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 Pate, M. S.
Right arrow Articles by Hook, E. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pate, M. S.
Right arrow Articles by Hook, E. W., III

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, August 1998, p. 2183-2186, Vol. 36, No. 8
0095-1137/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Evaluation of the Biostar Chlamydia OIA Assay with Specimens from Women Attending a Sexually Transmitted Disease Clinic

Mitchell S. Pate,1 Paula B. Dixon,1 Kim Hardy,1 Mark Crosby,2 and E. W. Hook III1,3,*

Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Alabama at Birmingham,1 and Jefferson County Department of Health,3 Birmingham, Alabama 35294, and Biostar, Inc., Boulder, Colorado 803012

Received 4 November 1997/Returned for modification 30 December 1997/Accepted 24 April 1998

Chlamydia trachomatis infections are the most prevalent sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) in the United States. In acute-care settings such as clinics and emergency rooms, a desirable chlamydia screening assay should exhibit good sensitivity and good specificity and should provide test results while the patient is still present. The Biostar Chlamydia OIA (Biostar, Inc., Boulder, Colo.) is an optical immunoassay (OIA) that provides test results in less than 30 min and that uses a test format that allows office-based testing. This assay is performed entirely at room temperature without the need for rotators or other specialized equipment. The goal of this study was to compare the performance of the Biostar Chlamydia OIA for the detection of C. trachomatis with the performance of cell culture, direct fluorescent-antibody (DFA) assay (Syva MicroTrak; Syva Co., Palo Alto, Calif.), and PCR (Roche Amplicor Chlamydia trachomatis; Roche, Branchburg, N.J.) for the detection of C. trachomatis infections in women attending an urban STD clinic. For calculations of relative test performance (sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values), patient specimens that yielded positive results by two or more of the four assays (cell culture, DFA assay, PCR, and OIA) were classified as "true infections." By these criteria, 42 of 306 total specimens were classified as positive for C. trachomatis (positive prevalence, 13.7%), 11 (3.6%; 10 by PCR and 1 by DFA assay) were positive by a single assay, and 253 (82.7%) were negative by all four tests. All culture-positive specimens were also positive by at least one other assay. Among the culture-negative specimens, 14 (5%) specimens were positive by two of the three non-culture-based assays used. By using the criterion that positivity by at least two of the tests indicated a true infection, the relative sensitivities were as follows: culture and PCR, 92.9% each; Biostar Chlamydia OIA, 73.8%; and DFA assay, 59.5%.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1900 University Blvd., THT-229, Birmingham, AL 35294-0006. Phone: (205) 934-5191. Fax: (205) 934-5155. E-mail: ehook{at}uabid.dom.uab.edu.

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, August 1998, p. 2183-2186, Vol. 36, No. 8
0095-1137/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.


This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Gaydos, C. A (2009). Can we climb out of the "pit" of poorly performing rapid diagnostic tests for chlamydia?. Sex. Transm. Infect. 85: 158-158 [Full Text]  
  • Michel, C-E C, Saison, F G, Joshi, H, Mahilum-Tapay, L M, Lee, H H (2009). Pitfalls of internet-accessible diagnostic tests: inadequate performance of a CE-marked Chlamydia test for home use. Sex. Transm. Infect. 85: 187-189 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Bandea, C. I., Koumans, E. H., Sawyer, M. K., Dover, J., O'Connor, A., Papp, J. R., Unger, E. R., Braxton, J., Black, C. M. (2009). Evaluation of the Rapid BioStar Optical Immunoassay for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in Adolescent Women. J. Clin. Microbiol. 47: 215-216 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Mahilum-Tapay, L., Laitila, V., Wawrzyniak, J. J, Lee, H. H, Alexander, S., Ison, C., Swain, A., Barber, P., Ushiro-Lumb, I., Goh, B. T (2007). New point of care Chlamydia Rapid Test bridging the gap between diagnosis and treatment: performance evaluation study. BMJ 335: 1190-1194 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Peeling, R W (2006). Testing for sexually transmitted infections: a brave new world?. Sex. Transm. Infect. 82: 425-430 [Full Text]  
  • Dean, G L (2006). Near-patient testing will not improve the control of sexually transmitted infections. Sex. Transm. Infect. 82: 509-512 [Full Text]  
  • Swain, G. R., McDonald, R. A., Pfister, J. R., Gradus, M. S., Sedmak, G. V., Singh, A. (2004). Decision Analysis: Point-of-care Chlamydia Testing vs. Laboratory-based Methods. Clin Med Res 2: 29-35 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • WATSON, E. J., TEMPLETON, A., RUSSELL, I., PAAVONEN, J., MARDH, P.-A., STARY, A., PEDERSON, B. S. (2002). The accuracy and efficacy of screening tests for Chlamydia trachomatis: a systematic review. J Med Microbiol 51: 1021-1031 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Chernesky, M., Jang, D., Krepel, J., Sellors, J., Mahony, J. (1999). Impact of Reference Standard Sensitivity on Accuracy of Rapid Antigen Detection Assays and a Leukocyte Esterase Dipstick for Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis Infection in First-Void Urine Specimens from Men. J. Clin. Microbiol. 37: 2777-2780 [Abstract] [Full Text]  


Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»