Dataset Information

Serum GFAP for stroke diagnosis in regions with limited access to brain imaging (BE FAST India).

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Despite a high burden of stroke, access to rapid brain imaging is limited in many middle- and low-income countries. Previous studies have described the astroglial protein GFAP (glial fibrillary acidic protein) as a biomarker of intracerebral hemorrhage. The aim of this study was to test the diagnostic accuracy of GFAP for ruling out intracranial hemorrhage in a prospective cohort of Indian stroke patients.

Patients and methods

This study was conducted in an Indian tertiary hospital (Christian Medical College, Ludhiana). Patients with symptoms suggestive of acute stroke admitted within 12 h of symptom onset were enrolled. Blood samples were collected at hospital admission. Single Molecule Array technology was used for determining serum GFAP concentrations.

Results

A total number of 155 patients were included (70 intracranial hemorrhage, 75 ischemic stroke, 10 stroke mimics). GFAP serum concentrations were elevated in intracranial hemorrhage patients compared to ischemic stroke patients [median (interquartile range) 2.36 µg/L (0.61-7.16) vs. 0.18 µg/L (0.11-0.38), p < 0.001]. Stroke mimics patients had a median GFAP serum level of 0.14 µg/L (0.09-0.26). GFAP values below the cut-off of 0.33 µg/L (area under the curve 0.871) ruled out intracranial hemorrhage with a negative predictive value of 89.7%, (at a sensitivity for detecting intracranial hemorrhage of 90.0%).

Discussion

The high negative predictive value of a GFAP test system allows ruling out patients with intracranial hemorrhage.

Conclusion

In settings where immediate brain imaging is not available, this would enable to implement secondary prevention (e.g., aspirin) in suspected ischemic stroke patients as soon as possible.

SUBMITTER: Kalra LP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8370074 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn 2013, the Comprehensive Case Management Programme (CCMP) was initiated to assess the impact of universal access to diagnosis and treatment and improved surveillance on malaria transmission in different settings in Odisha state, India.MethodsPairs of intervention and control sub-districts (blocks), matched on malaria incidence were selected in four districts with different transmission intensities. CCMP activities included training and supervision, ensuring no stock-outs of malaria tests and drugs, analysing verified surveillance data, stratifying areas based on risk factors, and appointing alternative providers to underserved areas. Composite risk scores were calculated for each sub-centre using principal component analysis. Post-pre changes (2013-2015 versus 2011-2012) for annual blood examination rates (ABER) and annual parasite incidence (API) across intervention and control groups were assessed using difference-in-difference (DID) estimates, adjusted for malaria transmission risk.ResultsIn the intervention sub-centres, the mean increase in ABER was 6.41 tests/sub-centre (95%CI 4.69, 8.14; p<0.01) and in API was 9.2 cases diagnosed/sub-centre (95%CI 5.18, 13.21; p<0.01). The control sub-centres reported lower increases in ABER (2.84 [95%CI 0.35, 5.34]; p<0.05) and API (3.68 [95%CI 0.45, 6.90]; p<0.05). The control-adjusted post-pre changes in API showed that 5.52 more cases (95%CI 0.34, 10.70; p<0.05) were diagnosed, and a 3.6 more cases (95%CI 0.58, 6.56; p<0.05) were tested per sub-centre in the intervention versus control areas. Larger differences in post-pre changes in API between intervention and control sub-centres were registered in the higher transmission-risk areas compared with the lower risk areas. All the changes were statistically significant.ConclusionsIntensive intervention activities targeted at improved access to malaria diagnosis and treatment produced a substantial increase in blood examination and case notification, especially in inaccessible, hard-to-reach pockets. CCMP provides insights into how to achieve universal coverage of malaria services through a routine, state-run programme.

Project description:BackgroundIndia and many other high-burden countries have committed to providing universal access to high-quality diagnosis and drug susceptibility testing (DST) for tuberculosis (TB), but the most cost-effective approach to achieve this goal remains uncertain. Centralized testing at district-level hub facilities with a supporting sample transport network can generate economies of scale, but decentralization to the peripheral level may provide faster diagnosis and reduce losses to follow-up (LTFU).MethodsWe generated functions to evaluate the costs of centralized and decentralized molecular testing for tuberculosis with Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert), a WHO-endorsed test which can be performed at centralized and decentralized levels. We merged the cost estimates with an agent-based simulation of TB transmission in a hypothetical representative region in India to assess the impact and cost-effectiveness of each strategy.ResultsCompared against centralized Xpert testing, decentralization was most favorable when testing volume at decentralized facilities and pre-treatment LTFU were high, and specimen transport network was exclusively established for TB. Assuming equal quality of centralized and decentralized testing, decentralization was cost-saving, saving a median $338,000 (interquartile simulation range [IQR] - $222,000; $889,000) per 20 million people over 10 years, in the most cost-favorable scenario. In the most cost-unfavorable scenario, decentralized testing would cost a median $3161 [IQR $2412; $4731] per disability-adjusted life year averted relative to centralized testing.ConclusionsDecentralization of Xpert testing is likely to be cost-saving or cost-effective in most settings to which these simulation results might generalize. More decentralized testing is more cost-effective in settings with moderate-to-high peripheral testing volumes, high existing clinical LTFU, inability to share specimen transport costs with other disease entities, and ability to ensure high-quality peripheral Xpert testing. Decision-makers should assess these factors when deciding whether to decentralize molecular testing for tuberculosis.