Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis by Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing: Our Evaluation Suggests that CDC-Recommended Approaches for Confirmatory Testing Are Ill-Advised
- 1 July 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Society for Microbiology in Journal of Clinical Microbiology
- Vol. 44 (7) , 2512-2517
- https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.02620-05
Abstract
We evaluated three CDC-suggested approaches for confirming positive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for Chlamydia trachomatis: (i) repeat the original test on the original specimen, (ii) retest the original specimen with a different test, and (iii) perform a different test on a duplicate specimen. For approach 1, specimens (genital swabs or first-catch urine [FCU]) initially positive by the Abbott LCx Probe System Chlamydia trachomatis Assay (LCx; Abbott Laboratories), the APTIMA Combo 2 Assay (AC2; Gen-Probe Inc.), the Amplicor CT/NG Assay (PCR; Roche Diagnostics Corp.), or the BD ProbeTec ET System C. trachomatis amplified-DNA assay (SDA; Becton Dickinson Diagnostic Systems) were retested by the same NAAT. In several evaluations, multiple efforts were made to confirm the original positive result. For approach 2, specimens initially positive by SDA and the Hybrid Capture 2 CT-ID DNA Test (HC2; Digene Corp.) were retested by different NAATs (SDA, PCR, AC2, and the APTIMA assay for C. trachomatis [ACT]). For approach 3, duplicate male urethral or cervical swabs were tested by SDA or by both AC2 and ACT. FCU specimens were tested by all three tests. We found that 84 to 98% of SDA, LCx, PCR, and AC2 positive results were confirmed by a repeat test and that 89 to 99% of SDA and AC2 and 93% of HC2 positive results were confirmed by different NAATs, but that some NAATs cannot be used to confirm other NAATs. The use of repeat testing did not confirm 11% of C. trachomatis SDA positive results that could be confirmed by more extensive testing. Doing more testing confirms more positive results; >90% of all positive NAATs could be confirmed.Keywords
This publication has 28 references indexed in Scilit:
- Use of Pooled Urine Samples and Automated DNA Isolation To Achieve Improved Sensitivity and Cost-Effectiveness of Large-Scale Testing for Chlamydia trachomatis in Pregnant WomenJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2005
- Confirming Positive Results of Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) for Chlamydia trachomatis : All NAATs Are Not Created EqualJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2005
- Comparison of Three Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in Urine SpecimensJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2004
- The Effect of Urine Testing in Evaluations of the Sensitivity of the Gen-Probe APTIMA??Combo 2 Assay on Endocervical Swabs for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeaeSexually Transmitted Diseases, 2004
- Reproducibility of Positive Test Results in the BDProbeTec ET System for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeaeJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2003
- Head-to-Head Multicenter Comparison of DNA Probe and Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests for Chlamydia trachomatis Infection in Women Performed with an Improved Reference StandardJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2002
- Accuracy of Results Obtained by Performing a Second Ligase Chain Reaction Assay and PCR Analysis on Urine Samples with Positive or Near-Cutoff Results in the LCx Test for Chlamydia trachomatisJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2002
- Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae by Enzyme Immunoassay, Culture, and Three Nucleic Acid Amplification TestsJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2001
- 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
- Editorial Response:Two Different Worlds We Live InClinical Infectious Diseases, 1998