Clinic-based evaluation of the dual Xpert CT/NG assay on the GeneXpert System for screening for extragenital chlamydial and gonococcal infections amongst men who have sex with men.
Chlamydia
trachomatis
Neisseria
gonorrhoeae
Gonococcal and chlamydial infections
Men who have Sex with Men
Point-of-Care Tests (POCTs)
Public Health
Sexually transmitted infections
diagnostic evaluation
Journal
BMC infectious diseases
ISSN: 1471-2334
Titre abrégé: BMC Infect Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968551
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Feb 2024
29 Feb 2024
Historique:
received:
05
04
2023
accepted:
19
01
2024
medline:
1
3
2024
pubmed:
29
2
2024
entrez:
28
2
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) infections have increased globally. Asymptomatic infections represent a significant risk of long-term complications. Men who have sex with men (MSM) are disproportionally affected, underscoring the need to offer screening programmes to this population. CT/NG Point of Care Testing (POCT) constitutes a strategic tool to improve the continuum of STI care, however extensive real-life evaluations amongst at risk populations are lacking. The aim of this study is to estimate the GeneXpert CT/NG assay performance and usability for CT and NG at genital and extragenital sites for screening amongst MSM. This study was a multi-site sexual health clinic-based evaluation (Italy, Malta and Peru) with consecutive enrolment. A first void urine sample (divided in two aliquots), two oropharyngeal and two anorectal swabs were collected for each study participant. One specimen set (one for each anatomical site) was tested with the dual index test (Cepheid) at the clinics by the healthcare staff, the other set with FDA/CE approved Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) at the laboratory. Clinical sites and reference laboratories participated in an internal and external quality control programme. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, positive and negative predictive values for each anatomical site were estimated using a meta-analytic approach. One thousand seven hundred two MSM were recruited across all clinical sites for a total of 5049 biological specimens. NG and CT were respectively detected in 274 and 287 of samples. Overall, the NG POCT sensitivity and specificity was 91.43% and 99.75% in urine (LR + 372.80, LR- 0.09), 89.68% and 99.55% in rectal specimens (LR + 197.30, LR- 0.10) and 75.87% and 98.77% at the pharynx respectively (LR + 61.94, LR- 0.24). The CT component of the POCT sensitivity was 84.82% and specificity 99.63% in urine (LR + 228.68, LR- 0.15), 78.07% and 99.19% respectively on rectal site (LR + 96.23, LR-0.22), 67.79% and 99.88% respectively at pharyngeal site (LR + 554.89, LR- 0.32). 95.95% of MSM reported to be willing to wait for POCT results and no provider reported difficulties in terms of performance or interpretation of the results of the Xpert CT/NG. Rapid turnaround time, ease of use and high acceptability make the Xpert CT/NG testing system a strategic tool for increasing testing frequency, reaching those not yet tested and offering the possibility of immediate treatment if needed. The assay showed good negative likelihood ratios and confirms its use to rule out CT/NG infections. Sensitivity varied across sites and pathogens. Periodic staff training at the testing sites should be mandatory.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) infections have increased globally. Asymptomatic infections represent a significant risk of long-term complications. Men who have sex with men (MSM) are disproportionally affected, underscoring the need to offer screening programmes to this population. CT/NG Point of Care Testing (POCT) constitutes a strategic tool to improve the continuum of STI care, however extensive real-life evaluations amongst at risk populations are lacking. The aim of this study is to estimate the GeneXpert CT/NG assay performance and usability for CT and NG at genital and extragenital sites for screening amongst MSM.
METHODS
METHODS
This study was a multi-site sexual health clinic-based evaluation (Italy, Malta and Peru) with consecutive enrolment. A first void urine sample (divided in two aliquots), two oropharyngeal and two anorectal swabs were collected for each study participant. One specimen set (one for each anatomical site) was tested with the dual index test (Cepheid) at the clinics by the healthcare staff, the other set with FDA/CE approved Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) at the laboratory. Clinical sites and reference laboratories participated in an internal and external quality control programme. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, positive and negative predictive values for each anatomical site were estimated using a meta-analytic approach.
RESULTS
RESULTS
One thousand seven hundred two MSM were recruited across all clinical sites for a total of 5049 biological specimens. NG and CT were respectively detected in 274 and 287 of samples. Overall, the NG POCT sensitivity and specificity was 91.43% and 99.75% in urine (LR + 372.80, LR- 0.09), 89.68% and 99.55% in rectal specimens (LR + 197.30, LR- 0.10) and 75.87% and 98.77% at the pharynx respectively (LR + 61.94, LR- 0.24). The CT component of the POCT sensitivity was 84.82% and specificity 99.63% in urine (LR + 228.68, LR- 0.15), 78.07% and 99.19% respectively on rectal site (LR + 96.23, LR-0.22), 67.79% and 99.88% respectively at pharyngeal site (LR + 554.89, LR- 0.32). 95.95% of MSM reported to be willing to wait for POCT results and no provider reported difficulties in terms of performance or interpretation of the results of the Xpert CT/NG.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Rapid turnaround time, ease of use and high acceptability make the Xpert CT/NG testing system a strategic tool for increasing testing frequency, reaching those not yet tested and offering the possibility of immediate treatment if needed. The assay showed good negative likelihood ratios and confirms its use to rule out CT/NG infections. Sensitivity varied across sites and pathogens. Periodic staff training at the testing sites should be mandatory.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38418963
doi: 10.1186/s12879-024-09042-4
pii: 10.1186/s12879-024-09042-4
pmc: PMC10902931
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
224Subventions
Organisme : World Health Organization
ID : 001
Pays : International
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018 Feb;90(2):83-84
pubmed: 29174733
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Mar;54(3):650-6
pubmed: 26719439
Int J STD AIDS. 2020 Jan;31(1):4-15
pubmed: 31870237
Clin Chem. 2012 Dec;58(12):1636-43
pubmed: 22730450
J Clin Microbiol. 2009 Jun;47(6):1657-62
pubmed: 19369445
MMWR Recomm Rep. 2014 Mar 14;63(RR-02):1-19
pubmed: 24622331
Nat Rev Urol. 2014 Dec;11(12):672-87
pubmed: 25330794
BMJ Open. 2016 Nov 14;6(11):e012799
pubmed: 28137831
Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2021 Sep;21(9):861-868
pubmed: 34225553
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019 May;25(5):623-627
pubmed: 30107282
Sex Transm Infect. 2010 Oct;86(5):355-9
pubmed: 20876754
Sex Health. 2019 Aug;16(4):314-319
pubmed: 31296280
Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 2016;2016:5758387
pubmed: 27366021
S Afr Med J. 2015 Apr 06;105(5):325
pubmed: 26242647
Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Feb 1;66(4):570-575
pubmed: 29028971
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2006 Sep;4(9 Suppl):S21-31
pubmed: 17034069
Int J STD AIDS. 2016 Mar;27(4):251-67
pubmed: 26538553
J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Dec;50(12):3867-9
pubmed: 22993183
Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Jan 18;66(3):437-443
pubmed: 29136127
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004 Mar;2(3):231-40
pubmed: 15083158
AIDS. 2017 Sep 24;31(15):2069-2076
pubmed: 28692536
Int J STD AIDS. 2020 Oct 29;:956462420949126
pubmed: 33121366
Sex Transm Infect. 2017 Dec;93(S4):S22-S30
pubmed: 29223960
Sex Transm Infect. 2017 Dec;93(S4):S81-S88
pubmed: 29223966
Sex Transm Infect. 2022 Feb;98(1):11-16
pubmed: 33436503
Sex Transm Infect. 2017 Dec;93(S4):S16-S21
pubmed: 29223959
Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2014 Mar;14(2):135-7
pubmed: 24450867
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2022 Jan 03;11:784610
pubmed: 35047416
Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Apr 15;70(9):1966-1972
pubmed: 31198933
MMWR Recomm Rep. 2021 Jul 23;70(4):1-187
pubmed: 34292926
J Med Microbiol. 2018 Aug;67(8):1050-1057
pubmed: 29927376
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Jun;51(6):1666-72
pubmed: 23467600
Sex Transm Dis. 2018 May;45(5):287-293
pubmed: 29465688
Sex Transm Dis. 2017 Apr;44(4):211-218
pubmed: 28282646
Sex Transm Infect. 2021 Dec;97(8):607-612
pubmed: 33431605
BMC Public Health. 2013 Nov 25;13:1093
pubmed: 24274101
PLoS One. 2016 May 24;11(5):e0156160
pubmed: 27219005
Sex Transm Infect. 1999 Feb;75(1):3-17
pubmed: 10448335
Lancet Microbe. 2021 Nov;2(11):e627-e636
pubmed: 35544082
Lancet Infect Dis. 2014 Mar;14(3):239-49
pubmed: 24332389
Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Jun 18;67(1):154-155
pubmed: 29370373
Lancet Infect Dis. 2021 May;21(5):668-676
pubmed: 33242473
BMC Infect Dis. 2024 Feb 29;24(Suppl 1):203
pubmed: 38418947
APMIS. 2018 Dec;126(12):907-912
pubmed: 30456870
Sex Transm Infect. 2017 Dec;93(S4):S69-S80
pubmed: 29223965