Dataset Information

Evaluating the diagnostic test accuracy of molecular xenomonitoring methods for characterising the community burden of Onchocerciasis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Molecular xenomonitoring (MX), the detection of parasite nucleic acid in the vector population, is recommended for onchocerciasis surveillance in elimination settings. However, the sensitivity of MX for detecting onchocerciasis-positive communities has not previously been evaluated. MX may have additional applications for control programmes but its utility is restricted by a limited understanding of the relationship between MX results and human prevalence.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of studies reporting the prevalence of Onchocerca volvulus DNA in wild-caught Simulium spp. flies (MX rate) and corresponding prevalence of microfilaria (mf) in humans. We evaluated the sensitivity of MX for detecting onchocerciasis-positive communities and describe the characteristics of studies with reduced sensitivity. We conducted a linear regression to evaluate the relationship between mf prevalence and MX rate.

Results

We identified 15 relevant studies, with 13 studies comprising 34 study communities included in the quantitative analyses. Most communities were at advanced stages towards elimination and had no or extremely low human prevalence. MX detected positive flies in every study area with >1% mf prevalence, with the exception of one study conducted in the Venezuelan Amazonian focus. We identified a significant relationship between the two measurements, with mf prevalence accounting for half of the variation in MX rate (R2 0.50, p<0.001).

Conclusion

MX is sensitive to communities with ongoing onchocerciasis transmission. It has potential to predict human mf prevalence, but further data is required to understand this relationship, particularly from MX surveys conducted earlier in control programmes before transmission has been interrupted.

SUBMITTER: Pryce J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8509893 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:A pretest probability must be selected to calculate data to help clinicians, guideline boards and policy makers interpret diagnostic accuracy parameters. When multiple analyses for the same target condition are compared, identical pretest probabilities might be selected to facilitate the comparison. Some pretest probabilities may lead to exaggerations of the patient harms or benefits, and guidance on how and why to select a specific pretest probability is minimally described. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the data sources and methods used in Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) reviews for determining pretest probabilities to facilitate the interpretation of DTA parameters. A secondary aim was to assess the use of identical pretest probabilities to compare multiple meta-analyses within the same target condition. METHODS:Cochrane DTA reviews presenting at least one meta-analytic estimate of the sensitivity and/or specificity as a primary analysis published between 2008 and January 2018 were included. Study selection and data extraction were performed by one author and checked by other authors. Observed data sources (e.g. studies in the review, or external sources) and methods to select pretest probabilities (e.g. median) were categorized. RESULTS:Fifty-nine DTA reviews were included, comprising of 308 meta-analyses. A pretest probability was used in 148 analyses. Authors used included studies in the DTA review, external sources, and author consensus as data sources for the pretest probability. Measures of central tendency with or without a measure of dispersion were used to determine the pretest probabilities, with the median most commonly used. Thirty-two target conditions had at least one identical pretest probability for all of the meta-analyses within their target condition. About half of the used identical pretest probabilities were inside the prevalence ranges from all analyses within a target condition. CONCLUSIONS:Multiple sources and methods were used to determine (identical) pretest probabilities in Cochrane DTA reviews. Indirectness and severity of downstream consequences may influence the acceptability of the certainty in calculated data with pretest probabilities. Consider: whether to present normalized frequencies, the influence of pretest probabilities on normalized frequencies, and whether to use identical pretest probabilities for meta-analyses in a target condition.