EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Field Evaluation of the Cepheid GeneXpert Chlamydia trachomatis Assay for Detection of Infection in a Trachoma Endemic Community in Tanzania

Alexander Jenson, Laura Dize, Harran Mkocha, Beatriz Munoz, Jennifer Lee, Charlotte Gaydos, Thomas Quinn and Sheila K West

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 2013, vol. 7, issue 7, 1-6

Abstract: Purpose: To determine the sensitivity, specificity, and field utility of the Cepheid GeneXpert Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) Assay (GeneXpert) for ocular chlamydia infection compared to Roche Amplicor CT assay (Amplicor). Methods: In a trachoma-endemic community in Kongwa Tanzania, 144 children ages 0 to 9 were surveyed to assess clinical trachoma and had two ocular swabs taken. One swab was processed at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore MD, using Amplicor, (Roche Molecular Diagnostics) and the other swab was processed at a field station in Kongwa using the GeneXpert Chlamydia trachomatis/Neisseria gonorrhoeae assay (Cepheid). The sensitivity and specificity of GeneXpert was compared to the Amplicor assay. Results: Of the 144 swabs taken the prevalence of follicular trachoma by clinical exam was 43.7%, and by evidence of infection according to Amplicor was 28.5%. A total of 17 specimens (11.8%) could not be processed by GeneXpert in the field due to lack of sample volume, other specimen issues or electricity failure. The sensitivity of GeneXpert when compared to Amplicor was 100% and the specificity was 95%. The GeneXpert test identified more positives in individuals with clinical trachoma than Amplicor, 55% versus 52%. Conclusion: The GeneXpert test for C. trachomatis performed with high sensitivity and specificity and demonstrated excellent promise as a field test for trachoma control. Author Summary: Trachoma, an eye infection caused by C. trachomatis, is the leading cause of infectious blindness worldwide, affecting the developing world. The current standard for trachoma treatment involves mass drug administration (MDA) of an antibiotic that is given to a community to reduce transmission. A field test for the presence of infection would be a useful adjunct in measuring MDA impact. However, the current standard for measuring infection involves expensive, delicate instrumentation that is often only in laboratories in developed countries or capital cities, and eye swab specimens are mostly shipped to the developed world for analysis.

Date: 2013
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0002265 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id ... 02265&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pntd00:0002265

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002265

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosntds ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-22
Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0002265