Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (Parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian Amazon
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>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 Parasc...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2010-06-01
|
Series: | Malaria Journal |
Online Access: | http://www.malariajournal.com/content/9/1/154 |
id |
doaj-b9ee07fc57b14a5080a3028c699c4ae9 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-b9ee07fc57b14a5080a3028c699c4ae92020-11-24T23:17:02ZengBMCMalaria Journal1475-28752010-06-019115410.1186/1475-2875-9-154Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (Parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian AmazonRodriguez HugoGrande TaniluRosas AngelBendezu JorgeLlanos-Cuentas AlejandroEscobedo JorgeGamboa Dionicia<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>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 <it>Plasmodium falciparum </it>and lactate deshydrogenase from all <it>Plasmodium </it>species.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>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-).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>332 patients with suspected non-complicated malaria who attended to the MOH health centres were enrolled between October and December 2006. For <it>P. falciparum </it>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-<it>P. falciparum </it>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 <it>P. falciparum </it>malaria, Se: 81.8%, Sp: 99.1%, PV+: 75%, PV-: 99.4, LR+: 87.27 and LR-: 0.18; and for non-<it>P. falciparum </it>malaria Se: 76.1%, Sp: 99.2%, PV+: 97.1%, PV-: 92.0%, LR+: 92.51 and LR-: 0.24.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>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 <it>Plasmodium </it>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 <it>P. falciparum </it>malaria parasites lacking <it>pfhrp2 </it>gene in this region.</p> http://www.malariajournal.com/content/9/1/154 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Rodriguez Hugo Grande Tanilu Rosas Angel Bendezu Jorge Llanos-Cuentas Alejandro Escobedo Jorge Gamboa Dionicia |
spellingShingle |
Rodriguez Hugo Grande Tanilu Rosas Angel Bendezu Jorge Llanos-Cuentas Alejandro Escobedo Jorge Gamboa Dionicia Field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (Parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the Peruvian Amazon Malaria Journal |
author_facet |
Rodriguez Hugo Grande Tanilu Rosas Angel Bendezu Jorge Llanos-Cuentas Alejandro Escobedo Jorge Gamboa Dionicia |
author_sort |
Rodriguez Hugo |
title |
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_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_sort |
field evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test (parascreen™) for malaria diagnosis in the peruvian amazon |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
Malaria Journal |
issn |
1475-2875 |
publishDate |
2010-06-01 |
description |
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>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 <it>Plasmodium falciparum </it>and lactate deshydrogenase from all <it>Plasmodium </it>species.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>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-).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>332 patients with suspected non-complicated malaria who attended to the MOH health centres were enrolled between October and December 2006. For <it>P. falciparum </it>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-<it>P. falciparum </it>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 <it>P. falciparum </it>malaria, Se: 81.8%, Sp: 99.1%, PV+: 75%, PV-: 99.4, LR+: 87.27 and LR-: 0.18; and for non-<it>P. falciparum </it>malaria Se: 76.1%, Sp: 99.2%, PV+: 97.1%, PV-: 92.0%, LR+: 92.51 and LR-: 0.24.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>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 <it>Plasmodium </it>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 <it>P. falciparum </it>malaria parasites lacking <it>pfhrp2 </it>gene in this region.</p> |
url |
http://www.malariajournal.com/content/9/1/154 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT rodriguezhugo fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT grandetanilu fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT rosasangel fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT bendezujorge fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT llanoscuentasalejandro fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT escobedojorge fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon AT gamboadionicia fieldevaluationofarapiddiagnostictestparascreenformalariadiagnosisintheperuvianamazon |
_version_ |
1725585128897380352 |