↓ Skip to main content

Diagnostic performance of the loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) based illumigene® malaria assay in a non-endemic region

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Diagnostic performance of the loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) based illumigene® malaria assay in a non-endemic region
Published in
Malaria Journal, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12936-017-2065-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne-Sophie De Koninck, Lieselotte Cnops, Mattias Hofmans, Jan Jacobs, Dorien Van den Bossche, Jan Philippé

Abstract

Light microscopy and antigen-based rapid diagnostic tests are the primary diagnostic tools for detecting malaria, although being labour-intensive and frequently challenged by lack of personnel's experience and low levels of parasite density. The latter being especially important in non-endemic settings. Novel molecular techniques aim to overcome this drawback. The objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of the illumigene malaria assay(®) (Meridian Bioscience) compared to microscopy, RDT and real-time PCR. This loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay is a qualitative in vitro diagnostic test for the direct detection of Plasmodium spp. DNA in human venous whole blood samples. The illumigene assay was assessed on a retrospective panel of stored blood samples (n = 103) from returned travellers and external quality control samples (n = 12). Additionally the assay was prospectively assessed on 30 fresh routine samples with a request for malaria diagnosis. The illumigene assay was compared to microscopy, RDT and Plasmodium species specific real-time PCR. In the retrospective evaluation, the illumigene assay showed 100% agreement with the real-time PCR, RDT and microscopy yielding a sensitivity and specificity of 100% (95% CI 95.1-100% and 89.7-100%, respectively). Seven samples from patients recently treated for Plasmodium falciparum infection that were RDT positive and microscopy negative yielded positive test results. The performance of the illumigene assay equals that of microscopy combined with RDT in the prospective panel with three false negative RDT results and one false negative microscopy result. Excellent concordance with PCR was observed. The limit of detection of the assay approached 0.5 parasites/µL for both P. falciparum and Plasmodium vivax. In non-endemic regions where the diagnostic process for malaria infections is questioned by lack of experience and low levels of parasite densities, the illumigene assay can be of value. Due to its high sensitivity, the LAMP assay may be considered as primary diagnostic test. The results of this study indicate that negative screen results do not need further confirmation. However, before implementation, this approach needs to be confirmed in larger, prospective studies. A shortcoming of this assay is that no species identification nor determination of parasite density are possible.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 24%
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Other 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 5 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Engineering 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 7 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 May 2018.
All research outputs
#6,867,848
of 12,942,450 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#2,102
of 3,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,058
of 314,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#323
of 490 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,942,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,801 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,983 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 490 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.