Evaluation of a Rapid Diagnostic Test for Detection of Burkholderia pseudomallei in the Lao People's Democratic Republic

Burkholderia pseudomallei causes significant global morbidity and mortality, with the highest disease burden in parts of Asia where culture-based diagnosis is often not available. We prospectively evaluated the Active Melioidosis Detect (AMD; InBios International, USA) lateral flow immunoassay (LFI) for rapid detection of B. pseudomallei in turbid blood cultures, pus, sputum, sterile fluid, urine, and sera. The performance of this test was compared to that of B. pseudomallei detection using monoclonal antibody latex agglutination (LA) and immunofluorescence assays (IFA), with culture as the gold standard. AMD was 99% (99/100; 95% confidence interval, 94.6 to 100%) sensitive and 100% (308/308; 98.8 to 100%) specific on turbid blood culture bottles, with no difference from LA or IFA. AMD specificity was 100% on pus (122/122; 97.0 to 100%), sputum (20/20; 83.2 to 100%), and sterile fluid (44/44; 92 to 100%). Sensitivity on these samples was as follows: pus, 47.1% (8/17; 23.0 to 72.2%); sputum, 33.3% (1/3; 0.84 to 90.6%); and sterile fluid, 0% (0/2; 0 to 84.2%). For urine samples, AMD had a positive predictive value of 94% (32/34; 79.7 to 98.5%) for diagnosing melioidosis in our cohort. AMD sensitivity on stored sera, collected prospectively from melioidosis cases during this study, was 13.9% (5/36; 4.7% to 29.5%) compared to blood culture samples taken on the same day. In conclusion, AMD is an excellent tool for rapid diagnosis of melioidosis from turbid blood cultures and maintains specificity across all sample types. It is a promising tool for urinary antigen detection, which could revolutionize diagnosis of melioidosis in resource-limited settings. Further work is required to improve sensitivity on nonblood culture samples

A Prospective Hospital Study to Evaluate the Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Diagnostic Tests for the Early Detection of Leptospirosis in Laos.

Leptospirosis is a globally important cause of acute febrile illness, and a common cause of non-malarial fever in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Simple rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are needed to enable health-care workers, particularly in low resource settings, to diagnose leptospirosis early and give timely targeted treatment. This study compared four commercially available RDTs to detect human IgM against Leptospira spp. in a head-to-head prospective evaluation in Mahosot Hospital, Lao PDR. Patients with an acute febrile illness consistent with leptospirosis (N = 695) were included in the study during the 2014 rainy season. Samples were tested with four RDTs: ("Test-it" [Life Assay, Cape Town, South Africa; N = 418]; "Leptorapide" [Linnodee, Ballyclare, Northern Ireland; N = 492]; "Dual Path Platform" [DPP] [Chembio, Medford, NY; N = 530]; and "SD-IgM" [Standard Diagnostics, Yongin, South Korea; N = 481]). Diagnostic performance characteristics were calculated and compared with a composite reference standard combining polymerase chain reaction (PCR) (rrs), microscopic agglutination tests (MATs), and culture. Of all patients investigated, 39/695 (5.6%) were positive by culture, PCR, or MAT. The sensitivity and specificity of the RDTs ranged greatly from 17.9% to 63.6% and 62.1% to 96.8%, respectively. None of the investigated RDTs reached a sensitivity or specificity of > 90% for detecting Leptospira infections on admission. In conclusion, our investigation highlights the challenges associated with Leptospira diagnostics, particularly in populations with multiple exposures. These findings emphasize the need for extensive prospective evaluations in multiple endemic settings to establish the value of rapid tools for diagnosing fevers to allow targeting of antibiotics

A comparison of two molecular methods for diagnosing leptospirosis from three different sample types in patients presenting with fever in Laos.

OBJECTIVES: To compare two molecular assays (rrs quantitative PCR (qPCR) versus a combined 16SrRNA and LipL32 qPCR) on different sample types for diagnosing leptospirosis in febrile patients presenting to Mahosot Hospital, Vientiane, Laos. METHODS: Serum, buffy coat and urine samples were collected on admission, and follow-up serum ∼10 days later. Leptospira spp. culture and microscopic agglutination tests (MAT) were performed as reference standards. Bayesian latent class modelling was performed to estimate sensitivity and specificity of each diagnostic test. RESULTS: In all, 787 patients were included in the analysis: 4/787 (0.5%) were Leptospira culture positive, 30/787 (3.8%) were MAT positive, 76/787 (9.7%) were rrs qPCR positive and 20/787 (2.5%) were 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR positive for pathogenic Leptospira spp. in at least one sample. Estimated sensitivity and specificity (with 95% CI) of 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR on serum (53.9% (33.3%-81.8%); 99.6% (99.2%-100%)), buffy coat (58.8% (34.4%-90.9%); 99.9% (99.6%-100%)) and urine samples (45.0% (27.0%-66.7%); 99.6% (99.3%-100%)) were comparable with those of rrs qPCR, except specificity of 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR on urine samples was significantly higher (99.6% (99.3%-100%) vs. 92.5% (92.3%-92.8%), p <0.001). Sensitivities of MAT (16% (95% CI 6.3%-29.4%)) and culture (25% (95% CI 13.3%-44.4%)) were low. Mean positive Cq values showed that buffy coat samples were more frequently inhibitory to qPCR than either serum or urine (p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Serum and urine are better samples for qPCR than buffy coat, and 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR performs better than rrs qPCR on urine. Quantitative PCR on admission is a reliable rapid diagnostic tool, performing better than MAT or culture, with significant implications for clinical and epidemiological investigations of this global neglected disease

Evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test for the detection of Burkholderia pseudomallei in the Lao People's Democratic Republic

Burkholderia pseudomallei causes significant global morbidity and mortality, with the highest disease burden in parts of Asia where culture-based diagnosis is often not available. We prospectively evaluated the Active Melioidosis Detect (AMD, InBios International, USA) lateral flow immunoassay (LFI) for rapid detection of B. pseudomallei in turbid blood cultures, pus, sputum, sterile fluid, urine, and sera. Performance was compared to B. pseudomallei detection using monoclonal antibody latex agglutination (LA) and immunofluorescence assays (IFA), with culture as the gold standard. AMD was 99% (99/100; 94.6 – 100%) sensitive and 100% (308/308; 98.8-100%) specific on turbid blood culture bottles, with no difference to LA or IFA. AMD specificity was 100% on pus (122/122; 97.0-100%), sputum (20/20; 83.2-100%), and sterile fluid (44/44; 92 – 100%). Sensitivity on these samples was: pus 47.1% (8/17; 23.0 – 72.2%), sputum 33.3% (1/3; 0.84 – 90.6%), and sterile fluid 0% (0/2; 0 – 84.2%). Urine AMD had a positive predictive value of 94% (32/34; 79.7 – 98.5%) for diagnosing melioidosis in our cohort. AMD sensitivity on stored sera, collected prospectively from melioidosis cases during this study, was 13.9% (5/36; 4.7% - 29.5%) when compared to blood culture samples taken on the same day. In conclusion, the AMD is an excellent tool for rapid diagnosis of melioidosis from turbid blood cultures, and maintains specificity across all sample types. It is a promising tool for urinary antigen detection, which could revolutionise diagnosis of melioidosis in resource-limited settings. Further work is required to improve sensitivity on non-blood culture samples

Detection and Quantification of the Capsular Polysaccharide of Burkholderia pseudomallei in Serum and Urine Samples from Melioidosis Patients.

Burkholderia pseudomallei is the causative agent of melioidosis, a life-threatening disease common in Southeast Asia and northern Australia. Melioidosis often presents with nonspecific symptoms and has a fatality rate of upwards of 70% when left untreated. The gold standard for diagnosis is culturing B. pseudomallei from patient samples. Bacterial culture, however, can take up to 7 days, and its sensitivity is poor, at roughly 60%. The successful administration of appropriate antibiotics is reliant on rapid and accurate diagnosis. Hence, there is a genuine need for new diagnostics for this deadly pathogen. The Active Melioidosis Detect (AMD) lateral flow immunoassay (LFI) detects the capsular polysaccharide (CPS) of B. pseudomallei. The assay is designed for use on various clinical samples, including serum and urine; however, there are limited data to support which clinical matrices are the best candidates for detecting CPS. In this study, concentrations of CPS in paired serum and urine samples from melioidosis patients were determined using a quantitative antigen capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. In parallel, samples were tested with the AMD LFI, and the results of the two immunoassays were compared. Additionally, centrifugal concentration was performed on a subset of urine samples to determine if this method may improve detection when CPS levels are initially low or undetectable. The results indicate that while CPS levels varied within the two matrices, there tended to be higher concentrations in urine. The AMD LFI detected CPS in 40.5% of urine samples, compared to 6.5% of serum samples, suggesting that urine is a preferable matrix for point-of-care diagnostic assays. IMPORTANCE Melioidosis is very challenging to diagnose. There is a clear need for a point-of-care assay for the detection of B. pseudomallei antigen directly from patient samples. The Active Melioidosis Detect lateral flow immunoassay detects the capsular polysaccharide (CPS) of B. pseudomallei and is designed for use on various clinical samples, including serum and urine. However, there are limited data regarding which clinical matrix is preferable for the detection of CPS. This study addresses this question by examining quantitative CPS levels in paired serum and urine samples and relating them to clinical parameters. Additionally, centrifugal concentration was performed on a subset of urine samples to determine whether this might enable the detection of CPS in samples in which it was initially present at low or undetectable levels. These results provide valuable insights into the detection of CPS in patients with melioidosis and suggest potential ways forward in the diagnosis and treatment of this challenging disease

A comparison of two molecular methods for diagnosing leptospirosis from three different sample types in patients presenting with fever in Laos

Objectives To compare two molecular assays (rrs quantitative PCR (qPCR) versus a combined 16SrRNA and LipL32 qPCR) on different sample types for diagnosing leptospirosis in febrile patients presenting to Mahosot Hospital, Vientiane, Laos. Methods Serum, buffy coat and urine samples were collected on admission, and follow-up serum ∼10 days later. Leptospira spp. culture and microscopic agglutination tests (MAT) were performed as reference standards. Bayesian latent class modelling was performed to estimate sensitivity and specificity of each diagnostic test. Results In all, 787 patients were included in the analysis: 4/787 (0.5%) were Leptospira culture positive, 30/787 (3.8%) were MAT positive, 76/787 (9.7%) were rrs qPCR positive and 20/787 (2.5%) were 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR positive for pathogenic Leptospira spp. in at least one sample. Estimated sensitivity and specificity (with 95% CI) of 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR on serum (53.9% (33.3%–81.8%); 99.6% (99.2%–100%)), buffy coat (58.8% (34.4%–90.9%); 99.9% (99.6%–100%)) and urine samples (45.0% (27.0%–66.7%); 99.6% (99.3%–100%)) were comparable with those of rrs qPCR, except specificity of 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR on urine samples was significantly higher (99.6% (99.3%–100%) vs. 92.5% (92.3%–92.8%), p &lt;0.001). Sensitivities of MAT (16% (95% CI 6.3%–29.4%)) and culture (25% (95% CI 13.3%–44.4%)) were low. Mean positive Cq values showed that buffy coat samples were more frequently inhibitory to qPCR than either serum or urine (p &lt;0.001). Conclusions Serum and urine are better samples for qPCR than buffy coat, and 16SrRNA/LipL32 qPCR performs better than rrs qPCR on urine. Quantitative PCR on admission is a reliable rapid diagnostic tool, performing better than MAT or culture, with significant implications for clinical and epidemiological investigations of this global neglected disease