Literature reviews  >  Articles for review > Kaydos-Daniels et al. Validation of a urine-based... 

 

About SDI
Mission
Diagnostic
Priorities
Workplan
Activities
Newsletters
Grants
Publications
Journal articles
Guidelines
Manuals
Reports
Literature reviews
Contact us

A urine-based PCR method may be used for detection of trichomoniasis in men in settings in which collecting urethral swabs and performing culture are not feasible.

Validation of a urine-based PCR-enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for use in clinical research settings to detect Trichomonas vaginalis in men.
Kaydos-Daniels SC, Miller WC, Hoffman I, Banda T, Dzinyemba W, Martinson F, Cohen MS, Hobbs MM.
Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2003;41:318-323.

 

Summary:

Question
How does a PCR assay performed on urine samples compare to culture of urine and urethral swabs for the detection of T. vaginalis infection in men?

Design
This article describes a cross-sectional study to validate detection of T. vaginalis in men by a urine-based PCR-enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with urine and urethral swab culture as the reference standard.

Participants
One thousand three hundred sixty-one men attending outpatient STD and dermatology clinics at Lilongwe Central Hospital, Lilongwe, Malawi, were evaluated. Men enrolled through the STD clinic (n=929) presented with urethritis (4 or more polymorphonuclear cells per high power field), urethral discharge, dysuria, or genital ulcers; men enrolled through the dermatology clinic (n=432) were asymptomatic for STD infection. The ages of the participants ranged from 18 to 61 years (mean=26.1 years), 43.1% were married, and 78% reported fewer than 2 sexual partners in the previous 4 weeks (range=0 to 30). HIV was diagnosed in 46.7% and 27.6% of STD and dermatology clinic subjects, respectively. One thousand two hundred twenty-five urine specimens were tested with the T. vaginalis PCR assay.

Description of Tests and Diagnostic Standard
Urethral swabs were collected and immediately used to inoculate TV InPouch culture systems (Biomed, San Jose, CA) according to the manufacturer's protocol. After the physical examination, 20 to 30 ml of first-void urine was collected. Ten ml was centrifuged within 4 hr of collection and the sediment was used to inoculate a culture. Both cultures were examined microscopically on days 2 and 5 for the presence of motile trichomonads. Subjects with any positive culture were considered positive for T. vaginalis infection.

For PCR analysis, 1028 urine samples were processed with the Amplicor CT Urine Specimen Prep Kit (Roche Applied Science, Indianapolis, IN) and 197 with the Amplicor CT/NG Urine Specimen Prep Kit (Roche) in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, then frozen, and shipped in liquid nitrogen to the testing laboratory in North Carolina. Specimens prepared from the CT Urine Specimen Prep Kit were extracted with phenol chloroform and the DNA was precipitated. The PCR assay was performed with primers TVK3 and TVK7 (digoxigenin labeled). Products were detected in duplicate with the PCR DIG ELISA detection kit (Roche Diagnostic Systems) using biotinylated probe TVK. The absorbance cutoff value for a positive test was determined by constructing a ROC curve.

Main Outcome Measures
The sensitivity and specificity of the PCR assay compared to culture were calculated. Although culture is considered 100% specific, its imperfect sensitivity would underestimate the specificity of the PCR. To compensate, the specificity was adjusted by the method of Staquet et al. using a high estimate of 70% and a low of 50% for the sensitivity of T. vaginalis culture for men.

Main Results
T. vaginalis was detected by culture of urethral swab or urine sediment in 9.0% and 3.2% of subjects enrolled from the STD and dermatology clinics, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the urine PCR compared to culture were 88.9% (95% CI, 79.2-94.4) and 88.6% (95% CI, 86.8-90.4), respectively. The adjusted specificities were 91.0% for the high and 94.5% for the low culture estimates. Sixty-four percent of the specimens with ODs greater than the ELISA cutoff were negative by culture. The performance of the T. vaginalis PCR with samples from subjects with different clinical characteristics is shown in the table. No significant differences were observed.

Performance of T. vaginalis PCR assay with specimens from subjects with different characteristics
Characteristics No. of subjects % Senstitivity (95% CI) % Specificity (95% CI) Adjusted % specificty

Urethritis

Present 521 87.2 (73.6-94.7) 89.0 (85.8-91.6) 97.5
Absent 701 90.9 (74.5-97.6) 88.5 (85.7-90.7) 92.7

HIV

Positive 496 84.6 (68.8-93.6) 86.9 (83.3-89.8) 93.5
Negative 711 92.7 (79.0-98.1) 89.7 (87.1-91.8) 95.1
N. gonorrhoeae
Positive 364 85.0 (61.1-96.0) 89.5 (85.7-92.5) 94.1
Negative 858 90.0 (78.8-95.9) 88.3 (85.9-90.4) 94.7
Dysuria
Present 554 86.8 (71.1-95.1) 89.7 (86.7-92.1) 95.8
Absent 671 90.5 (76.5-96.9) 87.8 (84.9-90.2) 93.4
Urethral discharge
Present 464 87.9 (70.9-96.0) 90.3 (87.0-92.8) 96.7
Absent 761 89.4 (76.1-96.0) 87.7 (85.0-90.0) 93.1
Urine volume
>30 ml 646 84.2 (68.1-93.4) 89.0 (86.2-91.3) 93.7
<30 ml 559 92.7 (79.0-98.1) 88.2 (85.1-90.8) 95.2

Authors' Conclusions
The performance of the T. vaginalis PCR-ELISA assay performed on urine compared favorably to urethral swab and urine sediment culture for the detection of T. vaginalis in men. The addition of a urine-based screening test for T. vaginalis would complement routinely used similar tests for gonorrhoea and chlamydial infections.

Source of funding: National Institutes of Health, NIH Sexually Transmitted Disease Cooperative Research Centers, NIH National Study of Adolescent Health: Survey 2000, and NIH training grants; NIH Sexually Transmitted Disease Clinical Trials Unit contract; and the Clinical Associate Physician Program of the General Clinical Research Center, Division of Research Health.

For correspondence: Marcia M. Hobbs, Department of Medicine, Campus Box 7030, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599. E-mail address: mmhobbs@med.und.edu.

   

about SDI | newsletters | grants | publications | literature reviews

WHO Home - WHO Search - TDR Home - SDI Home - SDI Contact us
(c) WHO/OMS 2001