Richard Steece, Ph.D., D(ABMM)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
John Harrison, Michelle Garassi, Sara Wierzbicki, William LeBar Hospital Consolidated Laboratories-Providence Hospital, Southfield, MI, Evaluation of the.
Advertisements

PREVALENCE OF CHLAMYDIA TRACHOMATIS, NEISSERIA GONORRHOEAE AND TRICHOMONAS VAGINALIS IN YOUNG WOMEN IN KENYA USING THE GEN-PROBE APTIMA ASSAYS J Moncada.
Figure 1. Trichomonas Assay Procedure
John Harrison, Michelle Garassi, Sara Wierzbicki, William LeBar Hospital Consolidated Laboratories-Providence Hospital, Southfield, MI, Abstract There.
Nick Curry, MD, MPH Infectious Diseases Prevention Section
Recommendations for STD Clinical Preventive Services for Persons Living with HIV/AIDS.
Guidelines for the Laboratory Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Treponema pallidum Testing Recommendations from the an expert.
Region II Infertility Prevention Project New York City, New York December 12-13, 2007 Richard Steece, Ph.D., D(ABMM) National Infertility Prevention Project.
Positive NAAT test results for Neisseria gonorrhoeae do not require routine confirmatory testing Matthew R. Golden MD, MPH Center for AIDS & STD, University.
Self-Collected Vaginal Specimens for the Detection of Multiple STIs in Adolescent Detainees Cynthia M. Holland, M.D., M.P.H., Harold C. Wiesenfeld, M.D.,
Chlamydia NAATs: update in the clinical and laboratory setting Gill Underhill St Mary’s Hospital Portsmouth.
Epidemiology of Chlamydia in the United States Debra J. Mosure, Ph.D. Division of STD Prevention Centers for Disease Control and Prevention March 8, 2004.
STUDY DESIGN FOR DIAGNOSTIC STUDY FOR MELIOIDOSIS Dr Direk Limmathurotsakul, MD MSc PhD.
CDC National Infertility Prevention Project Laboratory Update Region I Wells Beach, Maine June 1-3, 2009 Richard Steece, Ph.D., D(ABMM)
Molecular testing for Neisseria gonorrhoeae J.Dave.
Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) & Neisseria gonorrhoeae(GC) by APTIMA COMBO 2 ASSAY Molecular Diagnostics Instructor: Dr. Nancy McQueen Date June.
Region I Advisory Board Meeting Wells Beach, ME June 9, 2008 Use and Verification of STD Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests for non-FDA Cleared Clinical.
2014 PATIENT HISTORY How would you diagnose and screen Miranda? How would you treat Miranda? Are there any additional steps you would take? Antimicrobial.
Gonococcal Isolate Surveillance Project (GISP)
HIV Testing CDC power point edited by M. Myers
Chlamydia trachomatis testing Research Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology “Georgi D. Efremov”, MASA What is Chlamydia trachomatis? Chlamydia.
Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Lab Update þBurning Questions þLaboratory Guidelines þCT Immunobiology Consultation The findings and conclusions in this presentation.
Use of an Internet-Based Self-Screening Program to Screen for Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Wendy Voet On Behalf Of Charlotte A. Gaydos and Karen Dwyer, Mathilda.
Laboratory Training for Field Epidemiologists Viral cultures Investigation strategies and methods May 2007.
Faiza Ali MD, Ericka Hayes MD, Gaurav Kaushik MPH, Nicole Carr RN, Katie Plax MD Washington University School Of Medicine Department of Pediatrics.
Gonorrhea Epidemiology and Prevention Program Efforts in Iowa
Region I Laboratory Update CDC National Infertility Prevention Project Boston, Massachusetts November 15, 2010 Richard Steece, Ph.D., D(ABMM) Laboratory.
Strand Displacement Amplification Presented by Lisa Smith & Apollo Kacsinta.
Laboratory Issues in STD Testing From the Perspective of The Bureau of STD Control Jennifer Baumgartner, MSPH Preeti Pathela, DrPH Julia Schillinger, MD,
The Impact of Introducing “Express Visits” for Asymptomatic Persons Seeking STD Services in a Busy Urban STD Clinic System, Borrelli J 1, Paneth-Pollak.
When to Confirm a Positive NAAT An additional test should be considered after a positive screening test if a false-positive screening test would result.
PID Normal Human Fallopian Tube Tissue C. trachomatis Infection (PID)
Region I Laboratory Update CDC National Infertility Prevention Project Wells Beach, Maine June 15, 2010 Richard Steece, Ph.D., D(ABMM) Laboratory Consultant.
WHEN DID THE NEW VARIANT OF CHLAMYDIA TRACHOMATIS (nvCT) EMERGE IN ÖREBRO COUNTY, SWEDEN? – A STATISTICAL EVALUATION OF THE POSITIVITY RATES FROM 1999.
CASE 2 THE MICROBIOLOGY LABORATORY Ashley Wang, Feb
Prevalence of Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Among Patients With Genital Ulcer Disease in Zimbabwe: Potential Implications for Syndromic Management More Mungati:
NAAT identified chlamydial infections: Enhanced sensitivity, reduced transmissibility? Presenter: Maria Villarroel, MA Authors: Maria A. Villarroel, MA.
 Direct  Indirect  Direct: -Microscopy -Culture -Antigen -Nucleic acid  Indirect: -Specific antibody (Serology)
New Technologies in cervical cancer screening Cosette Wheeler, University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico.
The Dublin Well Woman Centre and The National Virus Reference Laboratory  Approved by ICGP Ethics Committee.
Evaluation of 5 different tests for Trichomonas vaginalis infection and cost effective planning for clinical implementation B. Nathan 1, J Appiah 2, D.
Missed Gonorrhea Infections by Anatomic Site among Asymptomatic Men who have Sex with Men (MSM) Attending U.S. STD Clinics, KC Mahle 1, DJ Helms.
Diagnostic Testing for Zika Virus Frederick S. Nolte, PhD, D(ABMM), F(AAM) Professor and Vice-Chair for Laboratory Medicine Department of Pathology and.
CHLAMYDIA TRACHOMATIS – DIAGNOSIS AND MANAGEMENT Jess Gaddie (adapted from presentation by Rachel Coyne)
What’s New in STI Testing?
Gonorrhea Testing, Diagnosis and Treatment
Case Study 2 Microbiological Testing for Chlamydia and Gonorrhea
Tumor markers 1111.
Vaginal Swabs Clinical Information Why? Murray Robinson
Copyright © 2010 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
6 Bacterial Growth, Nutrition, and Differentiation
Evaluation of Various Laboratory Methods for the Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection Yousun Chung1, Ji Yeon Sung1, Ho Eun Chang2, Soon Hee Choi2,
A Question of Stability. Stability of GC and CT nucleic acids in Urine
Modern diagnosis of Trichomonas vaginalis infection
Gonococcal Isolate Surveillance Project (GISP)
Appraising a diagnostic test study using a critical appraisal checklist Mahilum-Tapay L, et al. New point of care Chlamydia Rapid Test – bridging the gap.
Universal Screening to Assess Chlamydia Prevalence and Risk Among Older Women Attending Family Planning Clinics in Wisconsin Roberta (Bobbie) McDonald.
Chlamydial and Gonococcal Infections
Laboratory Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases
Nucleic Acid Amplification Test for Tuberculosis
Do Patients adherent on PrEP exposed to HIV have seroconversion symptoms & falsely reactive HIV tests? Mark Roche1, Elaney Youssef1, Yvonne Gilleece¹,
Appraising a diagnostic test study using a critical appraisal checklist Mahilum-Tapay L, et al. New point of care Chlamydia Rapid Test – bridging the gap.
Investigation strategies and methods
CT/NG Testing Driven by CDC Guidelines.
IMPROVING AND OPTIMIZING EARLY INFANT DIAGNOSIS
Large-scale testing of women in Copenhagen has not reduced the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infections  H. Westh, H.J. Kolmos  Clinical Microbiology.
1985: First HIV-1 ELISA Approved by FDA
(A) Venn diagrams comparing Chlamydia trachomatis Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and (B) Neisseria Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) percent positive results across.
Richard Steece, Ph.D., D(ABMM) National Infertility Prevention Project
Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests for the Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis Rectal Infections Bachmann LH1,2, Johnson R3, Cheng H1, Markowitz L3, Papp.
Presentation transcript:

Richard Steece, Ph.D., D(ABMM) DrRSteece@aol.com CDC National Infertility Prevention Project Laboratory Update Region I Wells Beach, Maine June 1-3, 2009 Richard Steece, Ph.D., D(ABMM) DrRSteece@aol.com

Chlamydia and Gonorrhea “102” Tests - Old and New Test Performance Issues Sensitivity/Specificity Positive Predictive Value (PPV) Negative Predictive Value (NPV) Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Chlamydia Laboratory Methods Culture (Cell Culture)

Advantages/Disadvantages Cell Culture Used for many types of specimens, e.g. endocervical, urethral, rectal, ocular, etc. Meets medico-legal standards (specificity) Used for strain studies (DNA fingerprinting) Susceptibility testing possible DISADVANTAGES Comparatively expensive Many variables involved, e.g. cell culture, medium, etc. Technically more difficult than many non-culture tests Delayed turn around time Lack of sensitivity (compared to amplified tests)

Chlamydia Laboratory Methods Non-culture ANTIGEN DETECTION Direct Fluorescent Antibody (DFA) Enzyme Immunoassay (EIA) NUCLEIC ACID DETECTION METHODS Nucleic Acid Probe (GenProbe) Hybrid Capture (Digene)

Advantages/Disadvantages Non-culture Used for many types of specimens, e.g. endocervical, urethral, rectal, ocular, etc. (DFA) Effective for large scale screening (EIA/NAP) Viable organism not required Evaluate quality of specimens (DFA) Inexpensive Rapid turn around time DISADVANTAGES Not suitable for large volume testing (DFA) Lack of sensitivity (compared to amplified tests) Not FDA cleared for alternate specimens, e.g. urine, etc.

Chlamydia Laboratory Methods Non-culture Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) Roche AMPLICOR® CT/NG Test (PCR) Roche COBAS AMPLICOR™ CT/NG Test (PCR) GenProbe APTIMA COMBO 2® (TMA) GenProbe APTIMA CT® (TMA) BD ProbeTec™ ET (SDA) BD ProbeTec™ Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) Qx Amplified DNA Assay (SDA) Abbott RealTime CT/NG (PCR)

Advantages/Disadvantages NAATs Most sensitive and specific tests Effective for large scale screening Rapid turn around time NAATs are FDA cleared for urine specimens May be used with some alternate specimens DISADVANTAGES Some versions not suitable for large volume screening High technical skill required Special facilities or clean area required Expensive

Chlamydia Rapid Tests Point of Care Tests (POCTs) Wampole Clearview Quidel Quickview - Inverness

Advantages/Disadvantages POCTs Rapid turn around time Allows treatment of patient while in clinic DISADVANTAGES Expensive Not suitable for large volume screening Poor sensitivity with some POCTs Complexity non-waived

Gonorrhea Laboratory Methods Culture Thayer Martin, etc. Genetic transformation (Gonostat) Direct Microscopic Exam Gram Stain

Advantages/Disadvantages Bacterial Culture All types of specimens, e.g. endocervical, urethral, rectal, pharyngeal, ocular, etc. Meets medico-legal standards (specificity) Used for strain studies fingerprinting Susceptibility testing possible DISADVANTAGES Some variables, e.g. various culture, media, etc. Delayed turn around time Lack of sensitivity (compared to amplified tests)

Gonorrhea Laboratory Methods Non-Culture Nucleic acid detection method Nucleic Acid Probe (GenProbe) Hybrid Capture (Digene)

Advantages/Disadvantages NAP and NAPSA Effective for large scale screening Viable organism not required Rapid turn around time Inexpensive Moderate technical skill required DISADVANTAGES Lack of sensitivity (compared to amplified tests) Not FDA cleared for alternate specimens, e.g. urine, etc.

Gonorrhea Laboratory Methods Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) Roche AMPLICOR® CT/NG Test (PCR) Roche COBAS AMPLICOR™ CT/NG Test (PCR) GenProbe APTIMA COMBO 2® (TMA) GenProbe APTIMA GC® (TMA) BD ProbeTec™ ET (SDA) BD ProbeTec™ Neisseria gonorrhoeae (GC) Qx Amplified DNA Assay (SDA) Abbott RealTime CT/NG (PCR)

Advantages/Disadvantages Nucleic Acid Amplified Tests (NAATs) Most sensitive and specific tests Effective for large scale screening Rapid turn around time NAATs are FDA cleared for urine specimens May be used with some alternate specimens DISADVANTAGES Some versions not suitable for large volume screening High technical skill required Special facilities or clean area required Expensive

Test Performance Issues Sensitivity – The ability of a test to detect patients who have the disease or condition for which they are being tested OR refers to the proportion of people with disease who have a positive test. Specificity – The ability of a test to identify patients who do not have the disease or condition for which they are being tested OR refers to the proportion of people without disease who have negative test result.

Positive Predictive Value (PPV) The likelihood that an individual with a positive test has the disease. Negative Predictive Value (NPV) The likelihood that a person with a negative test does not have the disease.

Performance estimates1 of different tests to detect chlamydia and gonorrhea Sensitivity, % Specificity,% CT Culture 40-70 >99 GC Culture 45-65 >99 DFA 50-70 95-99 EIA 60-70 95-99 NAP/NAPSA 60-75 97-99 NAATs 95-98 >99 DNA amplified testing is most sensitive, New gold standard, can be used to test urine. Particularly important for screening males. 1Performance estimates vary widely due to differences in statistical analysis

Example of NPV using Prevalence Sensitivity is 95% Specificity is 99% Prevalence is 20.0% NPV=(1-.20)(.99)/(1-.20)(.99)+(.20)(1-.95)x100 NPV=.792/.792(.01)x100 NPV=.9875 x 100 = NPV of 99%

Example of NPV using Prevalence Sensitivity is 95% Specificity is 99% Prevalence is 20.0% NPV=(1-.20)(.99)/(1-.20)(.99)+(.20)(1-.95)x100 NPV=.792/.792+(.01)x100 NPV=.9875 x 100 = NPV of 99% Sensitivity is 85% NPV=.9635 x 100 = NPV of 96%

Graph Courtesy of Abbot Laboratories

Example of PPV using Prevalence Sensitivity is 95% Specificity is 99% Prevalence is 20.0% PPV=(.20)(.95)/(.20)(.95)+(1-.20)(1-.99)x100 PPV=.19/.19+(.008)x100 PPV=.9595 x 100 = PPV of 96%

Example of PPV using Prevalence Sensitivity is 95% Specificity is 99% Prevalence is 15.0% PPV=(.15)(.95)/(.15)(.95)+(1-.15)(1-.99)x100 PPV=.1425/.1425+(.0085)x100 PPV=.9437 x 100 = PPV of 94%

Example of PPV using Prevalence Sensitivity is 95% Specificity is 99% Prevalence is 10.0% PPV=(.10)(.95)/(.10)(.95)+(1-.10)(1-.99)x100 PPV=.095/.095+(.009)x100 PPV=.9134 x 100 = PPV of 91%

Example of PPV using Prevalence Sensitivity is 95% Specificity is 99% Prevalence is 5.0% PPV=(.05)(.95)/(.05)(.95)+(1-.05)(1-.99)x100 PPV=.0475/.0475+(.0095)x100 PPV=.8333 x 100 = PPV of 83%

Example of PPV using Prevalence Sensitivity is 95% Specificity is 99% Prevalence is 2.0% PPV=(.02)(.95)/(.02)(.95)+(1-.02)(1-.99)x100 PPV=.019/.019+(.0098)x100 PPV=.6597 x 100 = PPV of 66%

Example of PPV using Prevalence Sensitivity is 95% Specificity is 99% Prevalence is 1.0% PPV=(.01)(.95)/(.01)(.95)+(1-.01)(1-.99)x100 PPV=.0095/.0095+(.0099)x100 PPV=.4896 x 100 = PPV of 49%

Example of PPV using Prevalence (Effect of repeating positive specimens) Sensitivity remains 95% Revised Specificity is 99.99% Prevalence is 1.0% PPV=(.01)(.95)/(.01)(.95)+(1-.01)(1-.9999) x 100 PPV=.0095/.0095+(.000099) x 100 PPV=.9896 x 100 = PPV of 99% (49%)

Graph Courtesy of Abbot Laboratories

Example of PPV using Prevalence Sensitivity is 95% Specificity is 99.9% Prevalence is 1.0% PPV=(.01)(.95)/(.01)(.95)+(1-.01)(1-.999)x100 PPV=.0095/.0095+(.00099)x100 PPV=.9056 x 100 = PPV of 91%

Example of PPV using Prevalence Sensitivity is 95% Specificity is 99.9% Prevalence is 1.0% PPV=(.01)(.95)/(.01)(.95)+(1-.01)(1-.999)x100 PPV=.0095/.0095+(.00099)x100 PPV=.9056 x 100 = PPV of 91% Specificity is 99.99%, PPV of 99%

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Question: How long after a patient has successfully completed appropriate antimicrobial therapy would you be able to detect antigen in their specimen (e.g. false positive) due to residual CT or GC DNA/RNA? Answer: The current CDC Treatment (and Laboratory) Guidelines state that DNA or RNA may persist for up to 3 weeks after the successful completion of appropriate antimicrobial therapy. At the recent laboratory guidelines meeting, the expert panel recommended that this statement remain the same at this time. However, studies are being conducted to examine this with several "newer" NAATs and it is possible this recommendation may change in the future based on new data.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Question: How soon after a patient has unprotected sex would you be able to detect CT and/or GC with a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)? Answer: Depending on the antigen load (i.e. amount of CT or GC in the ejaculate), a patient’s specimen could be positive very shortly after exposure (sex/rape/abuse), before actual infection, from minutes to hours after sex to upwards of several days.  If infection occurs there should be a latent or silent (undetectable) period for a short time.  Once again depending on antigen load, a positive (if the individual becomes infected) could be detected in some cases in as little as a week, looking at the life cycle of the organism.  However, the average time from actual infection to detectable shedding is more likely 2-4 weeks for CT, most likely a week sooner for GC. 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Question: Is test-of-cure recommended as a routine procedure after therapy for CT or GC infection with first-line CDC-recommended treatment regimens? Answer: The guidelines do not recommend a test of cure for CT or GC, with a few exceptions

The End - Questions Lots of tears

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Question: In the past our laboratory has given us the option of submitting urine or endocervical swabs on our patient/clients. Recently they have verified rectal swabs as an additional specimens. Is it possible to just send in rectal swabs instead of urine or endocervical? Answer: Rectal swabs are not recommended for patients unless they have participated in anal sex.