Search

Background: Blood collection, transportation and storage remain a problem in countries where infrastructure, laboratory facilities and skilled manpower are scarce. This limits evaluation of immune responses in natural infections and vaccination in field studies. We developed methods to measure antigen specific antibody responses using dried blood spot (DBS) in cholera, ETEC and typhoid fever patients as well as recipients of oral cholera vaccine (OCV). Methodology/Principle findings: We processed heparinized blood for preparing DBS and plasma specimens from patients with, cholera, ETEC and typhoid as well as OCV recipients. We optimized the conventional vibriocidal method to measure vibriocidal antibody response in DBS eluates. We measured responses in DBS samples and plasma (range of titer of 5 to 10240). Vibriocidal titer showed strong agreement between DBS eluates and plasma in cholera patients (ICC = 0.9) and in OCV recipients (ICC = 0.8) using the Bland-Altman analysis and a positive correlation was seen (r = 0.7, p = 0.02 and r = 0.6, p = 0.006, respectively). We observed a strong agreement of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and cholera toxin B (CTB)-specific antibody responses between DBS eluates and plasma in cholera patients and OCV recipients. We also found agreement of heat labile toxin B (LTB) and membrane protein (MP)-specific antibody responses in DBS eluates and plasma specimen of ETEC and typhoid patients respectively. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that dried blood specimens can be used as an alternate method for preservation of samples to measure antibody responses in enteric diseases and vaccine trials and can be applied to assessment of responses in humanitarian crisis and other adverse field settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cholera remains a substantial health burden in Asia and Africa particularly in resource poor settings. The standard procedures to identify the etiological organism V. cholerae are isolation from microbiological culture from stool as well as Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). Both the processes are highly lab oriented, labor extensive, time consuming, and expensive. In an effort to control for outbreaks and epidemics; an effective, convenient, quick and relatively less expensive detection method is imperative, without compromising the sensitivity and specificity that exists at present. The objective of this component of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a locally produced rapid diagnostic test (RDT) for cholera diagnosis. Methods: In Bangladesh, nationwide cholera surveillance is ongoing in 22 hospitals covering all 8 divisions of the country since June, 2016. In the surveillance, stool samples have been collected from patients presenting to hospitals with acute watery diarrhea. Crystal VCTM (Span diagnostics, India) and Cholkit (locally produced RDT) have been used to detect V. cholerae from stool samples. Samples have also been sent to the main laboratory at icddr,b where the culture based isolation is routinely performed. All the tests were carried out for both direct and enriched stool samples. RDT sensitivity and specificity were calculated using stool culture as the gold standard. Results: A total of 7720 samples were tested. Among these, 5865 samples were solely tested with Crystal VC and 1355 samples with Cholkit whereas 381 samples were tested with both the RDTs. In comparison with culture, direct testing with Crystal VC showed a sensitivity of 72% (95% CI: 50.6% to 87.9%) and specificity of 86.8% (95% CI: 82.8% to 90.1%). After enrichment the sensitivity and specificity was 68% (95% CI: 46.5% to 85.1%) and 97.5% (95% CI: 95.3% to 98.8%) respectively. The direct Cholkit test showed sensitivity of 76% (95% CI: 54.9% to 90.6%) and specificity of 90.2% (95% CI: 86.6% to 93.1%). Conclusion: This evaluation has demonstrated that the sensitivity and specificity of Cholkit is similar to the commercially available test, Crystal VC when used in field settings for detecting V. cholerae from stool specimens. The findings from this study suggest that the Cholkit could be a possible alternative for cholera endemic regions where V. cholerae O1 is the major causative organism causing cholera. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recognizing cholera cases early, especially in the initial phase of an outbreak and in areas where cholera has not previously circulated, is a high public health priority. Laboratory capacity in such settings is often limited. To address this, we have developed a rapid diagnostic test (RDT) termed Cholkit that is based on an immunochromatographic lateral flow assay for the diagnosis of cholera cases using stool. Cholkit contains a monoclonal antibody (ICL-33) to the O-specific polysaccharide (OSP) component of V. cholerae O1 lipopolysaccharide, and recognizes both Inaba and Ogawa serotypes. We tested the Cholkit dipstick using fresh stool specimens of 76 adults and children presenting with acute watery diarrhea at the icddr,b hospital in Dhaka, Bangladesh. We compared Cholkit’s performance with those of microbial culture, PCR (targeting the rfb and ctxA genes of V. cholerae) and the commercially available RDT, Crystal VC (Span Diagnostics; Surat, India). We found that all stool specimens with a positive culture for V. cholerae O1 (n = 19) were positive by Cholkit as well as Crystal VC. We then used Bayesian latent class modeling to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of each diagnostic assay. The sensitivity of Cholkit, microbiological culture, PCR and Crystal VC was 98% (95% CI: 88–100), 71% (95% CI: 59–81), 74% (95% CI: 59–86) and 98% (95% CI: 88–100), respectively. The specificity for V. cholerae O1 was 97% (95% CI: 89–100), 100%, 97% (95% CI: 93–99) and 98% (95% CI: 92–100), respectively. Of note, two Crystal VC dipsticks were positive for V. cholerae O139 but negative by culture and PCR in this area without known circulating epidemic V. cholerae O139. In conclusion, the Cholkit dipstick is simple to use, requires no dedicated laboratory capacity, and has a sensitivity and specificity for V. cholerae O1 of 98% and 97%, respectively. Cholkit warrants further evaluation in other settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is an urgent need for an improved diagnostic assay for typhoid fever. In this current study, we compared the recently developed TPTest (Typhoid and Paratyphoid Test) with the Widal test, blood culture, and two commonly used commercially available kits, Tubex and Typhidot. Methodology: For analysis, we categorized 92 Bangladeshi patients with suspected enteric fever into four groups: S. Typhi bacteremic patients (n = 28); patients with a fourfold change in Widal test from day 0 to convalescent period (n = 7); patients with Widal titer ≥1:320 (n = 13) at either acute or convalescent stage of disease; and patients suspected with enteric fever, but with a negative blood culture and Widal titer (n = 44). We also tested healthy endemic zone controls (n = 20) and Bangladeshi patients with other febrile illnesses (n = 15). Sample size was based on convenience to facilitate preliminary analysis. Principle findings: Of 28 S. Typhi bacteremic patients, 28 (100%), 21 (75%) and 18 (64%) patients were positive by TPTest, Tubex and Typhidot, respectively. In healthy endemic zone controls, the TPTest method was negative in all, whereas Tubex and Typhidot were positive in 3 (15%) and 5 (25%), respectively. We then estimated sensitivity and specificity of all diagnostic tests using Bayesian latent class modeling. The sensitivity of TPTest, Tubex and Typhidot were estimated at 96.0% (95% CI: 87.1%-99.8%), 60.2% (95% CI: 49.3%-71.2%), and 59.6% (95% CI: 50.1%-69.3%), respectively. Specificity was estimated at 96.6% (90.7%-99.2%) for TPTest, 89.9% (79.6%-96.8%) for Tubex, and 80.0% (67.7%-89.7%) for Typhidot. Conclusion: These results suggest that the TPTest is highly sensitive and specific in diagnosing individuals with typhoid fever in a typhoid endemic setting, outperforming currently available and commonly used alternatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]