Investigation of Plasmodium falciparum pfhrp2 and pfhrp3 gene deletions and performance of a rapid diagnostic test for identifying asymptomatic malaria infection in northern Ethiopia, 2015.
Antigenemia
Gene deletions
HRP2
HRP3
Malaria
RDT
pLDH
Journal
Malaria journal
ISSN: 1475-2875
Titre abrégé: Malar J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101139802
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 Mar 2022
04 Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
14
10
2021
accepted:
18
02
2022
entrez:
5
3
2022
pubmed:
6
3
2022
medline:
9
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are widely used for malaria diagnosis of both symptomatic and asymptomatic infections. Although RDTs are a reliable and practical diagnostic tool, the sensitivity of histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2)-based RDTs can be reduced if pfhrp2 or pfhrp3 (pfhrp2/3) gene deletions exist in the Plasmodium falciparum parasite population. This study evaluated dried blood spot (DBS) samples collected from a national household survey to investigate the presence of pfhrp2/3 deletions and the performance of the RDT used in the cross-sectional survey in a low transmission setting. The 2015 Ethiopia Malaria Indicator Survey tested household members by RDT and collected DBS samples. DBS (n = 2648) from three regions in northern Ethiopia were tested by multiplex bead-based antigen detection assay after completion of the survey. The multiplex assay detected pan-Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), pAldolase, and HRP2 antigens in samples. Samples suspected for pfhrp2/3 gene deletions (pLDH and/or pAldolase positive but low or absent HRP2) were further investigated by molecular assays for gene deletions. Antigen results were also compared to each individual's RDT results. Dose-response logistic regression models were fit to estimate RDT level of detection (LOD) antigen concentrations at which 50, 75, 90, and 95% of the RDTs returned a positive result during this survey. Out of 2,648 samples assayed, 29 were positive for pLDH or pAldolase antigens but low or absent for HRP2 signal, and 15 of these samples (51.7%) were successfully genotyped for pfhrp2/3. Of these 15 P. falciparum infections, eight showed single deletions in pfhrp3, one showed a single pfhrp2 deletion, and six were pfhrp2/3 double-deletions. Six pfhrp2 deletions were observed in Tigray and one in Amhara. Twenty-five were positive for HRP2 by the survey RDT while the more sensitive bead assay detected 30 HRP2-positive samples. A lower concentration of HRP2 antigen generated a positive test result by RDT compared to pLDH (95% LOD: 16.9 ng/mL vs. 319.2 ng/mL, respectively). There is evidence of dual pfhrp2/3 gene deletions in the Tigray and Amhara regions of Ethiopia in 2015. As the prevalence of malaria was very low (< 2%), it is difficult to make strong conclusions on RDT performance, but these results challenge the utility of biomarkers in household surveys in very low transmission settings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are widely used for malaria diagnosis of both symptomatic and asymptomatic infections. Although RDTs are a reliable and practical diagnostic tool, the sensitivity of histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2)-based RDTs can be reduced if pfhrp2 or pfhrp3 (pfhrp2/3) gene deletions exist in the Plasmodium falciparum parasite population. This study evaluated dried blood spot (DBS) samples collected from a national household survey to investigate the presence of pfhrp2/3 deletions and the performance of the RDT used in the cross-sectional survey in a low transmission setting.
METHODS
METHODS
The 2015 Ethiopia Malaria Indicator Survey tested household members by RDT and collected DBS samples. DBS (n = 2648) from three regions in northern Ethiopia were tested by multiplex bead-based antigen detection assay after completion of the survey. The multiplex assay detected pan-Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), pAldolase, and HRP2 antigens in samples. Samples suspected for pfhrp2/3 gene deletions (pLDH and/or pAldolase positive but low or absent HRP2) were further investigated by molecular assays for gene deletions. Antigen results were also compared to each individual's RDT results. Dose-response logistic regression models were fit to estimate RDT level of detection (LOD) antigen concentrations at which 50, 75, 90, and 95% of the RDTs returned a positive result during this survey.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Out of 2,648 samples assayed, 29 were positive for pLDH or pAldolase antigens but low or absent for HRP2 signal, and 15 of these samples (51.7%) were successfully genotyped for pfhrp2/3. Of these 15 P. falciparum infections, eight showed single deletions in pfhrp3, one showed a single pfhrp2 deletion, and six were pfhrp2/3 double-deletions. Six pfhrp2 deletions were observed in Tigray and one in Amhara. Twenty-five were positive for HRP2 by the survey RDT while the more sensitive bead assay detected 30 HRP2-positive samples. A lower concentration of HRP2 antigen generated a positive test result by RDT compared to pLDH (95% LOD: 16.9 ng/mL vs. 319.2 ng/mL, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
There is evidence of dual pfhrp2/3 gene deletions in the Tigray and Amhara regions of Ethiopia in 2015. As the prevalence of malaria was very low (< 2%), it is difficult to make strong conclusions on RDT performance, but these results challenge the utility of biomarkers in household surveys in very low transmission settings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35246151
doi: 10.1186/s12936-022-04097-7
pii: 10.1186/s12936-022-04097-7
pmc: PMC8895513
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antigens, Protozoan
0
Protozoan Proteins
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
70Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Malar J. 2010 Oct 27;9:297
pubmed: 20979601
J Infect Dis. 2019 Apr 16;219(9):1490-1498
pubmed: 30476111
Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020 Dec;9(1):1984-1987
pubmed: 32869688
Bull World Health Organ. 2020 Aug 1;98(8):558-568F
pubmed: 32773901
PLoS One. 2017 Feb 13;12(2):e0172139
pubmed: 28192523
Malar J. 2015 Jan 21;14:19
pubmed: 25604310
BMJ Glob Health. 2019 Jul 29;4(4):e001582
pubmed: 31406591
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2011 Nov;17(11):1624-31
pubmed: 21910780
J Infect Dis. 2019 Jan 9;219(3):437-447
pubmed: 30202972
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 5;15(11):e0241807
pubmed: 33152025
Nat Commun. 2019 Mar 29;10(1):1433
pubmed: 30926893
Nat Microbiol. 2021 Oct;6(10):1289-1299
pubmed: 34580442
Malar J. 2021 Feb 23;20(1):109
pubmed: 33622309
Clin Infect Dis. 2017 May 1;64(9):1221-1227
pubmed: 28369268
PLoS One. 2020 Jul 23;15(7):e0236369
pubmed: 32702040
Malar J. 2014 Jul 22;13:283
pubmed: 25052298
Trop Med Int Health. 2015 Nov;20(11):1564-1568
pubmed: 26211505
PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e56677
pubmed: 23437209
J Trop Med. 2020 Sep 7;2020:1807608
pubmed: 32963553
EBioMedicine. 2020 May;55:102757
pubmed: 32403083
Malar J. 2020 Nov 4;19(1):392
pubmed: 33148265
Malar J. 2020 Nov 4;19(1):391
pubmed: 33148255
Trends Parasitol. 2020 Feb;36(2):112-126
pubmed: 31848119
J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Aug 26;57(9):
pubmed: 31270184
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2012 Feb;86(2):192-193
pubmed: 22302846
Malar J. 2017 Nov 7;16(1):451
pubmed: 29115966
Emerg Infect Dis. 2018 Mar;24(3):462-470
pubmed: 29460730
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2002 Jan;15(1):66-78
pubmed: 11781267