Diagnostic accuracy of DPP Fever Panel II Asia tests for tropical fever diagnosis
Sandhya Dhawan,Sabine Dittrich,Sonia Arafah,Stefano Ongarello,Aurelian Mace,Siribun Panapruksachat,Latsaniphone Boutthasavong,Aphaphone Adsamouth,Soulignasak Thongpaseuth,Viengmon Davong,Manivanh Vongsouvath,Elizabeth A Ashley,Matthew T Robinson,Stuart D Blacksell,Elizabeth A. Ashley,Matthew T. Robinson,Stuart D. Blacksell
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0012077
2024-04-11
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
Abstract:Fever is the most frequent symptom in patients seeking care in South and Southeast Asia. The introduction of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for malaria continues to drive patient management and care. Malaria-negative cases are commonly treated with antibiotics without confirmation of bacteraemia. Conventional laboratory tests for differential diagnosis require skilled staff and appropriate access to healthcare facilities. In addition, introducing single-disease RDTs instead of conventional laboratory tests remains costly. To overcome some of the delivery challenges of multiple separate tests, a multiplexed RDT with the capacity to diagnose a diverse range of tropical fevers would be a cost-effective solution. In this study, a multiplex lateral flow immunoassay (DPP Fever Panel II Assay) that can detect serum immunoglobulin M (IgM) and specific microbial antigens of common fever agents in Asia ( Orientia tsutsugamushi , Rickettsia typhi , Leptospira spp ., Burkholderia pseudomallei , Dengue virus, Chikungunya virus, and Zika virus), was evaluated. Whole blood (WB) and serum samples from 300 patients with undefined febrile illness (UFI) recruited in Vientiane, Laos PDR were tested using the DPP Fever Panel II, which consists of an Antibody panel and Antigen panel. To compare reader performance, results were recorded using two DPP readers, DPP Micro Reader (Micro Reader 1) and DPP Micro Reader Next Generation (Micro Reader 2). WB and serum samples were run on the same fever panel and read on both micro readers in order to compare results. ROC analysis and equal variance analysis were performed to inform the diagnostic validity of the test compared against the respective reference standards of each fever agent (S1 Table). Overall better AUC values were observed in whole blood results. No significant difference in AUC performance was observed when comparing whole blood and serum sample testing, except for when testing for R . typhi IgM (p = 0.04), Leptospira IgM (p = 0.02), and Dengue IgG (p = 0.03). Linear regression depicted R 2 values had ~70% agreement across WB and serum samples, except when testing for leptospirosis and Zika, where the R 2 values were 0.37 and 0.47, respectively. No significant difference was observed between the performance of Micro Reader 1 and Micro Reader 2, except when testing for the following pathogens: Zika IgM, Zika IgG, and B pseudomallei CPS Ag. These results demonstrate that the diagnostic accuracy of the DPP Fever Panel II is comparable to that of commonly used RDTs. The optimal cut-off would depend on the use of the test and the desired sensitivity and specificity. Further studies are required to authenticate the use of these cut-offs in other endemic regions. This multiplex RDT offers diagnostic benefits in areas with limited access to healthcare and has the potential to improve field testing capacities. This could improve tropical fever management and reduce the public health burden in endemic low-resource areas. Tropical fevers, specifically those caused by non-malarial infectious agents, contribute to considerable morbidity and mortality in the Asia-Pacific region. Diagnosis of these pathogens is challenging since the clinical signs are often indistinguishable. Conventional laboratory tests to differentiate between tropical diseases require substantial infrastructure and experienced staff, limiting access to accurate tests in low-resource endemic regions. Rapid diagnostic tools (RDTs) offer an affordable solution for disease management and patient care. Although RDTs are also available for detecting non-malarial pathogens, there are financial and accessibility issues in establishing multiple separate tests in resource-constrained regions. To overcome these challenges, a multi-detection diagnostic platform with the capacity to diagnose a diverse range of tropical fevers would be a solution. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of an easier-to-use multiplex lateral flow immunoassay (DPP Fever Panel II Assay) that can detect IgM antibodies and specific antigens of common tropical diseases in Asia (Scrub typhus, Murine typhus, Leptospirosis, Melioidosis, Dengue virus, Chikungunya, and Zika virus). The test performed offers comparable diagnostic accuracy to commercially available tests, as well as some reference tests. The test also performs at equivalent accuracy with both blood and serum samples. If the fever panel were used as a stand-alone test for acute febrile illness diagnosis, cut-offs would need to be adjusted depending on the use of the test, and the desired sensitivity and specificity. There is a need to investigate the use of these cut-offs in other endemic regions, which could improve the rate of tropical fever diagnosis in low-resource settings.
tropical medicine,parasitology