ArticleMalaria journal2025
Clinical evaluation of a novel Mologic malaria Plasmodium falciparum LDH-dependent lateral flow rapid diagnostic test diagnostic accuracy: a cross-sectional study, Sudan.
Article in Malaria journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMalaria diagnosis by Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) is challenged by the newly emerging histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2) gene deletion in the Plasmodium falciparum species. The alternative lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)-dependent RDTs suffer from low sensitivity, and improvement in the sensitivity of LDH RDTs is the cornerstone for detecting the (HRP2) gene deletion species. This study aimed to evaluate a novel, improved Mologic Malaria Pf LDH-dependent RDT for the diagnosis of P. falciparum malaria in partnership with the Foundation for Innovative Diagnostics (FIND), Switzerland.
methodsThis is a descriptive cross-sectional study evaluating the clinical performance of the improved Mologic LDH- RDT in two rural sites in Khartoum state, Sudan. Five hundred patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of malaria in the two primary care health centres were enrolled after signing informed consent. Finger-prick blood was collected for examination with microscopy, the index Mologic LDH RDT, the comparator RDT, and preparation of DBS for PCR, the reference method.
resultsThe mean age of the study subjects was 31 years, ranging from 5 to 80 years. Out of 500 patients, 210 (42%) were positive by PCR, 200 (40%) by expert microscopy, 193 (38.6%) by index Mologic LDH RDT, and 199 (39.8%) by comparator RDT. The sensitivities of microscopy, index RDT, and comparator RDT were 95.24% (95% CI, 91.4-97.6), 91.9% (95% CI, 87.3-95.2), and 93.81% (95% CI, 89.6-96.6), respectively. All tests were nearly 100% specific for the detection of P. falciparum parasites. The concordance test showed almost perfect agreement with the reference test (κ = 0.929). Six samples were P. falciparum HRP2 Ag negative and were detected by Mologic LDH RDT. A limitation of this study is that there is no confirmation of HRP2 gene deletion by PCR.
conclusionThe novel Mologic LDH RDT showed performance concordant with standard expert microscopy and the comparator HRP2-based RDT. The sensitivity of the Mologic LDH RDT makes it suitable for the clinical management of P. falciparum HRP2 negative malaria.
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.