Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Oxford University Press, Journal of Travel Medicine, 3(30), 2023

DOI: 10.1093/jtm/taad041

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Clinical evaluation of BioFire® multiplex-PCR panel for acute undifferentiated febrile illnesses in travellers: a prospective multicentre study

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Background Identifying the causes of Acute Undifferentiated Febrile Illness (AUFI) is key to improve the management of returning travellers with fever. We evaluated a BioFire®FilmArray® prototype panel of multiplex nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) targeting different relevant pathogens in travellers returning with fever. Methods Prospective, multicentre study to evaluate a prototype panel in whole blood samples of adult international travellers presenting with AUFI in three European travel Clinics/Hospitals (November 2017–November 2019). We evaluated 15 target analytes: Plasmodium spp., Plasmodium falciparum, Plasmodium knowlesi, Plasmodium malariae, Plasmodium ovale, Plasmodium vivax, chikungunya virus, dengue virus, Zika virus, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia spp., Leptospira spp., Orientia tsutsugamushi, Rickettsia spp. and Salmonella spp. Results were compared with composite reference standards (CRSs) for each target infection, including direct methods [smear microscopy, rapid diagnostic test (RDT), reference NAAT and blood cultures] and indirect methods (paired serology). Findings Among 455 travellers with AUFI, 229 target infections were diagnosed; the prototype panel detected 143 (overall sensitivity and specificity of 62.5 and 99.8%, respectively). The panel identified all Plasmodium infections (n = 82). Sensitivity for dengue (n = 71) was 92.9, 80.8 and 68.5% compared with RDT, NAAT and CRS, respectively. Compared with direct methods and CRS, respectively, the prototype panel detected 4/4 and 4/6 chikungunya, 2/2 and 4/29 Leptospira spp., 1/1 and 1/6 O. tsutsugamushi and 2/2 and 2/55 Rickettsia spp., but 0/2 and 0/10 Zika, 0/1 and 0/11 A. phagocytophylum and 0/3 Borrelia spp. diagnosed by serology and only 1/7 Salmonella spp. diagnosed by blood cultures. 77/86 (89.5%) infections not detected by the panel were diagnosed by serology. Interpretation The prototype panel allowed rapid and reliable diagnosis for malaria, dengue and chikungunya. Further improvements are needed to improve its sensitivity for Zika and important travel-related bacterial infections.