External quality assessment to support the WHO ProSPeRo study for the evaluation of two dual HIV/syphilis point-of-care tests in seven countries.

BACKGROUND: Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) such as syphilis and HIV remain to be a significant public health issue worldwide. Dual rapid point-of-care tests (POCTs) have shown promise for detecting antibodies to HIV and syphilis but have not been fully evaluated in the field. Our study supported the WHO ProSPeRo study on Sexually Transmitted Infection Point-of-Care Testing (STI POCT) by providing external quality assessment (EQA) for HIV and syphilis testing in reference laboratories and their associated clinical sites in seven countries. METHODS: HIV/syphilis serum liquid and dried tube specimen (DTS) panels were prepared by CDC. Liquid panels were distributed to the reference laboratories for three rounds of testing using commercially and locally available laboratory-based serological tests. DTS panels were sent to the clinical testing sites for 8 rounds of POC testing using the Abbott SD BIOLINE HIV/Syphilis Duo test (hereafter referred to as SD BIOLINE) and the Chembio Dual Path Platform (DPP) HIV-Syphilis assay. EQA panels were tested at CDC using the Rapid Plasma Reagin (RPR) test and the Treponema pallidum Particle Agglutination assay (TP-PA) for syphilis antibodies. Genetic Systems HIV-1/HIV-2 Plus O EIA, Geenius HIV Supplemental Assay and the Oraquick Advance HIV test were used to detect HIV antibodies in the EQA panels. Results from the reference laboratories and POCT sites were compared to those obtained at the CDC and a percentage agreement was calculated. RESULTS: Qualitative RPR and TP-PA performed at the reference laboratories demonstrated 95.4-100% agreement with CDC results while quantitative RPR and TP-PA tests demonstrated 87.7% and 89.2% agreement, respectively. A 93.8% concordance rate was observed for qualitative HIV testing in laboratories. EQA testing at clinical sites using dual tests showed 98.7% and 99.1% agreement for detection of HIV antibodies and eight out of 10 sites had > 95.8% agreement for syphilis testing. However, two clinical sites showed only 65.0-66.7% agreement for SD BIOLINE and 84.0-86.7% for DPP, respectively, for syphilis testing. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, laboratories demonstrated high EQA performance in this study. Both HIV/syphilis POCTs gave expected results in the clinic-based evaluations using DTS. However, testing errors were identified in a few testing sites suggesting the necessity for continuous training and monitoring the quality of POC testing.

In vitro assessment of dual drug combinations to inhibit growth of Neisseria gonorrhoeae.

The development of resistance to first-line antimicrobial therapies has led to recommendations for combination therapies for the treatment of gonorrhea infection. Recent studies have shown the success of combination therapies in treating patients, but few have reported on the in vitro activities of these drug combinations. An in vitro assessment of azithromycin in combination with gentamicin demonstrated inhibition of growth and suggests that clinical trials may be warranted to assess the utility of this combination in treating gonorrhea infections.

Assessment of Etest as an alternative to agar dilution for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Neisseria gonorrhoeae.

We studied whether the Etest can be used as an alternative to agar dilution to determine antimicrobial susceptibilities of ceftriaxone, cefixime, and cefpodoxime in Neisseria gonorrhoeae surveillance. One hundred fifteen clinical and laboratory isolates of N. gonorrhoeae were tested following the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-approved CLSI standard agar dilution method and, separately, by the Etest according to the manufacturer's recommendations. The MICs were determined and compared. Ten laboratory-generated mutants were used to simulate substantially nonsusceptible specimens. The Etest and agar dilution methods were well correlated. Statistical tests produced regression R2 values of 88%, 82%, and 85% and Pearson correlation coefficients of 92%, 91%, and 92% for ceftriaxone, cefixime, and cefpodoxime, respectively. When paired comparisons were made, the two tests were 88.7%, 80%, and 87% within 1 log2 dilution from each other for ceftriaxone, cefixime, and cefpodoxime, respectively. The within-2-log2 agreements were 99.1%, 98.3%, and 94.8% for ceftriaxone, cefixime, and cefpodoxime, respectively. Notwithstanding the good correlations and the within-2-log2 general agreement, the Etest results produced slightly lower MICs than the agar dilution results. In conclusion, we found that the Etest can be effectively used as an alternative to agar dilution testing to determine the susceptibility of N. gonorrhoeae to ceftriaxone, cefixime, and cefpodoxime, although we recommend further research into extremely resistant isolates. For isolates within the typical range of clinical MICs, reexamination of the Etest interpretation of susceptible and nonsusceptible categories would likely allow for successful transition from agar dilution to the Etest.