Novel typhoid diagnostics currently under development have the potential to improve clinical care, surveillance, and the disease burden estimates that support vaccine introduction. Blood culture is most often used as the reference method to evaluate the accuracy of new typhoid tests; however, it is recognized to be an imperfect gold standard. If no single gold standard test exists, use of a composite reference standard (CRS) can improve estimation of diagnostic accuracy. Numerous studies have used a CRS to evaluate new typhoid diagnostics; however, there is no consensus on an appropriate CRS. In order to evaluate existing tests for use as a reference test or inclusion in a CRS, we performed a systematic review of the typhoid literature to include all index/reference test combinations observed. We described the landscape of comparisons performed, showed results of a meta-analysis on the accuracy of the more common combinations, and evaluated sources of variability based on study quality. This wide-ranging meta-analysis suggests that no single test has sufficiently good performance but some existing diagnostics may be useful as part of a CRS. Additionally, based on findings from the meta-analysis and a constructed numerical example demonstrating the use of CRS, we proposed necessary criteria and potential components of a typhoid CRS to guide future recommendations. Agreement and adoption by all investigators of a standardized CRS is requisite, and would improve comparison of new diagnostics across independent studies, leading to the identification of a better reference test and improved confidence in prevalence estimates.

No abstract

Improved diagnostic tests for Chagas disease are urgently needed. A new lateral flow rapid test for Chagas disease is under development at PATH, in collaboration with Laboratorio Lemos of Argentina, which utilizes a recombinant antigen for detection of antibodies to Trypanosoma cruzi. To evaluate the performance of this test, 375 earlier characterized serum specimens from a region where Chagas is endemic were tested using a reference test (the Ortho T. cruzi ELISA, Johnson & Johnson), a commercially available rapid test (Chagas STAT-PAK, Chembio), and the PATH–Lemos rapid test. Compared to the composite reference tests, the PATH–Lemos rapid test demonstrated an optimal sensitivity of 99.5% and specificity of 96.8%, while the Chagas STAT-PAK demonstrated a sensitivity of 95.3% and specificity of 99.5%. These results indicate that the PATH–Lemos rapid test shows promise as an improved and reliable tool for screening and diagnosis of Chagas disease.

BackgroundEven though the WHO-endorsed, non-commercial MODS assay offers rapid, reliable TB liquid culture and phenotypic drug susceptibility testing (DST) at lower cost than any other diagnostic, uptake has been patchy. In part this reflects misperceptions about in-house assay quality assurance, but user convenience of one-stop procurement is also important. A commercial MODS kit was developed by Hardy Diagnostics (Santa Maria, CA, USA) with PATH (Seattle, WA, USA) to facilitate procurement, simplify procedures through readymade media, and enhance safety with a sealing silicone plate lid. Here we report the results from a large-scale field evaluation of the MODS kit in a government service laboratory.Methods & Findings2446 sputum samples were cultured in parallel in Lowenstein-Jensen (LJ), conventional MODS and in the MODS kit. MODS kit DST was compared with conventional MODS (direct) DST and proportion method (indirect) DST. 778 samples (31.8%) were Mycobacterium tuberculosis culture-positive. Compared to conventional MODS the sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values (95% confidence intervals) of the MODS Kit were 99.3% (98.3–99.8%), 98.3% (97.5–98.8%), 95.8% (94.0–97.1%), and 99.7% (99.3–99.9%). Median (interquartile ranges) time to culture-positivity (and rifampicin and isoniazid DST) was 10 (9–13) days for conventional MODS and 8.5 (7–11) for MODS Kit (p<0.01). Direct rifampicin and isoniazid DST in MODS kit was almost universally concordant with conventional MODS (97.9% agreement, 665/679 evaluable samples) and reference indirect DST (97.9% agreement, 687/702 evaluable samples).ConclusionsMODS kit delivers performance indistinguishable from conventional MODS and offers a convenient, affordable alternative with enhanced safety from the sealing silicone lid. The availability in the marketplace of this platform, which conforms to European standards (CE-marked), readily repurposed for second-line DST in the near future, provides a fresh opportunity for improving equity of access to TB diagnosis and first and second-line DST in settings where the need is greatest.

No abstract

No abstract