on poor quality microscopy. In partial response to this experience, WHO, FIND, and other project partners have developed guidance on documenting, troubleshooting, reporting, and resolving such problems when they occur.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12936-017-1820-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Smartphone-Based Fluorescent Diagnostic System for Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Viruses

Field diagnostic tools for avian influenza (AI) are indispensable for the prevention and controlled management of highly pathogenic AI-related diseases. More accurate, faster and networked on-site monitoring is demanded to detect such AI viruses with high sensitivity as well as to maintain up-to-date information about their geographical transmission. In this work, we assessed the clinical and field-level performance of a smartphone-based fluorescent diagnostic device with an efficient reflective light collection module using a coumarin-derived dendrimer-based fluorescent lateral flow immunoassay. By application of an optimized bioconjugate, a smartphone-based diagnostic device had a two-fold higher detectability as compared to that of the table-top fluorescence strip reader for three different AI subtypes (H5N3, H7N1, and H9N2). Additionally, in a clinical study of H5N1-confirmed patients, the smartphone-based diagnostic device showed a sensitivity of 96.55% (28/29) [95% confidence interval (CI): 82.24 to 99.91] and a specificity of 98.55% (68/69) (95% CI: 92.19 to 99.96). The measurement results from the distributed individual smartphones were wirelessly transmitted via short messaging service and collected by a centralized database system for further information processing and data mining. Smartphone-based diagnosis provided highly sensitive measurement results for H5N1 detection within 15 minutes. Because of its high sensitivity, portability and automatic reporting feature, the proposed device will enable agile identification of patients and efficient control of AI dissemination.

Task-Shifting and Quality of HIV Testing Services: Experiences from a National Reference Hospital in Zambia

BACKGROUND

With new testing technologies, task-shifting and rapid scale-up of HIV testing services in high HIV prevalence countries, assuring quality of HIV testing is paramount. This study aimed to explore various cadres of providers' experiences in providing HIV testing services and their understanding of elements that impact on quality of service in Zambia.

METHODS

Sixteen in-depth interviews and two focus group discussions were conducted with HIV testing service providers including lay counselors, nurses and laboratory personnel at purposively selected HIV testing sites at a national reference hospital in Lusaka. Qualitative content analysis was adopted for data analysis.

RESULTS

Lay counselors and nurses reported confidentiality and privacy to be greatly compromised due to limited space in both in- and out-patient settings. Difficulties in upholding consent were reported in provider-initiated testing in in-patient settings. The providers identified non-adherence to testing procedures, high workload and inadequate training and supervision as key elements impacting on quality of testing. Difficulties related to testing varied by sub-groups of providers: lay counselors, in finger pricking and obtaining adequate volumes of specimen; non-laboratory providers in general, in interpreting invalid, false-negative and false-positive results. The providers had been participating in a recently established national HIV quality assurance program, i.e. proficiency testing, but rarely received site supervisory visits.

CONCLUSION

Task-shifting coupled with policy shifts in service provision has seriously challenged HIV testing quality, protection of confidentiality and the process of informed consent. Ways to better protect confidentiality and informed consent need careful attention. Training, supervision and quality assurance need strengthening tailored to the needs of the different cadres of providers.

Addressing Barriers to the Development and Adoption of Rapid Diagnostic Tests in Global Health

Immunochromatographic rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have demonstrated significant potential for use as point-of-care diagnostic tests in resource-limited settings. Most notably, RDTs for malaria have reached an unparalleled level of technological maturity and market penetration, and are now considered an important complement to standard microscopic methods of malaria diagnosis. However, the technical development of RDTs for other infectious diseases, and their uptake within the global health community as a core diagnostic modality, has been hindered by a number of extant challenges. These range from technical and biological issues, such as the need for better affinity agents and biomarkers of disease, to social, infrastructural, regulatory and economic barriers, which have all served to slow their adoption and diminish their impact. In order for the immunochromatographic RDT format to be successfully adapted to other disease targets, to see widespread distribution, and to improve clinical outcomes for patients on a global scale, these challenges must be identified and addressed, and the global health community must be engaged in championing the broader use of RDTs.

Wrong sample dispensing may cause false positive malaria test

Both false positive (FP) and false negative are known limitations of any diagnostic test. Malaria parasite (MP) rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) may give FP results due to interference by substance in blood sample. We detected a FP in a MP RDT for first time in 36-year-old female whole blood donor due to incorrect sample dispensing technique. As per manufacturer's instructions, while allowing all kit components and blood specimen to come to room temperature before testing, blood samples usually separate into lower layer of red blood cells (RBC) and upper layer of plasma. Technician performing the test took the sample from the bottom of the vacutainer thus taking RBC instead of whole blood (WB-recommended by manufacturer). This test showed reactive result and as per our standard protocol was re-tested to confirm the result. This second test was performed after re-mixing the same sample, which now tested as non-reactive sample, buffer and other kit component mix-up were ruled out. Repeated test on another sample of same donor produced same results. Thick and thin peripheral blood smear examination for malaria was found negative. This case highlights wrong MP RDT result due to wrong sample dispensing.

Quality assurance of malaria rapid diagnostic tests used for routine patient care in rural Tanzania: microscopy versus real-time polymerase chain reaction

Background

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends parasitologic confirmation of suspected malaria cases before treatment. Due to the limited availability of quality microscopy services, this recommendation has become scalable following increased use of antigen-detecting malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) in many malaria-endemic countries. This study was carried out to monitor quality of RDT performance in selected health facilities using two quality assurance (QA) methods: reference microscopy and detection of parasite DNA by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) on dried blood spots (DBS).

Methods

Blood samples for QA were collected from patients undergoing RDT for diagnostic confirmation of malaria during two to three consecutive days per month in 12 health facilities in rural Tanzania. Stained blood smears (BS) were first examined at the district hospitals (BS1) and then at a reference laboratory (BS2). Discordant BS1 and BS2 results prompted a third examination. Molecular analysis was carried out at the Ifakara Health Institute laboratory in Bagamoyo.

Results

Malaria RDTs had a higher positivity rate (6.5%) than qPCR (4.2%) or microscopy (2.9% for BS1 and 2.5% for BS2). Poor correlation was observed between RDT and BS results: BS1 (K = 0.5), BS2 (K = 0.43) and qPCR (K = 0.45), challenging the utility of these tests for RDT QA. In addition, many challenges related to qPCR processing were recorded and long delays in obtaining QA test results for both microscopy and qPCR.

Conclusions

Overall there was limited agreement among the three diagnostic approaches and neither microscopy nor qPCR appear to be good QA options for RDTs under field conditions.

Misdiagnosis of malaria using wrong buffer substitutes for rapid diagnostic tests in poor resource setting in Enugu, southeast Nigeria

Background

A key to the effective management of malaria is prompt and accurate diagnosis, and the use of malaria rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs) is becoming relevant in the absence of reliable microscopy. This study explored the phenomenon of using the wrong buffer vial (often a kit from another brand or buffer from HIV rapid test kits), dextrose, saline or distilled water among health care providers who used RDTs for malaria diagnosis in resource poor settings in Enugu South East, Nigeria.

Materials and Methods

Laboratory personnel (medical laboratory scientists, technicians, assistants, nurses, community health extension workers (CHEW), community health officers (CHO) and doctors) were interviewed using structured questionnaires and results were checked using the SOP checklist. The selection criterion was a prior experience with using RDTs, and any facility that did not use RDTs was excluded.

Results

Of the 80 study participants that completed their questionnaires, 56.3% reported that malaria diagnosis was positive using non-buffer RDTs detection while others reported negative results. Among the various professionals who used RDTs, 76.2% reported to have run out of RDT buffer stock at least once. Of the study participants that ran out of RDT buffer solution, 73% declared to have used non-RDT alternatives (physiological saline, 0.9% NaCl), distilled water, HIV buffer or ordinary water). Only 30% had received formal training on the proper usage and application of RDTs while 70% had never received any formal training on RDTs but learnt the technique of using RDT on the job.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that at least three quarters of health care workers in a resource poor setting had run out of buffer when using malaria RDTs and that the majority of them had used buffer substitutes, which are known to generate inaccurate tests results. This has the consequence of misdiagnosis, thus potentially damaging the credibility of malaria control.

Malaria rapid diagnostic tests in endemic settings

Malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are instrument-free tests that provide results within 20 min and can be used by community health workers. RDTs detect antigens produced by the Plasmodium parasite such as Plasmodium falciparum histidine-rich protein-2 (PfHPR2) and Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH). The accuracy of RDTs for the diagnosis of uncomplicated P. falciparum infection is equal or superior to routine microscopy (but inferior to expert microscopy). Sensitivity for Plasmodium vivax is 75-100%; for Plasmodium ovale and Plasmodium malariae, diagnostic performance is poor. Design limitations of RDTs include poor sensitivity at low parasite densities, susceptibility to the prozone effect (PfHRP2-detecting RDTs), false-negative results due to PfHRP2 deficiency in the case of pfhrp2 gene deletions (PfHRP2-detecting RDTs), cross-reactions between Plasmodium antigens and detection antibodies, false-positive results by other infections and susceptibility to heat and humidity. End-user's errors relate to safety, procedure (delayed reading, incorrect sample and buffer volumes) and interpretation (not recognizing invalid test results, disregarding faint test lines). Withholding antimalarial treatment in the case of negative RDT results tends to be infrequent and tendencies towards over-prescription of antibiotics have been noted. Numerous shortcomings in RDT kits' labelling, instructions for use (correctness and readability) and contents have been observed. The World Health Organization and partners actively address quality assurance of RDTs by comparative testing of RDTs, inspections of manufacturing sites, lot testing and training tools but no formal external quality assessment programme of end-user performance exists. Elimination of malaria requires RDTs with lower detection limits, for which nucleic acid amplification tests are under development.

Self-diagnosis of malaria by travelers and expatriates: assessment of malaria rapid diagnostic tests available on the internet

Introduction

In the past malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for self-diagnosis by travelers were considered suboptimal due to poor performance. Nowadays RDTs for self-diagnosis are marketed and available through the internet. The present study assessed RDT products marketed for self-diagnosis for diagnostic accuracy and quality of labeling, content and instructions for use (IFU).

Methods

Diagnostic accuracy of eight RDT products was assessed with a panel of stored whole blood samples comprising the four Plasmodium species (n = 90) as well as Plasmodium negative samples (n = 10). IFUs were assessed for quality of description of procedure and interpretation and for lay-out and readability level. Errors in packaging and content were recorded.

Results

Two products gave false-positive test lines in 70% and 80% of Plasmodium negative samples, precluding their use. Of the remaining products, 4/6 had good to excellent sensitivity for the diagnosis of Plasmodium falciparum (98.2%–100.0%) and Plasmodium vivax (93.3%–100.0%). Sensitivity for Plasmodium ovale and Plasmodium malariae diagnosis was poor (6.7%–80.0%). All but one product yielded false-positive test lines after reading beyond the recommended reading time. Problems with labeling (not specifying target antigens (n = 3), and content (desiccant with no humidity indicator (n = 6)) were observed. IFUs had major shortcomings in description of test procedure and interpretation, poor readability and lay-out and user-unfriendly typography. Strategic issues (e.g. the need for repeat testing and reasons for false-negative tests) were not addressed in any of the IFUs.

Conclusion

Diagnostic accuracy of RDTs for self-diagnosis was variable, with only 4/8 RDT products being reliable for the diagnosis of P. falciparum and P. vivax, and none for P. ovale and P. malariae. RDTs for self-diagnosis need improvements in IFUs (content and user-friendliness), labeling and content before they can be considered for self-diagnosis by the traveler.

Evaluation of four rapid diagnostic tests for the diagnosis of Plasmodium vivax in Korea

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate 4 rapid malaria diagnostic kits (RDTs) in Korea: OptiMAL test, SD BIOLINE Malaria Ag P.f/Pan test, Humasis Malaria P.f/Pan antigen test and CareStart Malaria Pf/Pv Combo test.

METHODS

Hundred malaria patients with Plasmodium vivax (P. vivax) and 100 healthy volunteers were recruited. The results from earlier four RDTs were compared with the reference standard, the Giemsa-stained traditional microscopic diagnosis.

RESULTS

Compared with the reference standard, the sensitivity and specificity for Plasmodium vivax were 92.7 and 100% for SD BIOLINE Malaria Ag P.f/Pan; and 94.6% and 100% for OptiMAL; 95.5% and 100% for both Humasis Malaria P.f/Pan antigen test and CareStart Malaria Pf/Pv Combo test.

CONCLUSION

The performances of all four malaria RDT kits were acceptable, although Humasis Malaria P.f/Pan antigen test and CareStart Malaria Pf/Pv Combo test gave superior performances with ROK isolates.

Field trial of three different Plasmodium vivax-detecting rapid diagnostic tests with and without evaporative cool box storage in Afghanistan

BACKGROUND

Accurate parasitological diagnosis of malaria is essential for targeting treatment where more than one species coexist. In this study, three rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) (AccessBio CareStart (CSPfPan), CareStart PfPv (CSPfPv) and Standard Diagnostics Bioline (SDBPfPv)) were evaluated for their ability to detect natural Plasmodium vivax infections in a basic clinic setting. The potential for locally made evaporative cooling boxes (ECB) to protect the tests from heat damage in high summer temperatures was also investigated.

METHODS

Venous blood was drawn from P. vivax positive patients in Jalalabad, Afghanistan and tested against a panel of six RDTs. The panel comprised two of each test type; one group was stored at room temperature and the other in an ECB. RDT results were evaluated against a consensus gold standard based on two double-read reference slides and PCR. The sensitivity, specificity and a measure of global performance for each test were determined and stratified by parasitaemia level and storage condition.

RESULTS

In total, 306 patients were recruited, of which 284 were positive for P. vivax, one for Plasmodium malariae and none for Plasmodium falciparum; 21 were negative. All three RDTs were specific for malaria. The sensitivity and global performance index for each test were as follows: CSPfPan [98.6%, 95.1%], CSPfPv [91.9%, 90.5%] and SDBPfPv [96.5%, 82.9%], respectively. CSPfPv was 16% less sensitive to a parasitaemia below 5,000/μL. Room temperature storage of SDBPfPv led to a high proportion of invalid results (17%), which reduced to 10% in the ECB. Throughout the testing period, the ECB maintained ~8°C reduction over ambient temperatures and never exceeded 30°C.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the three RDTs, the CSPfPan test was the most consistent and reliable, rendering it appropriate for this P. vivax predominant region. The CSPfPv test proved unsuitable owing to its reduced sensitivity at a parasitaemia below 5,000/μL (affecting 43% of study samples). Although the SDBPfPv device was more sensitive than the CSPfPv test, its invalid rate was unacceptably high. ECB storage reduced the proportion of invalid results for the SDBPfPv test, but surprisingly had no impact on RDT sensitivity at low parasitaemia.

Malaria rapid diagnostic kits: quality of packaging, design and labelling of boxes and components and readability and accuracy of information inserts

BACKGROUND

The present study assessed malaria RDT kits for adequate and correct packaging, design and labelling of boxes and components. Information inserts were studied for readability and accuracy of information.

METHODS

Criteria for packaging, design, labelling and information were compiled from Directive 98/79 of the European Community (EC), relevant World Health Organization (WHO) documents and studies on end-users' performance of RDTs. Typography and readability level (Flesch-Kincaid grade level) were assessed.

RESULTS

Forty-two RDT kits from 22 manufacturers were assessed, 35 of which had evidence of good manufacturing practice according to available information (i.e. CE-label affixed or inclusion in the WHO list of ISO13485:2003 certified manufacturers). Shortcomings in devices were (i) insufficient place for writing sample identification (n=40) and (ii) ambiguous labelling of the reading window (n=6). Buffer vial labels were lacking essential information (n=24) or were of poor quality (n=16). Information inserts had elevated readability levels (median Flesch Kincaid grade 8.9, range 7.1-12.9) and user-unfriendly typography (median font size 8, range 5-10). Inadequacies included (i) no referral to biosafety (n=18), (ii) critical differences between depicted and real devices (n=8), (iii) figures with unrealistic colours (n=4), (iv) incomplete information about RDT line interpretations (n=31) and no data on test characteristics (n=8). Other problems included (i) kit names that referred to Plasmodium vivax although targeting a pan-species Plasmodium antigen (n=4), (ii) not stating the identity of the pan-species antigen (n=2) and (iii) slight but numerous differences in names displayed on boxes, device packages and information inserts. Three CE labelled RDT kits produced outside the EC had no authorized representative affixed and the shape and relative dimensions of the CE symbol affixed did not comply with the Directive 98/79/EC. Overall, RDTs with evidence of GMP scored better compared to those without but inadequacies were observed in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Overall, malaria RDTs showed shortcomings in quality of construction, design and labelling of boxes, device packages, devices and buffers. Information inserts were difficult to read and lacked relevant information.

External quality assessment on the use of malaria rapid diagnostic tests in a non-endemic setting

Background

Malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are increasingly used as a tool for the diagnosis of malaria, both in endemic and in non-endemic settings. The present study reports the results of an external quality assessment (EQA) session on RDTs in a non-endemic setting.

Methods

After validation of antigen stability during shipment at room temperature, three clinical samples and a questionnaire were sent to clinical laboratories in Belgium and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg using malaria RDTs. Participants were asked to report the results of the RDTs as observations (visibility of the RDT control and test lines) and interpretations (report as formulated to the clinician). In addition, participants were invited to fill in a questionnaire on the place of RDTs in the diagnostic strategy of malaria.

Results

A total of 128/133 (96.2%) of clinical laboratories using RDTs participated. Six three-band and one four-band RDT brands were used. Analytical errors were rare and included (i) not recognizing invalid RDT results (1.6%) and (ii) missing the diagnosis of Plasmodium falciparum (0.8%). Minor errors were related to RDT test result interpretation and included (i) reporting "RDT positive" without species identification in the case of P. falciparum and non-falciparum species (16.9% and 6.5% respectively) and (ii) adding incorrect comments to the report (3.2%). Some of these errors were related to incorrect RDT package insert instructions such as (i) not reporting the possibility of mixed species infection in the case of P. falciparum and Plasmodium vivax (35.5% and 18.5% respectively) and (ii) the interpretation of P. vivax instead of non-falciparum species at the presence of a pan-species antigen line (4.0%). According to the questionnaire, 48.8% of participants processed ≤20 requests for malaria diagnosis in 2009. During opening hours, 93.6% of 125 participants used RDTs as an adjunct to microscopy but outside opening hours, nearly one third of 113 participants relied on RDTs as the primary (4.4%) or the single tool (25.7%) for malaria diagnosis.

Conclusion

In this non-endemic setting, errors in RDT performance were mainly related to RDT test line interpretations, partly due to incorrect package insert instructions. The reliance on RDTs as the primary or the single tool for the diagnosis of malaria outside opening hours is of concern and should be avoided.