ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2024
Field laboratory comparison of STANDARD Q Filariasis Antigen Test (QFAT) with Bioline Filariasis Test Strip (FTS) for the detection of Lymphatic Filariasis in Samoa, 2023.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the impact of triple-drug mass drug administration using human and mosquito-based indicators of lymphatic filariasis in Samoa, 2019 - 2024.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Article
- Pan filarial-nested PCR with gelified tubes: a new approach towards point-of-care testing for human filariasisFIRST REVIEW ROUND - REVIEWERS' COMMENTSREVIEWERS' COMMENTS.Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz · 2026Article
- Detection of potential transmission foci of lymphatic filariasis using molecular xenomonitoring in Huahine, French Polynesia.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
- Field evaluation of Standard Q Filariasis Antigen Test for Lymphatic Filariasis (LF) during a pre-transmission assessment survey in Sierra Leone, 2022.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
- Current perspectives in the epidemiology and control of lymphatic filariasis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2025Review
- Laboratory Comparison of Rapid Antigen Diagnostic Tests for Lymphatic Filariasis: STANDARD Q Filariasis Antigen Test (QFAT) Versus Bioline Filariasis Test Strip (FTS).Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
- Genome-Wide Analysis Reveals Key Genes and MicroRNAs Related to Pathogenic Mechanism inPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Performance characteristics of STANDARD Q Filariasis Antigen test (QFAT) to detect filarial antigens of Wuchereria bancrofti in the field.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
- Beyond Tradition: Exploring Cutting-Edge Approaches for Accurate Diagnosis of Human Filariasis.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo monitor the progress of lymphatic filariasis (LF) elimination programmes, field surveys to assess filarial antigen (Ag) prevalence require access to reliable, user-friendly rapid diagnostic tests. We aimed to evaluate the performance of the new Q Filariasis Antigen Test (QFAT) with the currently recommended Filariasis Test Strip (FTS) for detecting the Ag of Wuchereria bancrofti, the causative agent of LF, under field laboratory conditions. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsDuring an LF survey in Samoa, 344 finger-prick blood samples were tested using FTS and QFAT. Microfilariae (Mf) status was determined from blood slides prepared from any sample that reported Ag-positive by either Ag-test. Each test was re-read at 1 hour and the next day to determine the stability of results over time. Overall Ag-positivity by FTS was 29.0% and 30.2% by QFAT. Concordance between the two tests was 93.6% (kappa = 0.85). Of the 101 Mf slides available, 39.6% were Mf-positive, and all were Ag-positive by both tests. Darker test line intensities from Ag-positive FTS were found to predict Mf-positivity (compared to same/lighter line intensities). QFAT had significantly higher reported test result changes than FTS, mostly reported the next day, but fewer changes were reported between 10 minutes to 1hour. The field laboratory team preferred QFAT over FTS due to the smaller blood volume required, better usability, and easier readability. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: QFAT could be a suitable and user-friendly diagnostic alternative for use in the monitoring and surveillance of LF in field surveys based on its similar performance to FTS under field laboratory conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.