Performance of the Kato-Katz method and real time polymerase chain reaction for the diagnosis of soil-transmitted helminthiasis in the framework of a randomised controlled trial: treatment efficacy and day-to-day variation.

backgroundAccurate, scalable and sensitive diagnostic tools are crucial in determining prevalence of soil-transmitted helminths (STH), assessing infection intensities and monitoring treatment efficacy. However, assessments on treatment efficacy comparing traditional microscopic to newly emerging molecular approaches such as quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR) are scarce and hampered partly by lack of an established diagnostic gold standard.

methodsWe compared the performance of the copromicroscopic Kato-Katz method to qPCR in the framework of a randomized controlled trial on Pemba Island, Tanzania, evaluating treatment efficacy based on cure rates of albendazole monotherapy versus ivermectin-albendazole against Trichuris trichiura and concomitant STH infections. Day-to-day variability of both diagnostic methods was assessed to elucidate reproducibility of test results by analysing two stool samples before and two stool samples after treatment of 160 T. trichiura Kato-Katz positive participants, partially co-infected with Ascaris lumbricoides and hookworm, per treatment arm (n = 320). As negative controls, two faecal samples of 180 Kato-Katz helminth negative participants were analysed.

resultsFair to moderate correlation between microscopic egg count and DNA copy number for the different STH species was observed at baseline and follow-up. Results indicated higher sensitivity of qPCR for all three STH species across all time points; however, we found lower test result reproducibility compared to Kato-Katz. When assessed with two samples from consecutive days by qPCR, cure rates were significantly lower for T. trichiura (23.2 vs 46.8%), A. lumbricoides (75.3 vs 100%) and hookworm (52.4 vs 78.3%) in the ivermectin-albendazole treatment arm, when compared to Kato-Katz.

conclusionsqPCR diagnosis showed lower reproducibility of test results compared to Kato-Katz, hence multiple samples per participant should be analysed to achieve a reliable diagnosis of STH infection. Our study confirms that cure rates are overestimated using Kato-Katz alone. Our findings emphasize that standardized and accurate molecular diagnostic tools are urgently needed for future monitoring within STH control and/or elimination programmes.