ArticleJournal of microbiology, immunology, and infection = Wei mian yu gan ran za zhi2026
Performance and reproducibility of Pylori DuoTect® in a high Helicobacter pylori prevalence Latin American population.
Article in Journal of microbiology, immunology, and infection = Wei mian yu gan ran za zhi, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAn accurate, rapid, non-invasive test is critically needed for Helicobacter pylori infection, particularly in under-resourced populations at increased risk of gastric cancer.
aimsThis study compared the performance of Pylori DuoTect® to a spectrum of other tests.
methodsSerum samples collected from Chilean adults with gastrointestinal symptoms who had undergone esophagogastroduodenoscopy were tested with the Pylori DuoTect® test for anti-FliD (flagellar hook-associated protein) and anti-CagA (cytotoxin-associated antigen gene A) antibodies, and compared to testing by urease, histology, whole-cell ELISA, CagA ELISA, and H. pylori-NAPPA array. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and agreement based on Cohen's kappa statistic of the Pylori DuoTect® test to other tests.
resultsBased on histology or rapid urease testing, 156 of 300 individuals (52%) were positive for H. pylori. Based on the Pylori DuoTect® test, 70 (45%) were seropositive for FliD, 94 (60%) for CagA, 127 (81%) for either FliD or CagA, and 37 (24%) for both. Sensitivity of either FliD or CagA detection for a positive H. pylori test by histology or urease testing was 81.1% and specificity was 29.2%. The Pylori DuoTect® test had the highest level of agreement with the CagA NAPPA and ELISA tests (81.3-82.0%).
conclusionsThe Pylori DuoTect® test showed high sensitivity but low specificity for H. pylori detection compared to histology or urease testing. However, it aligned well with performance of CagA detection. While this assay may hold promise based on ease of use, it requires additional optimization and validation to better define the performance characteristics across diverse, global populations.
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.