Head-to-Head Multicenter Comparison of DNA Probe and Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests for Chlamydia trachomatis Infection in Women Performed with an Improved Reference Standard
Open Access
- 1 October 2002
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Society for Microbiology in Journal of Clinical Microbiology
- Vol. 40 (10) , 3757-3763
- https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.40.10.3757-3763.2002
Abstract
Few evaluations of tests for Chlamydia trachomatis have compared nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) with diagnostic tests other than those by culture. In a five-city study of 3,551 women, we compared the results of commercial ligase chain reaction (LCR) and PCR tests performed on cervical swabs and urine with the results of PACE 2 tests performed on cervical swabs, using independent reference standards that included both cervical swabs and urethral swab-urine specimens. Using cervical culture as a standard, the sensitivities of PACE 2, LCR, and PCR tests with cervical specimens were 78.1, 96.9, and 89.9%, respectively, and the specificities were 99.3, 97.5, and 98.2%, respectively. Using either cervical swab or urine LCR-positive tests as the standard decreased sensitivities to 60.8% for PACE 2 and to 75.8 and 74.9% for PCR with cervical swabs and urine, respectively. Specificities increased to 99.7% for PACE 2 and to 99.7 and 99.4% for PCR with cervical swabs and urine, respectively. Sensitivities with a cervical swab-urine PCR standard were 61.9% for PACE 2 and 85.5 and 80.8% for LCR with cervical swabs and urine, respectively. Specificities were 99.6% for PACE 2 and 99.0 and 98.9% for LCR with cervical swabs and urine, respectively. Cervical swab versus urine differences were significant only for PCR specificities ( P = 0.034). Overall, LCR sensitivity exceeded that of PCR, and sensitivities obtained with cervical swabs exceeded those obtained with urine specimens by small amounts. These data have substantiated, using a large multicenter sample and a patient standard, that LCR and PCR tests performed on endocervical swabs and urine are superior to PACE 2 tests for screening C. trachomatis infections in women. In our study, NAATs improved the detection of infected women by 17 to 38% compared to PACE 2.Keywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Multicenter Evaluation of the BDProbeTec ET System for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in Urine Specimens, Female Endocervical Swabs, and Male Urethral SwabsJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2001
- Comparison between the LCx Probe System and the COBAS AMPLICOR System for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae Infections in Patients Attending a Clinic for Treatment of Sexually Transmitted Diseases in Amsterdam, The NetherlandsJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2001
- Discrepant analysis: how can we test a test?2000
- Bias in Discrepant Analysis: When Two Wrongs Don’t Make a RightJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1998
- Discrepant analysis and screening for Chlamydia trachomatisThe Lancet, 1998
- Discrepant analysis and screening for Chlamydia trachomatisThe Lancet, 1998
- The discrepancy in discrepant analysisThe Lancet, 1996
- Laboratory to Laboratory Variation in Chlamydia trachomatis Culture PracticesSexually Transmitted Diseases, 1995
- Some Statistical Methods for Combining Experimental ResultsInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1990
- Laboratory diagnosis of human chlamydial infectionsClinical Microbiology Reviews, 1989