Cargando…
Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (Parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian Amazon
BACKGROUND: The rapid diagnostic tests for malaria (RDT) constitute a fast and opportune alternative for non-complicated malaria diagnosis in areas where microscopy is not available. The objective of this study was to validate a RDT named Parascreen™ under field conditions in Iquitos, department of...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2898785/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20529273 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-9-154 |
_version_ | 1782183519434309632 |
---|---|
author | Bendezu, Jorge Rosas, Angel Grande, Tanilu Rodriguez, Hugo Llanos-Cuentas, Alejandro Escobedo, Jorge Gamboa, Dionicia |
author_facet | Bendezu, Jorge Rosas, Angel Grande, Tanilu Rodriguez, Hugo Llanos-Cuentas, Alejandro Escobedo, Jorge Gamboa, Dionicia |
author_sort | Bendezu, Jorge |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The rapid diagnostic tests for malaria (RDT) constitute a fast and opportune alternative for non-complicated malaria diagnosis in areas where microscopy is not available. The objective of this study was to validate a RDT named Parascreen™ under field conditions in Iquitos, department of Loreto, Peru. Parascreen™ is a RDT that detects the histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2) antigen from Plasmodium falciparum and lactate deshydrogenase from all Plasmodium species. METHODS: Parascreen™ was compared with microscopy performed by experts (EM) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using the following indicators: sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive (PV+) and negative predictive values (PV-), positive (LR+) and negative likehood ratio (LR-). RESULTS: 332 patients with suspected non-complicated malaria who attended to the MOH health centres were enrolled between October and December 2006. For P. falciparum malaria, Parascreen™ in comparison with EM, had Se: 53.5%, Sp: 98.7%, PV+: 66.7%, PV-: 97.8%, LR+: 42.27 and LR-: 0.47; and for non-P. falciparum malaria, Se: 77.1%, Sp: 97.6%, PV+: 91.4%, PV-: 92.7%, LR+: 32.0 and LR-: 0.22. The comparison of Parascreen™ with PCR showed, for P. falciparum malaria, Se: 81.8%, Sp: 99.1%, PV+: 75%, PV-: 99.4, LR+: 87.27 and LR-: 0.18; and for non-P. falciparum malaria Se: 76.1%, Sp: 99.2%, PV+: 97.1%, PV-: 92.0%, LR+: 92.51 and LR-: 0.24. CONCLUSIONS: The study results indicate that Parascreen™ is not a valid and acceptable test for malaria diagnosis under the field conditions found in the Peruvian Amazon. The relative proportion of Plasmodium species, in addition to the genetic characteristics of the parasites in the area, must be considered before applying any RDT, especially after the finding of P. falciparum malaria parasites lacking pfhrp2 gene in this region. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2898785 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-28987852010-07-08 Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (Parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian Amazon Bendezu, Jorge Rosas, Angel Grande, Tanilu Rodriguez, Hugo Llanos-Cuentas, Alejandro Escobedo, Jorge Gamboa, Dionicia Malar J Research BACKGROUND: The rapid diagnostic tests for malaria (RDT) constitute a fast and opportune alternative for non-complicated malaria diagnosis in areas where microscopy is not available. The objective of this study was to validate a RDT named Parascreen™ under field conditions in Iquitos, department of Loreto, Peru. Parascreen™ is a RDT that detects the histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2) antigen from Plasmodium falciparum and lactate deshydrogenase from all Plasmodium species. METHODS: Parascreen™ was compared with microscopy performed by experts (EM) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using the following indicators: sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive (PV+) and negative predictive values (PV-), positive (LR+) and negative likehood ratio (LR-). RESULTS: 332 patients with suspected non-complicated malaria who attended to the MOH health centres were enrolled between October and December 2006. For P. falciparum malaria, Parascreen™ in comparison with EM, had Se: 53.5%, Sp: 98.7%, PV+: 66.7%, PV-: 97.8%, LR+: 42.27 and LR-: 0.47; and for non-P. falciparum malaria, Se: 77.1%, Sp: 97.6%, PV+: 91.4%, PV-: 92.7%, LR+: 32.0 and LR-: 0.22. The comparison of Parascreen™ with PCR showed, for P. falciparum malaria, Se: 81.8%, Sp: 99.1%, PV+: 75%, PV-: 99.4, LR+: 87.27 and LR-: 0.18; and for non-P. falciparum malaria Se: 76.1%, Sp: 99.2%, PV+: 97.1%, PV-: 92.0%, LR+: 92.51 and LR-: 0.24. CONCLUSIONS: The study results indicate that Parascreen™ is not a valid and acceptable test for malaria diagnosis under the field conditions found in the Peruvian Amazon. The relative proportion of Plasmodium species, in addition to the genetic characteristics of the parasites in the area, must be considered before applying any RDT, especially after the finding of P. falciparum malaria parasites lacking pfhrp2 gene in this region. BioMed Central 2010-06-07 /pmc/articles/PMC2898785/ /pubmed/20529273 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-9-154 Text en Copyright ©2010 Bendezu et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Bendezu, Jorge Rosas, Angel Grande, Tanilu Rodriguez, Hugo Llanos-Cuentas, Alejandro Escobedo, Jorge Gamboa, Dionicia Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (Parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian Amazon |
title | Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (Parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian Amazon |
title_full | Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (Parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian Amazon |
title_fullStr | Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (Parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian Amazon |
title_full_unstemmed | Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (Parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian Amazon |
title_short | Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (Parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian Amazon |
title_sort | field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the peruvian amazon |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2898785/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20529273 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-9-154 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bendezujorge fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT rosasangel fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT grandetanilu fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT rodriguezhugo fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT llanoscuentasalejandro fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT escobedojorge fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT gamboadionicia fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon |