Publication:
Comparison of three molecular methods for the detection and speciation of Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparum

dc.contributor.authorPrapaporn Boonmaen_US
dc.contributor.authorPeter R. Christensenen_US
dc.contributor.authorRossarin Suwanarusken_US
dc.contributor.authorRic N. Priceen_US
dc.contributor.authorBruce Russellen_US
dc.contributor.authorUsa Lek-Uthaien_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherMenzies School of Health Researchen_US
dc.contributor.otherJohn Radcliffe Hospitalen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-08-24T01:51:43Z
dc.date.available2018-08-24T01:51:43Z
dc.date.issued2007-10-22en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground. Accurate diagnosis of Plasmodium spp. is essential for the rational treatment of malaria. Despite its many disadvantages, microscopic examination of blood smears remains the current "gold standard" for malaria detection and speciation. PCR assays offer an alternative to microscopy which has been shown to have superior sensitivity and specificity. Unfortunately few comparative studies have been done on the various molecular based speciation methods. Methods. The sensitivity, specificity and cost effectiveness of three molecular techniques were compared for the detection and speciation of Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax from dried blood spots collected from 136 patients in western Thailand. The results from the three molecular speciation techniques (nested PCR, multiplex PCR, and real-time PCR) were used to develop a molecular consensus (two or more identical PCR results) as an alternative gold standard. Results. According to the molecular consensus, 9.6% (13/136) of microscopic diagnoses yielded false negative results. Multiplex PCR failed to detect P. vivax in three mixed isolates, and the nested PCR gave a false positive P. falciparum result in one case. Although the real-time PCR melting curve analysis was the most expensive method, it was 100% sensitive and specific and least time consuming of the three molecular techniques investigated. Conclusion. Although microscopy remains the most appropriate method for clinical diagnosis in a field setting, its use as a gold standard may result in apparent false positive results by superior techniques. Future studies should consider using more than one established molecular methods as a new gold standard to assess novel malaria diagnostic kits and PCR assays. © 2007 Boonma et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.en_US
dc.identifier.citationMalaria Journal. Vol.6, (2007)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1475-2875-6-124en_US
dc.identifier.issn14752875en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-35348868517en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/24503
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=35348868517&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectImmunology and Microbiologyen_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleComparison of three molecular methods for the detection and speciation of Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparumen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=35348868517&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections