xmlui.ArtifactBrowser.ItemViewer.show_simple

dc.contributor.authorCheaveau, James-
dc.contributor.authorNguyen, Hong-
dc.contributor.authorChow, Barbara-
dc.contributor.authorMarasinghe, Dewdunee-
dc.contributor.authorMohon, Abu Naser-
dc.contributor.authorYuan, Hong-
dc.contributor.authorViana, Giselle Maria Rachid-
dc.contributor.authorVan Schalkwyk, Donelly-
dc.contributor.authorChurch, Deirdre-
dc.contributor.authorChan, Wilson-
dc.contributor.authorPillai, Dylan R-
dc.date.accessioned2019-04-04T11:24:16Z-
dc.date.available2019-04-04T11:24:16Z-
dc.date.issued2018-
dc.identifier.citationCHEAVEAU, James et al. Clinical validation of a commercial LAMP Test for ruling out Malaria in returning travelers: a prospective diagnostic trial. Open Forum Infectious Diseases, v. 5, n. 11, p. 1-9, Oct. 2018.pt_BR
dc.identifier.issn2328-8957-
dc.identifier.urihttp://patua.iec.gov.br//handle/iec/3632-
dc.description.abstractThe mainstay of malaria diagnosis relies on rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and microscopy, both of which lack analytical sensitivity. This leads to repeat testing to rule out malaria. A prospective diagnostic trial of the Meridian illumigene Malaria assay (loop-mediated isothermal amplification [LAMP]) was conducted comparing it with reference microscopy and RDTs (BinaxNOW Malaria) in returning travelers between June 2017 and January 2018. Returning travelers with signs and symptoms of malaria were enrolled in the study. RDTs, microscopy, and LAMP assays were performed simultaneously. A total of 298 patients (50.7% male; mean age, 32.5 years) were enrolled, most visiting friends and relatives (43.3%), presenting with fever (88.9%), not taking prophylaxis (82.9%), and treated as outpatients (84.1%). In the prospective arm (n = 348), LAMP had a sensitivity of 98.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90.0%-100%) and a specificity of 97.6% (95% CI, 95.2%-99.1%) vs microscopy. After discrepant resolution with real-time polymerase chain reaction, LAMP had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 93.7%-100%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI, 98.7%-100%) vs microscopy. After discrepant resolution, RDTs had a sensitivity of 83.3% (95% CI, 58.6%-96.4%) and a specificity of 96.2% (95% CI, 93.2%-98.1%) vs microscopy. When including retrospective specimens (n = 377), LAMP had a sensitivity of 98.8% (95% CI, 93.2%-100%) and a specificity of 97.6% (95% CI, 95.2%-99.1%) vs microscopy, and after discrepant resolution of this set, LAMP had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 95.8%-100%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI, 98.7%-100%). A cost-benefit analysis of reagents and labor suggests savings of up to USD$13 per specimen using a novel algorithm with LAMP screening.pt_BR
dc.description.sponsorshipThis work was supported by Calgary Laboratory Services.pt_BR
dc.language.isoengpt_BR
dc.publisherOxford Openpt_BR
dc.rightsAcesso Abertopt_BR
dc.titleClinical validation of a commercial LAMP Test for ruling out Malaria in returning travelers: a prospective diagnostic trialpt_BR
dc.typeArtigopt_BR
dc.subject.decsPrimaryMalária / diagnósticopt_BR
dc.subject.decsPrimaryMalária / transmissãopt_BR
dc.subject.decsPrimarySaúde do Viajantept_BR
dc.subject.decsPrimaryReação em Cadeia da Polimerasept_BR
dc.subject.decsPrimaryTestes Sorológicos / métodospt_BR
dc.subject.decsPrimarySensibilidade e Especificidadept_BR
dc.subject.decsPrimaryEstudos de Casos e Controlespt_BR
dc.creator.affilliationCalgary Laboratory Services. Clinical Section of Microbiology. Calgary, Alberta, Canada / University of Calgary. Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Infectious Diseases. Calgary, Alberta, Canada;pt_BR
dc.creator.affilliationCalgary Laboratory Services. Clinical Section of Microbiology. Calgary, Alberta, Canadapt_BR
dc.creator.affilliationCalgary Laboratory Services. Clinical Section of Microbiology. Calgary, Alberta, Canadapt_BR
dc.creator.affilliationMcGill University. Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health. Montreal, Quebec, Canada.pt_BR
dc.creator.affilliationUniversity of Calgary. Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Infectious Diseases. Calgary, Alberta, Canada / Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Laboratório de Pesquisas em Malária. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.pt_BR
dc.creator.affilliationProvLab Alberta. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.pt_BR
dc.creator.affilliationMinistério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Laboratório de Pesquisas em Malária. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.pt_BR
dc.creator.affilliationLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. Faculty of Infectious & Tropical Diseases. Department of Immunology & Infection. London, UK.pt_BR
dc.creator.affilliationCalgary Laboratory Services. Clinical Section of Microbiology. Calgary, Alberta, Canada / University of Calgary, Calgary. Department Pathology and Laboratory Medicine. Alberta, Canada / University of Calgary. Department of Medicine. Calgary, Alberta, Canada.pt_BR
dc.creator.affilliationCalgary Laboratory Services. Clinical Section of Microbiology. Calgary, Alberta, Canada / University of Calgary. Department of Medicine. Calgary, Alberta, Canada.pt_BR
dc.creator.affilliationCalgary Laboratory Services. Clinical Section of Microbiology. Calgary, Alberta, Canada / University of Calgary. Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Infectious Diseases. Calgary, Alberta, Canada / University of Calgary, Calgary. Department Pathology and Laboratory Medicine. Alberta, Canada / University of Calgary. Department of Medicine. Calgary, Alberta, Canada.pt_BR
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/ofid/ofy260-


xmlui.dri2xhtml.METS-1.0.item-files-head

Thumbnail

xmlui.ArtifactBrowser.ItemViewer.head_parent_collections

xmlui.ArtifactBrowser.ItemViewer.show_simple