RESULTS: Several reaction conditions of the LAMP reaction were optimized to ensure efficient amplification of the target DNA. The sensitivity of the developed LAMP assay obtained using a pure Leptospira culture was 2 × 104 copies of genomic DNA per reaction (equivalent to 0.1 ng) for a 40-minute reaction time. No cross-reactions were observed in the LAMP reaction against a series of non-leptospiral bacteria, indicating a specific reaction. The applicability of the LAMP assay was demonstrated on human blood and urine specimens collected from suspected leptospirosis patients and rat kidney specimens collected from suspected leptospirosis outbreak areas and high-risk areas. The developed LAMP assay demonstrated a higher detection rate for leptospiral DNA compared with the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay, possibly due to the presence of inhibitory substances, especially in rat kidney specimens, to which the PCR method is more susceptible. The present findings also highlight the importance of urine sample collection from patients for routine monitoring of the disease.
CONCLUSIONS: In short, the developed LAMP assay can serve as a feasible alternative tool for the diagnosis of leptospirosis and be used for epidemiological and environmental surveillance of the disease, considering its robustness, rapidity, sensitivity, and specificity, as demonstrated in this study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The clinic-based prospective evaluation included all suspected measles cases captured by routine measles surveillance at 34 purposely selected clinics in 15 health districts in Malaysia between September 2019 and June 2020, following day-long regional trainings on RDT use. Following informed consent, four specimens were collected from each suspected case, including those routinely collected for standard surveillance [serum for EIA and throat swabs for quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR)] together with capillary blood and oral fluid tested with RDTs during the study. RDT impact was evaluated by comparing the rapidity of measles public health response between the pre-RDT implementation (December 2018 to August 2019) and RDT implementation periods (September 2019 to June 2020). To assess knowledge, attitudes, and practices of RDT use, staff involved in the public health management of measles at the selected sites were surveyed.
RESULTS: Among the 436 suspect cases, agreement of direct visual readings of measles RDT devices between two health clinic staff was 99% for capillary blood (k = 0.94) and 97% for oral fluid (k = 0.90) specimens. Of the total, 45 (10%) were positive by measles IgM EIA (n = 44, including five also positive by RT-qPCR) or RT-qPCR only (n = 1), and 38 were positive by RDT (using either capillary blood or oral fluid). Using measles IgM EIA or RT-qPCR as reference, RDT sensitivity using capillary blood was 43% (95% CI: 30%-58%) and specificity was 98% (95% CI: 96%-99%); using oral fluid, sensitivity (26%, 95% CI: 15%-40%) and specificity (97%, 95% CI: 94%-98%) were lower. Nine months after training, RDT knowledge was high among staff involved with the public health management of measles (average quiz score of 80%) and was highest among those who received formal training (88%), followed by those trained during supervisory visits (83%). During the RDT implementation period, the number of days from case confirmation until initiation of public response decreased by about 5 days.
CONCLUSION: The measles IgM RDT shows >95% inter-reader agreement, high retention of RDT knowledge, and a more rapid public health response. However, despite ≥95% RDT specificity using capillary blood or oral fluid, RDT sensitivity was <45%. Higher-powered studies using highly specific IgM assays and systematic RT-qPCR for case confirmation are needed to establish the role of RDT in measles elimination settings.