STI Outpatient Clinic, Cluster Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e32122. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0032122. Epub 2012 Feb 29.
In general, point-of-care (POC) tests for Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct) show disappointing test performance, especially disappointing sensitivity results. However, one study sponsored by the manufacturer (Diagnostics for the Real World) reported over 80% sensitivity with their Chlamydia Rapid Test (CRT). We evaluated the performance of this CRT in a non-manufacturer-sponsored trial.
Between July 2009 and February 2010, we included samples from 912 women in both high- and low-risk clinics for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in Paramaribo, Suriname. Sensitivity, specificity, positive- and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) for CRT compared to NAAT (Aptima, Gen-Probe) were determined. Quantitative Ct load and human cell load were determined in all CRT and/or NAAT positive samples.
CRT compared to NAAT showed a sensitivity and specificity of 41.2% (95% CI, 31.9%-50.9%) and 96.4% (95% CI, 95.0%-97.5%), respectively. PPV and NPV were 59.2% (95% CI, 47.5%-70.1%) and 92.9% (95% CI, 91.0%-94.5%), respectively. Quantitative Ct bacterial load was 73 times higher in NAAT-positive/CRT-positive samples compared to NAAT-positive/CRT-negative samples (p<0.001). Human cell load did not differ between true-positive and false-negative CRT results (p = 0.835). Sensitivity of CRT in samples with low Ct load was 12.5% (95% CI, 5.2%-24.2%) and in samples with high Ct load 73.5% (95% CI, 59.9%-84.4%).
The sensitivity of CRT for detecting urogenital Ct in this non-manufacturer-sponsored study did not meet the expectations as described previously. The CRT missed samples with a low Ct load. Improved POC are needed as meaningful diagnostic to reduce the disease burden of Ct.
一般来说,即时检测(POC)的沙眼衣原体(Ct)检测试验表现不佳,特别是敏感性结果较差。然而,一项由制造商(现实世界诊断)赞助的研究报告称,其衣原体快速检测(CRT)的敏感性超过 80%。我们在一项非制造商赞助的试验中评估了该 CRT 的性能。
2009 年 7 月至 2010 年 2 月,我们纳入了来自苏里南帕拉马里博的高风险和低风险性传播感染(STI)诊所的 912 名女性的样本。比较 CRT 与核酸扩增试验(Aptima,Gen-Probe)的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)。所有 CRT 和/或 NAAT 阳性样本均检测定量 Ct 负荷和人细胞负荷。
与 NAAT 相比,CRT 的敏感性和特异性分别为 41.2%(95%CI,31.9%-50.9%)和 96.4%(95%CI,95.0%-97.5%)。PPV 和 NPV 分别为 59.2%(95%CI,47.5%-70.1%)和 92.9%(95%CI,91.0%-94.5%)。与 NAAT 阳性/CRT 阴性样本相比,NAAT 阳性/CRT 阳性样本的定量 Ct 细菌负荷高 73 倍(p<0.001)。真阳性和假阴性 CRT 结果之间的人细胞负荷无差异(p=0.835)。低 Ct 负荷样本中 CRT 的敏感性为 12.5%(95%CI,5.2%-24.2%),高 Ct 负荷样本中 CRT 的敏感性为 73.5%(95%CI,59.9%-84.4%)。
在这项非制造商赞助的研究中,CRT 检测泌尿生殖道 Ct 的敏感性未达到之前描述的预期。CRT 漏检了 Ct 负荷较低的样本。需要改进 POCT,作为有意义的诊断手段来降低 Ct 的疾病负担。