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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bendezu, Jorge, Rosas, Angel, Grande, Tanilu, Rodriguez, Hugo, Llanos-Cuentas, Alejandro, Escobedo, Jorge, Gamboa, Dionicia
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