Evaluation of Rapid Diagnostics for Plasmodium falciparum and P. vivax in Mae Sot Malaria Endemic Area, Thailand

Pharmacology and Toxicology Unit, Graduate Program in Biomedical Sciences, Thammasat University, Rangsit, Patumthani 12121, Thailand.
The Korean Journal of Parasitology (Impact Factor: 1.15). 03/2011; 49(1):33-8. DOI: 10.3347/kjp.2011.49.1.33
Source: PubMed


Prompt and accurate diagnosis of malaria is the key to prevent disease morbidity and mortality. This study was carried out to evaluate diagnostic performance of 3 commercial rapid detection tests (RDTs), i.e., Malaria Antigen Pf/Pan™, Malaria Ag-Pf™, and Malaria Ag-Pv™ tests, in comparison with the microscopic and PCR methods. A total of 460 blood samples microscopically positive for Plasmodium falciparum (211 samples), P. vivax (218), mixed with P. falciparum and P. vivax (30), or P. ovale (1), and 124 samples of healthy subjects or patients with other fever-related infections, were collected. The sensitivities of Malaria Ag-Pf™ and Malaria Antigen Pf/Pan™ compared with the microscopic method for P. falciparum or P. vivax detection were 97.6% and 99.0%, or 98.6% and 99.0%, respectively. The specificities of Malaria Ag-Pf™, Malaria Ag-Pv™, and Malaria Antigen Pf/Pan™ were 93.3%, 98.8%, and 94.4%, respectively. The sensitivities of Malaria Ag-Pf™, Malaria Antigen Pf/Pan™, and microscopic method, when PCR was used as a reference method for P. falciparum or P. vivax detection were 91.8%, 100%, and 96.7%, or 91.9%, 92.6%, and 97.3%, respectively. The specificities of Malaria Ag-Pf™, Malaria Ag-Pv™, Malaria Antigen Pf/Pan™, and microscopic method were 66.2%, 92.7%, 73.9%, and 78.2%, respectively. Results indicated that the diagnostic performances of all the commercial RDTs are satisfactory for application to malaria diagnosis.

Download full-text


Available from: Wanna Chaijaroenkul,
1 Follower
24 Reads
  • Source
    • "The diagnostic performance of nested-PCR and ELISA-based NovaLisa test kit observed in the present study was in agreement with that reported in previous studies [10,14]. The sensitivity of DiaMed ELISA test kit in detecting the Plasmodium genus was shown by Doderer et al. [14] to be 84.2%. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Microscopy is considered as the gold standard for malaria diagnosis although its wide application is limited by the requirement of highly experienced microscopists. PCR and serological tests provide efficient diagnostic performance and have been applied for malaria diagnosis and research. The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of nested PCR and a recently developed an ELISA-based new rapid diagnosis test (RDT), NovaLisa test kit, for diagnosis of malaria infection, using microscopic method as the gold standard. The performance of nested-PCR as a malaria diagnostic tool is excellent with respect to its high accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and ability to discriminate Plasmodium species. The sensitivity and specificity of nested-PCR compared with the microscopic method for detection of Plasmodium falciparum, Plasmodium vivax, and P. falciparum/P. vivax mixed infection were 71.4 vs 100%, 100 vs 98.7%, and 100 vs 95.0%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the ELISA-based NovaLisa test kit compared with the microscopic method for detection of Plasmodium genus were 89.0 vs 91.6%, respectively. NovaLisa test kit provided comparable diagnostic performance. Its relatively low cost, simplicity, and rapidity enables large scale field application.
    The Korean Journal of Parasitology 08/2014; 52(4):377-81. DOI:10.3347/kjp.2014.52.4.377 · 1.15 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Malaria, a mosquito-borne disease, is caused by the infection of apicomplexan parasites belonging to the genus Plasmodium, five species of which [Plasmodium vivax, Plasmodium falciparum (P. falciparum), Plasmodium ovale, Plasmodium malariae and Plasmodium knowlesi] account for all forms of human malaria. P. falciparum is responsible for the highest degree of complications (severe malarial anaemia and cerebral malaria) and mortality in the tropics and subtropics of the world. Despite the large burden of vivax malaria, it is overlooked and left in the shadow of severity of falciparum malaria in the globe, but current reports provide evidence of severe vivax malaria symptoms similar to P. falciparum infection. The major challenging factor is the emergence of multidrug resistant Plasmodium strains to the conventionally used antimalarials over the last two decades, and, more recently, to artemisinins. The WHO recommended artemisinin based combination therapies (ACTs). The non-ACT regimens are also found to be effective, safe, and affordable compared to ACTs. However, current successful antimalarial interventions are under threat from the ability of the parasite and its mosquito vector to develop resistance to medicines and insecticides, respectively. Hence, with widespread use of effective drugs and vector control with insecticide-treated bed nets and indoor residual spraying, an ideal malaria vaccine would be the actual means of malaria prevention. This review represents the current evidence, based upon the search of SCI-and non-SCI journal, on epidemiological aspects of two forms (vivax and falciparum) of human malaria, which is still a great global concern.
    Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Disease 01/2014; 4:S13–S26. DOI:10.1016/S2222-1808(14)60410-2
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In settings where both Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparum infection cause malaria, rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) need to distinguish which species is causing the patients' symptoms, as different treatments are required. Older RDTs incorporated two test lines to distinguish malaria due to P. falciparum, from malaria due to any other Plasmodium species (non-falciparum). These RDTs can be classified according to which antibodies they use: Type 2 RDTs use HRP-2 (for P. falciparum) and aldolase (all species); Type 3 RDTs use HRP-2 (for P. falciparum) and pLDH (all species); Type 4 use pLDH (fromP. falciparum) and pLDH (all species).More recently, RDTs have been developed to distinguish P. vivax parasitaemia by utilizing a pLDH antibody specific to P. vivax. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of RDTs for detecting non-falciparum or P. vivax parasitaemia 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 test best detect non-falciparum and P. vivax malaria. We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases up to 31 December 2013: Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; MEDLINE; EMBASE; MEDION; Science Citation Index; Web of Knowledge; African Index Medicus; LILACS; and IndMED. Studies comparing RDTs with a reference standard (microscopy or polymerase chain reaction) in blood samples from a random or consecutive series of patients attending ambulatory health facilities with symptoms suggestive of malaria in non-falciparum endemic areas. For each study, two review authors independently extracted a standard set of data using a tailored data extraction form. We grouped comparisons by type of RDT (defined by the combinations of antibodies used), and combined in meta-analysis where appropriate. Average sensitivities and specificities are presented alongside 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). We included 47 studies enrolling 22,862 participants. Patient characteristics, sampling methods and reference standard methods were poorly reported in most studies. RDTs detecting 'non-falciparum' parasitaemiaEleven studies evaluated Type 2 tests compared with microscopy, 25 evaluated Type 3 tests, and 11 evaluated Type 4 tests. In meta-analyses, average sensitivities and specificities were 78% (95% CI 73% to 82%) and 99% (95% CI 97% to 99%) for Type 2 tests, 78% (95% CI 69% to 84%) and 99% (95% CI 98% to 99%) for Type 3 tests, and 89% (95% CI 79% to 95%) and 98% (95% CI 97% to 99%) for Type 4 tests, respectively. Type 4 tests were more sensitive than both Type 2 (P = 0.01) and Type 3 tests (P = 0.03).Five studies compared Type 3 tests with PCR; in meta-analysis, the average sensitivity and specificity were 81% (95% CI 72% to 88%) and 99% (95% CI 97% to 99%) respectively. RDTs detecting P.vivax parasitaemiaEight studies compared pLDH tests to microscopy; the average sensitivity and specificity were 95% (95% CI 86% to 99%) and 99% (95% CI 99% to 100%), respectively. RDTs designed to detect P. vivax specifically, whether alone or as part of a mixed infection, appear to be more accurate than older tests designed to distinguish P. falciparum malaria from non-falciparum malaria. Compared to microscopy, these tests fail to detect around 5% ofP. vivax cases. This Cochrane Review, in combination with other published information about in vitro test performance and stability in the field, can assist policy-makers to choose between the available RDTs.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 12/2014; 12(12):CD011431. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD011431 · 6.03 Impact Factor