Detection of Malaria Parasite Protein in Urine of Patients with Acute Uncomplicated Malaria Using Rapid Diagnostic Test Kits

Amusan Abi̇odun, A. Olugbenga, A. Kazeem, Gbotosho Grace Olusola
{"title":"Detection of Malaria Parasite Protein in Urine of Patients with Acute Uncomplicated Malaria Using Rapid Diagnostic Test Kits","authors":"Amusan Abi̇odun, A. Olugbenga, A. Kazeem, Gbotosho Grace Olusola","doi":"10.5799/jmid.1176524","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: The invasive nature of the current malaria diagnostic techniques impairs compliance to diagnosis, especially for on-field detection. Adapting non-invasive methods of biological sample collection for rapid diagnosis of malaria infections may provide a more efficient approach to case management and epidemiological studies of malaria. This study was designed to evaluate the detection of Plasmodium falciparum Histidine-rich Protein II (PfHRP-2) in urine samples and optimization as diagnostic markers for P. falciparum infection. \nMethods: One hundred (100) microscopically confirmed patients with Plasmodium falciparum infection and 25 P. falciparum negative controls were recruited for the study. Blood samples of all participants were tested for the presence of PfHRP-2 using Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) kits. In addition, urine samples of the confirmed malaria-infected patients were analyzed for PfHRP-2 using the CareStartTM and Global Devices (USA) Malaria kits. The diagnostic performances of the RDT kits were evaluated. \nResults: Overall, the two brands of malaria rapid diagnostics demonstrated 71% sensitivity (95%CI=62.1-79.9%) and 96% specificity (95%CI=88.3-103.7%) for PfHRP-2 detection in urine. \nThe sensitivities of the tests in urine at asexual parasitemia ≤ 2000 μL-1 and asexual parasitemia > 2000 μL-1 were 69.6% (95%CI=56.3-82.9%) and 72.2% (95%CI=60.3-84.2%) respectively. Global Devices and CareStartTM kits had individual sensitivities of 80% (95%CI= 65.7-94.3%) and 67.1% (95%CI= 56.1-78.1%) respectively for PfHRP-2 detection in urine (P= 0.072). \nConclusion: Findings revealed that urine-based RDTs have limited capacities for malaria diagnosis due to their low sensitivity and require more optimizations to meet required diagnostic standards. J Microbiol Infect Dis 2022; 12(3):97-107.","PeriodicalId":16603,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5799/jmid.1176524","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objectives: The invasive nature of the current malaria diagnostic techniques impairs compliance to diagnosis, especially for on-field detection. Adapting non-invasive methods of biological sample collection for rapid diagnosis of malaria infections may provide a more efficient approach to case management and epidemiological studies of malaria. This study was designed to evaluate the detection of Plasmodium falciparum Histidine-rich Protein II (PfHRP-2) in urine samples and optimization as diagnostic markers for P. falciparum infection. Methods: One hundred (100) microscopically confirmed patients with Plasmodium falciparum infection and 25 P. falciparum negative controls were recruited for the study. Blood samples of all participants were tested for the presence of PfHRP-2 using Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) kits. In addition, urine samples of the confirmed malaria-infected patients were analyzed for PfHRP-2 using the CareStartTM and Global Devices (USA) Malaria kits. The diagnostic performances of the RDT kits were evaluated. Results: Overall, the two brands of malaria rapid diagnostics demonstrated 71% sensitivity (95%CI=62.1-79.9%) and 96% specificity (95%CI=88.3-103.7%) for PfHRP-2 detection in urine. The sensitivities of the tests in urine at asexual parasitemia ≤ 2000 μL-1 and asexual parasitemia > 2000 μL-1 were 69.6% (95%CI=56.3-82.9%) and 72.2% (95%CI=60.3-84.2%) respectively. Global Devices and CareStartTM kits had individual sensitivities of 80% (95%CI= 65.7-94.3%) and 67.1% (95%CI= 56.1-78.1%) respectively for PfHRP-2 detection in urine (P= 0.072). Conclusion: Findings revealed that urine-based RDTs have limited capacities for malaria diagnosis due to their low sensitivity and require more optimizations to meet required diagnostic standards. J Microbiol Infect Dis 2022; 12(3):97-107.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
应用快速诊断试剂盒检测急性无并发症疟疾患者尿液中疟原虫蛋白
目的:当前疟疾诊断技术的侵入性损害了诊断的依从性,特别是对现场检测。将非侵入性生物样本采集方法用于疟疾感染的快速诊断,可能为疟疾病例管理和流行病学研究提供更有效的方法。本研究旨在评价尿液中检测恶性疟原虫富组氨酸蛋白II (PfHRP-2)作为恶性疟原虫感染诊断标志物的可行性。方法:选取显微镜下确诊的恶性疟原虫感染患者100例和恶性疟原虫阴性对照25例进行研究。使用快速诊断测试(RDT)试剂盒检测所有参与者的血液样本中PfHRP-2的存在。此外,使用CareStartTM和Global Devices (USA)疟疾试剂盒对确诊疟疾感染患者的尿液样本进行PfHRP-2分析。评价RDT试剂盒的诊断性能。结果:总体而言,两种疟疾快速诊断方法对尿液中PfHRP-2的检测灵敏度为71% (95%CI=62.1 ~ 79.9%),特异性为96% (95%CI=88.3 ~ 103.7%)。在无性寄生虫血症≤2000 μL-1和> 2000 μL-1时,尿液检测的敏感性分别为69.6% (95%CI=56.3 ~ 82.9%)和72.2% (95%CI=60.3 ~ 84.2%)。Global Devices和CareStartTM试剂盒检测尿液中PfHRP-2的个体敏感性分别为80% (95%CI= 65.7-94.3%)和67.1% (95%CI= 56.1-78.1%) (P= 0.072)。结论:研究结果表明,基于尿液的rdt诊断疟疾的能力有限,其灵敏度较低,需要进一步优化才能达到所需的诊断标准。中华微生物学杂志[J];12(3): 97 - 107。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Role of miRNAs in Immune Regulation And Bacterial Infections Effect of Sodium Hypochlorite on Biofilm-Producing Organisms Isolated from A Hospital Drinking Water Assessment of Quantity and Quality of Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis DNA Extracts Stored at Different Temperatures Characterization of SP-T1 Phage for Potential Biological Control of Salmonella Enteritidis The Effect Of Corticosteroid Therapy on the Frequency of Secondary Bacterial Infections And Mortality in COVID-19 Patients in ICU
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1