JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gaydos, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Quinn, T. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gaydos, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Quinn, T. C.
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, July 2004, p. 3041-3045, Vol. 42, No. 7
0095-1137/04/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.7.3041-3045.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Comparison of Three Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in Urine Specimens

Charlotte A. Gaydos,1* Mellisa Theodore,1 Nicholas Dalesio,1 Billie Jo Wood,1 and Thomas C. Quinn1,2

Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore,1 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland2

Received 14 January 2004/ Returned for modification 17 March 2004/ Accepted 13 April 2004

Traditionally, culture and immunoassays have been performed for the detection of sexually transmitted diseases, including Chlamydia trachomatis. However, these assays may often require invasive specimen collection methods, such as female cervical and male urethral swabs. Recently, nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) have been approved for testing for the presence of C. trachomatis in urine samples. Our objective was to compare the sensitivities and specificities of C. trachomatis detection in urine samples with three NAATs: the Abbott LCx (LCx), BD ProbeTec ET (ProbeTec), and Gen-Probe APTIMA Combo 2 (AC2). Urine specimens (n = 506) were collected from both symptomatic and asymptomatic males and females from various high school health clinics. Specimens were tested for C. trachomatis with the three NAATs, and a true-positive result was defined as any two positive NAATs. The C. trachomatis prevalence was 14.8% (75 of 506 samples). Of the 75 urine samples defined as true positives, LCx detected 72, ProbeTec 72, and AC2 detected 75. The sensitivities of LCx, ProbeTec, and AC2 for C. trachomatis detection were 96.0, 96.0, and 100%, and the specificities were 99.1, 100, and 98.8%, respectively. Four of five samples that were positive with AC2 and negative with LCx and ProbeTec were found to be positive with an alternative target TMA-based NAAT, APTIMA C. trachomatis, suggesting that they may have been true positives. Two of four uniquely positive LCx samples available for subsequent testing were both found to be positive by Roche PCR. We found that the LCx, ProbeTec, and AC2 NAATs are highly sensitive and specific methods for the detection of C. trachomatis in urine specimens and can be recommended for noninvasive screening of C. trachomatis in urine.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Johns Hopkins University, 720 Rutland Ave., Ross 1159, Baltimore, MD 21205. Phone: (410) 614-0932. Fax: (410) 614-9775. E-mail: cgaydos{at}jhmi.edu.

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, July 2004, p. 3041-3045, Vol. 42, No. 7
0095-1137/04/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.7.3041-3045.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.



This article has been cited by other articles:



Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 2004 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.