Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40153711›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2025

Evaluation of a rapid lateral flow assay for the detection of taeniosis and cysticercosis at district hospital level in Tanzania: A prospective multicentre diagnostic accuracy study.

Inge Van Damme, Chiara Trevisan, Mwemezi Kabululu, Dominik Stelzle, Charles E Makasi, Veronika Schmidt-Urbaneja, Kabemba E Mwape, Chishimba Mubanga, Gideon Zulu, Karen Shou Møller and 10 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Inge Van DammeDepartment of Translational Physiology, Infectiology and Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-2488-1132
Chiara TrevisanDepartment of Translational Physiology, Infectiology and Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Mwemezi KabululuTanzania Livestock Research Institute (TALIRI), Central Zone Office, Mpwapwa, Dodoma, Tanzania.
Dominik StelzleDepartment of Neurology, Center for Global Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Charles E MakasiNational Institute for Medical Research, Muhimbili Medical Research Centre, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Veronika Schmidt-UrbanejaDepartment of Neurology, Center for Global Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Kabemba E MwapeDepartment of Clinical studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Chishimba MubangaDepartment of Disease Control, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Gideon ZuluDepartment of Clinical studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Karen Shou MøllerDanish Veterinary and Food Administration, Glostrup, Denmark.
Famke JansenDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Dries ReyndersDepartment of Applied Mathematics, Computer Science and Statistics, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
John NohParasitic Diseases Branch, Division of Parasitic Diseases, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GeorgiaUnited States of America.
Sukwan HandaliParasitic Diseases Branch, Division of Parasitic Diseases, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GeorgiaUnited States of America.
Emmanuel BottieauDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Andrea S WinklerDepartment of Neurology, Center for Global Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Pierre DornyDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Pascal MagnussenDepartment of Immunology and Microbiology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Sarah GabriëlDepartment of Translational Physiology, Infectiology and Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Bernard NgowiNational Institute for Medical Research, Muhimbili Medical Research Centre, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

Funding

European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials PartnershipGerman Federal Ministry of Education and Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The TS POC test, Taenia solium point-of-care test, is a two-strip lateral flow assay using the recombinant antigen rES33 on the TS POC T test strip, and rT24H on the TS POC CC test strip, to detect antibodies against T. solium taeniosis and cysticercosis, respectively. The objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of the TS POC test for the detection of T. solium taeniosis and cysticercosis in individuals attending district hospitals in Tanzania. In this prospective two-phase diagnostic accuracy study, we recruited participants aged 10 and above, excluding pregnant women and those with acute severe illness. Participants were consecutively recruited in three cohorts according to their signs/symptoms: compatible with neurocysticercosis (cohort 1), intestinal worm infections (cohort 2), and other signs/symptoms (cohort 3). Lacking a gold standard test for both infections, diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using results of two coprological and two serological tests for taeniosis, and three serological tests for cysticercosis, in a Bayesian Latent Class Model approach. The TS POC test was conducted on 601 participants in cohort 1, 1661 participants in cohort 2, and 662 participants in cohort 3. Most individuals tested negative on both TS POC test strips, with proportions of 83% (n = 496), 97% (n = 1613) and 97% (n = 641) in cohorts 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Complete case data were available for 120, 114, and 53 participants for taeniosis, and 126, 122, and 55 participants for cysticercosis. Sensitivity values for the TS POC T test strip were 50.2% [95% credible interval 4.9 - 96.4], 40.8% [2.2 - 95.2], and 40.4% [2.3 - 95.0], while specificity values were 98.6% [97.1 - 99.6], 99.3% [98.7 - 99.7] and 99.4% [98.5 - 99.9], respectively. For the TS POC CC test strip, the sensitivity was 77.5% [37.8 - 99.2], 24.9% [95% CI 6.4 - 52.7] and 44.2% [6.6 - 91.5], and the specificity 92.3% [86.5 - 98.8], 99.1% [97.8 - 100], and 98.1% [96.1 - 99.7] across the respective cohorts. Although the TS POC test has a low sensitivity, it demonstrates a high specificity, which may have clinical utility to guide treatment and diagnostic decisions, or in epidemiological studies. An important strength of this study lies in its assessment of the TS POC test under real-world conditions, revealing divergent estimates across distinct cohorts. The study underscores the suboptimal performance of existing tests under field conditions, emphasizing the need to enhance and validate these tests for better performance in practical real-world settings. Registration number: PACTR201712002788898.

Indexed as

CysticercosisPoint-of-Care TestingTaeniasisTaenia soliumAdolescentAdultAgedAnimalsAntibodies, HelminthAntigens, HelminthChildFemaleHospitals, DistrictHumansMaleMiddle AgedAntibodies, HelminthAntigens, Helminth

Identifiers

PMID40153711
PMCPMC11977959

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.