IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0002265.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Jenson
  • Laura Dize
  • Harran Mkocha
  • Beatriz Munoz
  • Jennifer Lee
  • Charlotte Gaydos
  • Thomas Quinn
  • Sheila K West

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Jenson & Laura Dize & Harran Mkocha & Beatriz Munoz & Jennifer Lee & Charlotte Gaydos & Thomas Quinn & Sheila K West, 2013. "Field Evaluation of the Cepheid GeneXpert Chlamydia trachomatis Assay for Detection of Infection in a Trachoma Endemic Community in Tanzania," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(7), pages 1-6, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0002265
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002265
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0002265
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0002265&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0002265?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0002265. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.