Summary
Background
Currently, the biological diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PjP infection) usually relies on microbiological investigations in bronchial‐alveolar lavage fluid (BALF) by conventional staining methods and/or molecular biology. However, bronchial‐alveolar lavage is sometimes complicated to manage, especially in weakened patients. Therefore, alternative clinical samples—easier to collect—are warranted in such specific contexts.
Objective
Over a four‐year period, diagnostic performance of an original method based on combination of quantitative real‐time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) in nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA) with measurement of β‐(1, 3)‐D‐glucan antigen (BDG) in serum was prospectively assessed in a single centre.
Patients/methods
Results were compared with those obtained in BALF through direct staining methods and qPCR. True positives were defined by an independent committee based on clinical, radiological and biological data. Overall, 48 individuals with a definitive diagnosis of PjP infection were included, and 48 controls were selected upon matching for age, sex and underlying disease(s).
Results
qPCR results were strongly correlated between BALF and NPA (P < .0001). Altogether, greater diagnostic performance was achieved when establishing the positive cut‐off of BDG antigen at 143 pg/mL. In such conditions, sensitivity of the testing based on either positive BDG measurement or positive qPCR in NPA was then calculated at 93.75%, 95%CI [82.37%‐98.40%], and specificity at 97.87%, 95%CI [87.66%‐100.00%].
Conclusions
Further validation through multicentre studies is now required, especially for establishing clear cut‐offs. However, one could already state that combination of qPCR in the NPA with BDG measurement in serum may be a valuable substitute for BALF examination.
The epidemiology of invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) is hard to delineate given the difficulties in ascertaining the diagnosis that is often based on the confrontation of clinical and microbiological criteria. The present report underlines the interest of active surveillance involving mycologists and clinicians to describe the global incidence and that of the main IFDs.
Background
Pneumonia due to Pneumocystis jirovecii (PCP) is a frequent infection in HIV‐positive and also in immunocompromised HIV‐negative patients. PCR analysis of pulmonary samples has become an essential element in PCP laboratory diagnosis. Currently, many commercially PCR‐based tests are available for P jirovecii detection and need to be evaluated.
Objectives
We evaluated the performance of the RealStar® P jirovecii PCR kit for PCP diagnosis.
Methods
We performed the RealStar® P jirovecii PCR and an in‐house PCR in 219 pulmonary samples. We then assessed the performance of the RealStar® P jirovecii PCR kit by classifying patients in proven, probable, possible PCP or no final diagnosis, on the basis of the clinical and radiological signs and direct examination of bronchoalveolar lavage samples.
Results
The results showed excellent concordance (96.8%) with another in‐house PCR, previously used in the laboratory. The available clinical data allowed classifying 219 patients as having proven PCP (n = 6), probable PCP (n = 27), possible PCP (n = 29) and no final diagnosis of PCP (n = 157). The RealStar® P jirovecii PCR kit performed well with samples from patients with proven and probable PCP, as indicated by the detection of P jirovecii DNA in all these samples. The percentage of positive samples in the possible PCP category was 75.9%. In patients with no final diagnosis of PCP, P jirovecii DNA was detected in 13.4% of samples, indicating colonisation by this pathogen.
Conclusions
The RealStar® P jirovecii PCR kit shows excellent performance for PCP diagnosis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.