Performance of Treponemal Tests for the Diagnosis of Syphilis.

BACKGROUND: Treponemal immunoassays are increasingly used for syphilis screening with the reverse sequence algorithm. There are few data describing performance of treponemal immunoassays compared to traditional treponemal tests in patients with and without syphilis. METHODS: We calculated sensitivity and specificity of 7 treponemal assays: (1) ADVIA Centaur (chemiluminescence immunoassay [CIA]); (2) Bioplex 2200 (microbead immunoassay); (3) fluorescent treponemal antibody absorption test (FTA-ABS); (4) INNO-LIA (line immunoassay); (5) LIAISON CIA; (6) Treponema pallidum particle agglutination assay (TPPA); and (7) Trep-Sure (enzyme immunoassay [EIA]), using a reference standard combining clinical diagnosis and serology results. Sera were collected between May 2012-January 2013. Cases were characterized as: (1) current clinical diagnosis of syphilis: primary, secondary, early latent, late latent; (2) prior treated syphilis only; (3) no evidence of current syphilis, no prior history of syphilis, and at least 4 of 7 treponemal tests negative. RESULTS: Among 959 participants, 262 had current syphilis, 294 had prior syphilis, and 403 did not have syphilis. FTA-ABS was less sensitive for primary syphilis (78.2%) than the immunoassays or TPPA (94.5%-96.4%) (all P ≤ .01). All immunoassays were 100% sensitive for secondary syphilis, 95.2%-100% sensitive for early latent disease, and 86.8%-98.5% sensitive in late latent disease. TPPA had 100% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Treponemal immunoassays demonstrated excellent sensitivity for secondary, early latent, and seropositive primary syphilis. Sensitivity of FTA-ABS in primary syphilis was poor. Given its high specificity and superior sensitivity, TPPA is preferred to adjudicate discordant results with the reverse sequence algorithm over the FTA-ABS.

Correlation of Treponemal Immunoassay Signal Strength Values with Reactivity of Confirmatory Treponemal Testing.

Automated treponemal immunoassays are used for syphilis screening with the reverse-sequence algorithm; discordant results (e.g., enzyme immunoassay [EIA] reactive and reactive plasma reagin [RPR] nonreactive) are resolved with a second treponemal test. We conducted a study to determine automated immunoassay signal strength values consistently correlating with reactive confirmatory treponemal testing. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of four automated immunoassays (BioPlex 2200 microbead immunoassay [MBIA], Liaison chemiluminescence immunoassay [CIA], Advia-Centaur CIA, and Trep-Sure EIA) and three manual assays (Treponema pallidum particle agglutination [TP-PA], fluorescent treponemal antibody absorption [FTA-ABS] test, and Inno-LIA line immunoassay). We compared signal strength values of automated immunoassays and positive and negative agreement. Among 1,995 specimens, 908 (45.5%) were true positives (≥4/7 tests reactive) and 1,087 (54.5%) were true negatives (≥4/7 tests nonreactive). Positive agreement ranged from 86.1% (83.7 to 88.2%) for FTA-ABS to 99.7% (99.0 to 99.9%) for Advia-Centaur CIA; negative agreement ranged from 86.3% (84.1 to 88.2%) for Trep-Sure EIA to 100% for TP-PA (99.6 to 100%). Increasing signal strength values correlated with increasing reactivity of confirmatory testing (P < 0.0001 for all automated immunoassays by Cochran-Armitage test for trend). All automated immunoassays had signal strength cutoffs corresponding to ≥4/7 reactive treponemal tests. BioPlex MBIA and Liaison CIA had signal strength cutoffs correlating with ≥99% and 100% TP-PA reactivity, respectively. The Advia-Centaur CIA and Trep-Sure EIA had signal strength cutoffs correlating with at least 95% TP-PA reactivity. All automated immunoassays had signal strength cutoffs correlating with at least 95% FTA-ABS reactivity. Assuming that a 95% level of confirmation is adequate, these signal strength values can be used in lieu of confirmatory testing with TP-PA and FTA-ABS.