RESUMO
Diagnostics are critical tools that guide clinical decision-making for patient care and support disease surveillance. Despite its importance, developers and manufacturers often note that access to specimen panels and essential reagents is one of the key challenges in developing quality diagnostics, particularly in low-resource settings. A recent example, as the COVID-19 pandemic unfolded there was a need for clinical samples across the globe to support the rapid development of diagnostics. To address these challenges and gaps, PATH, a global nonprofit, along with its partners collaborated to create a COVID-19 biorepository to improve access to biological samples. Since then, the need for data resources to advance universal rapid diagnostic test (RDT) readers and noninvasive clinical measurement tools for screening children have also been identified and initiated. From biospecimens to data files, there are more similarities than differences in creating open-access repositories. And to ensure equitable technologies are developed, diverse sample panels and datasets are critical in the development process. Here we share one experience in creating open-access repositories as a case study to describe the steps taken, the key factors required to establish a biorepository, the ethical and legal frameworks that guided the initiative and the lessons learned. As diagnostic tools are evolving, more forms of data are critical to de-risk and accelerate early research and development (R&D) for products serving low resource settings. Creating physical and virtual repositories of freely available, well characterized, and high quality clinical and electronic data resources defray development costs to improve equitable access and test affordability.
RESUMO
Sensitive field-deployable diagnostic tests can assist malaria programs in achieving elimination. The performance of a new Alere™ Malaria Ag P.f Ultra Sensitive rapid diagnostic test (uRDT) was compared with the currently available SD Bioline Malaria Ag P.f RDT in blood specimens from asymptomatic individuals in Nagongera, Uganda, and in a Karen Village, Myanmar, representative of high- and low-transmission areas, respectively, as well as in pretreatment specimens from study participants from four Plasmodium falciparum-induced blood-stage malaria (IBSM) studies. A quantitative reverse transcription PCR (qRT-PCR) and a highly sensitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test for histidine-rich protein II (HRP2) were used as reference assays. The uRDT showed a greater than 10-fold lower limit of detection for HRP2 compared with the RDT. The sensitivity of the uRDT was 84% and 44% against qRT-PCR in Uganda and Myanmar, respectively, and that of the RDT was 62% and 0% for the same two sites. The specificities of the uRDT were 92% and 99.8% against qRT-PCR for Uganda and Myanmar, respectively, and 99% and 99.8% against the HRP2 reference ELISA. The RDT had specificities of 95% and 100% against qRT-PCR for Uganda and Myanmar, respectively, and 96% and 100% against the HRP2 reference ELISA. The uRDT detected new infections in IBSM study participants 1.5 days sooner than the RDT. The uRDT has the same workflow as currently available RDTs, but improved performance characteristics to identify asymptomatic malaria infections. The uRDT may be a useful tool for malaria elimination strategies.