Performance of pfHRP2 versus pLDH antigen rapid diagnostic tests for the detection of : a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION

There have been many inconsistent reports about the performance of histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) antigens as rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for the diagnosis of past infections. This meta-analysis was performed to determine the performance of pfHRP2 versus pLDH antigen RDTs in the detection of .

MATERIAL AND METHODS

After a systematic review of related studies, Meta-DiSc 1.4 software was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Forest plots and summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) analysis were used to summarize the overall test performance.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies which met the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. The summary performances for pfHRP2- and pLDH-based tests in the diagnosis of infections were as follows: pooled sensitivity, 96.3% (95.8-96.7%) vs. 82.6% (81.7-83.5%); specificity, 86.1% (85.3-86.8%) vs. 95.9% (95.4-96.3%); diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), 243.31 (97.679-606.08) vs. 230.59 (114.98-462.42); and area under ROCs, 0.9822 versus 0.9849 (all < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The two RDTs performed satisfactorily for the diagnosis of , but the pLDH tests had higher specificity, whereas the pfHRP2 tests had better sensitivity. The pfHRP2 tests had slightly greater accuracy compared to the pLDH tests. A combination of both antigens might be a more reliable approach for the diagnosis of malaria.