Rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) for malaria are the primary tool for malaria diagnosis in sub-Saharan Africa but the utility of the most commonly used histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2) antigen-based tests is limited in high transmission settings due to the long duration of positivity after successful malaria treatment. HRP2 tests are also threatened by the emergence of Plasmodium that do not carry pfhrp2 or pfhrp 3 genes. Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH)-based tests are promising alternatives, but less available. This study assessed the performances of HRP2 and pLDH(pan) tests under field conditions.
METHODS
The study performed a prospective facility-based diagnostic evaluation of two malaria RDTs in Aweil, South Sudan, during the high transmission season. Capillary blood by fingerprick was collected from 800 children under 15 years of age with fever and no signs of severity. SD Bioline HRP2 and CareStart pLDH(pan) RDTs were performed in parallel, thick and thin smears for microscopy were examined, and dried blood was used for PCR testing.
RESULTS
Using microscopy as the gold standard, the sensitivity of both tests was estimated at > 99%, but the specificity of each was lower: 55.0% for the pLDH test and 61.7% for the HRP2 test. When using PCR as the gold standard, the sensitivity of both tests was lower than the values assessed using microscopy (97.0% for pLDH and 96.5% for HRP2), but the specificity increased (65.1% for pLDH and 72.9% for HRP2). Performance was similar across different production lots, sex, and age. Specificity of both the pLDH and HRP2 tests was significantly lower in children who reported taking a therapeutic course of anti-malarials in the 2 months prior to enrollment. The prevalence of pfhrp2/3 deletions in the study population was 0.6%.
CONCLUSIONS
The low specificity of the pLDH RDT in this setting confirms previous results and suggests a problem with this specific test. The prevalence of pfhrp2/3 deletions in the study area warrants continued monitoring and underscores the relevance of assessing deletion prevalence nationally. Improved malaria RDTs for high-transmission environments are needed.
C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) are widely used biomarkers in high-income countries. However, evidence for their use in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is scant. Because many factors, including rates of endemic disease, comorbidities and genetics, may influence biomarkers’ behaviour, we aimed to review available evidence generated in LMICs.
METHODS
We searched the PubMed database for relevant studies within the last 20 years that originated in regions of interest (Africa, Latin America, Middle East, South Asia or South East Asia), and full-text articles involving diagnosis, prognostication and evaluation of therapeutic response with CRP and/or PCT in adults (n = 88) were reviewed and categorized in 12 predefined focus areas.
RESULTS
Overall, results were highly heterogeneous, at times conflicting, and often lacking clinically useful cut-off values. However, most studies demonstrated higher levels of CRP/PCT in patients with bacterial versus other infections. HIV and TB patients had consistently higher levels of CRP/PCT versus controls. In addition, higher CRP/PCT levels at baseline and follow-up in HIV, TB, sepsis and respiratory tract infections were associated with poorer prognosis.
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence generated from LMIC cohorts suggests that CRP and PCT may have potential to become effective clinical guiding tools particularly in respiratory tract infections, sepsis and HIV/TB. However, more studies are needed to define potential scenarios for use and cost-effectiveness. Consensus across stakeholders regarding target conditions, laboratory standards and cut-off values would support the quality and applicability of future evidence.
OBJECTIVE
The primary objectives of this study were to assess the usefulness of C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) in the diagnosis of bacterial co-infections in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and if their incorporation in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs is safe and useful, stratified by severity of disease as level of care, intensive care unit (ICU) or non-ICU. Our secondary objectives were to identify cut-off values for antibiotic decision-making and identify reported results from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
DESDIGN
A scoping review of published literature, adhering to the PRISMA statement for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The last search was performed in January 2024.
RESULTS
Fifty-nine studies were included in this scoping review: 20 studies reporting predictive values and/or sensitivity/specificity results for PCT, 8 reporting clear objectives on AMS, and 3 studies from LMICs.
CONCLUSION
In the context of non-ICU hospitalized COVID-19 patients in high-income countries, a PCT value below 0.25 mg/L can be a useful tool to rule out bacterial co-infection. The wide range of reported negative predictive values suggests that PCT should be interpreted in the context of other clinical findings. Our results do not support the use of CRP in the same manner as PCT. There is a clear need for more studies in LMICs.