Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2025
Evaluating the MedMira Multiplo® Complete Syphilis (TP/nTP) antibody test in a sexually transmitted infection clinic in Ottawa, Canada: increased rapid diagnosis and improved antibiotic stewardship.
Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06586905 (A Cross-sectional Investigational Study to Evaluate the Sensitivity, Specificity, and Utility of the MedMira Inc. Multiplo® Complete Syphilis), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
A Cross-sectional Investigational Study to Evaluate the Sensitivity, Specificity, and Utility of the MedMira Inc. Multiplo® Complete Syphilis (TP/nTP) Antibody Test (POCT) to Diagnose Infectious Syphilis in Participants Attending the Sexual Health Clinic in Ottawa, Ontario. The MedMira Inc. Multiplo® Complete Syphilis (TP/nTP) Antibody Test is Authorized for Investigational Use.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Rapid/point-of-care syphilis testing in high-income countries: insights and implementation challenges from the authors' experience in Canada.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSyphilis now affects every population and serology is the mainstay of diagnosis. The issue is that serology has a turnaround time of several days. One solution is point-of-care tests (POCTs), which can provide results in minutes. We consequently evaluated the MedMira Multiplo® Complete Syphilis Test in an STI clinic in Ottawa, Canada.
methodsAnyone 16 + years old who consented and was undergoing syphilis testing at our clinic was eligible. Those who enrolled completed the POCT and saw a clinician to review their result. We calculated sensitivities and specificities for the POCT, compared to serology and diagnosis.
resultsFrom August 2024 to May 2025, we performed 622 syphilis POCTs on 600 participants. Compared to serology when chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) and Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TP.PA) tests were reactive, the POCT treponemal (TP) test had a sensitivity of 90.1% and specificity of 97.9%. Compared to any dilution of rapid plasma reagin (RPR), the POCT non-treponemal (nTP) test had a sensitivity of 82.5% and specificity of 99.1%. When we stratified POCT nTP results based on RPR titers, the POCT nTP had a sensitivity of 94.1% for RPR dilutions ≥ 1:8. Compared to serology, the POCT identified 91.4% of new syphilis infections and 97% of infectious syphilis.
conclusionsPOCTs informed clinical syphilis management. While most research has focused on how POCTs can facilitate treatment, in our study, there was a second major utility: to withhold antibiotics when recommended as empiric treatment but when the patient does not have active syphilis. Future research on syphilis POCTs should focus on their abilities to rule in and rule out infections.
trial registrationNCT06586905 (Registered Sept 4, 2024).
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.