https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6489-167X
Figures
Abstract
Malaria rapid diagnostic test (mRDT) kit is one of the techniques for diagnosing malaria. Due to its inherent advantages over the microscopy technique, several brands of the kit have flooded malaria endemic countries, without prior in-country evaluation. Two of such mRDT kits are Oscar (India) and Standard Q (Korea Republic). In this study, the performance of Oscar and Standard Q mRDT kits were compared to First Response (India) and CareStart (USA) mRDTs, which have been evaluated and deployed for use approved by the Ministry of Health (MOH). In this comparative study, whole blood samples were collected from patients suspected of malaria. Plasmodium falciparum was detected in each sample using nested polymerase chain reaction (nPCR), microscopy and the four mRDTs. The sensitivities, specificities, accuracies, positive and negative predictive values and accuracies of the mRDTs were determined using nPCR as a reference technique. Kappa statistic was used to determine the level of agreement among the techniques. Two hundred (200) blood samples were analyzed in this study. The overall detection rates of P. falciparum by microscopy, First Response, CareStart, Oscar-PfHRP2, Standard Q mRDT kits and nPCR were 31.5%, 34.5%, 33.5%, 32%, 31% and 43% (x2 = 6.1, p = 0.046), respectively. The accuracies of CareStart and First Response were comparable (90.5% vs. 89.5%). Further, comparing their sensitivities, Oscar-PfHRP2 was 74.4% (95% confidence interval (CI): 63.9–83.2) while that of Standard Q was 72.1% (95% CI: 61.4–81.2), with comparable accuracies (Oscar-PfHRP2–89% and Standard Q -88%). Apart from First Response that was 98.3% specific, the others were 100% specific. Kappa test revealed perfect diagnostic agreement (κ = 0.90–0.98) among the four mRDTs. That notwithstanding, Oscar-PfHRP2 agreed better with CareStart (κ = 0.94) and First Response (κ = 0.92) compared to the agreement between Standard Q and, CareStart (κ = 0.92) and First Response (κ = 0.90). Taken together, the diagnostic performance of the four mRDT kits were statistically similar. That notwithstanding, new mRDT kits should be evaluated prior to deployment for use.
Citation: Aninagyei E, Deku JG, Yemofio KT, Quainoo E, Ntiri KA, Yaro E, et al. (2024) Comparative evaluation of the diagnostic accuracies of four different malaria rapid diagnostic test kits available in Ghana. PLoS ONE 19(5): e0302840. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0302840
Editor: Hassen Mamo, Addis Ababa University, ETHIOPIA
Received: November 10, 2023; Accepted: April 14, 2024; Published: May 7, 2024
Copyright: © 2024 Aninagyei et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: The study data are available from the Figshare database (doi: 10.6084/m9.figshare.25339297.
Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Abbreviations: FDA, Food and Drugs Authority; GSA, Ghana Standard Authority; PfHRP2, Plasmodium falciparum histidine-rich protein 2; ISO, International organization for standardization; mRDT, Malaria rapid diagnostic test; nPCR, nested Polymerase Chain Reaction; NMCP, National Malaria Control Program; NMEP, National Malaria Elimination Program; NPV, Negative Predictive Value; PLDH, Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase; PPV, Positive Predictive Value
Background
Microscopy remains the gold standard for diagnosing malaria in endemic areas [1]. This is because the causative organism for malaria is directly observed during microscopy. In spite of the advantages of malaria microscopy, the technique has several limitations, including higher detection limits, being operator dependent, lack of quality assured reagents and long turnaround time [2,3]. To circumvent these demerits of microscopy, malaria rapid diagnostic testing (mRDT) kits emerged in the 1990s [4] into largely an unregulated markets. The performance of some of the kits was a major concern to users [5]. However, mRDT kits have gained popularity over the years due to their simplicity, high sensitivity, amenable to different testing conditions, short turnaround time and non-reliance on electricity [6]. As at 2019, there are over 200 different mRDT kits available globally and about 66% are found in sub-Saharan Africa [7]. Though there are variations among the mRDT kits, the parasite detecting principles are similar [7]. Irrespective of the brand manufacturers of the these kits, they detect either Plasmodium falciparum histidine-rich protein 2 (PfHRP2), Plasmodium aldolase and Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH) [8].
In Ghana, mRDT kits are procured and distributed by the MOH, through the National Malaria Elimination Program (NMEP). Kits supplied through the national programs are always evaluated and approved by independent bodies such as the Food and Drugs Authority (FDA) and the Ghana Standard Authority (GSA). Suitable products are then deployed for use through the Central, Regional and District medical stores. Currently, two mRDT kits, namely, First Response (India) and CareStart (USA) are being used for malaria diagnosis, throughout the country. These kits are not sold in the Ghanaian open market.
However, due to the user-friendliness of mRDT kits and irregular supply by the Government of Ghana [9], several kits are imported into the country without prior evaluation of their sensitivities. At the time of this study, Oscar (India) and Standard Q (Republic of Korea) were widely used in the country. There was no evidence that Oscar and Standard Q mRDT kits were supplied through the Government of Ghana, and the product package did not have any evidence to show prior validation by the regulatory agencies in Ghana. To ensure public health confidence in the use of these mRDT kits, this study evaluated and compared the diagnostic accuracies of the ‘unapproved’ kits to the MOH deployed kits, using nested polymerase chain reactions (nPCR) as a reference technique, in patients suspected of malaria. The nPCR was used as a reference technique due to its superior detection advantage over other malaria diagnostic methods [10].
Methodology
Study design and sources of the mRDT kits
This prospective cross-sectional study assessed the accuracies of four mRDT kits available in Ghana. Of the four mRDT kits, two (First Response and CareStart) are supplied to health facilities through the NMEP, after prior evaluation while the other two (Oscar and Standard Q) were bought from the open market. Table 1 shows the manufacturer details of the mRDT kits.
Study sites, populations, sampling period and storage prior to analyses
Patients suspected of malaria were recruited from two rural and one urban health facilities in three different districts in the Greater Accra region of Ghana. The rural facilities were Obom (Ga Central municipal) and Mayera-Faase (Ga West municipal) Health Centers, and the urban facility was Taifa Polyclinic (Ga East municipal). Samples were collected from December 2021 –March 2022, under the ethics approval number GHS-ERC002/03/18, issued by the Ghana Health Service Ethics Review Committee. The samples used for this study were collected for a study supported by Malaria Genetic Epidemiology in the United Kingdom. The study sought to release an open dataset of P. falciparum genome variation in 20,000 worldwide samples. The findings of that study has since been published [11]. In that study, venous blood samples were randomly collected from patients suspected of malaria, with prior written consent. Adult patients provided self-written consent whilst in the case of minors (< 18 years), written consent was obtained from accompanying adults, after which child assent was sort from the minor (< 12 years). Suspected patient with malaria was defined as having fever, chills, general feeling of discomfort, headache, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and/or muscle or joint pain. Study participants across all ages without prior antimalarial chemotherapy were drugs were selected. Patients that declined to partake in the study and patients too sick to provide relevant study responses were excluded from the study. Whole blood were collected in an ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes, stored at 4°C whereas dried-blood spots (DBS), prepared with ~50 μL of the whole blood were stored at room temperature (25°C), until molecular analysis. Approval to re-use the archived samples were obtained from the University of Health and Allied Sciences Ethics Review Committee (UHAS-REC A.11 [24] 22–23). Analyses of archived samples (mRDT and PCR) were done from September 2022 –November 2022.
Sample size determination
Using the Cochrane’s formula, N = , where n is the sample size, z the confidence level at 95% (standard value of 1.96), d the margin of error at 5% (standard value of 0.05), the sample size of 160 was arrived at, using 11.8% malaria RDT prevalence of malaria in the Greater Accra [12].
Laboratory analyses
Malaria microscopy.
With about 6 μL of whole blood, a thick smear was done, air-dried, and stained with 10% Giemsa stain for 10 minutes (min) [13]. Parasites were detected using the x100 oil immersion objective. In positive samples, parasites were quantified using the WHO protocol [14]. According to the protocol, parasitaemia was estimated by dividing the number of asexual parasites per at least 200 leukocytes and multiplied by estimated white blood cell count of 8000 cells/μL.
Malaria RDT testing.
The manufacturer’s procedures for detecting P. falciparum specific histidine-rich proteins 2 (PfHRP2) proteins in the four mRDT kits were the same. Briefly, 5 μL venous blood were dropped on the sample column of the rapid test kit. Two drops of assay diluent were added to the buffer window of the kit. Results were read after 30, 20 and 15 min for First Response, CareStart, Oscar and Standard Q, respectively. For each mRDT kit, tests with two red lines at both the control and the test band was considered as positive whereas tests with only one red band at the control band was considered as negative. In the case of the Oscar mRDT, a band at the PfHRP2 column and a control band was deemed positive for P. falciparum. Only one line at the test band without one at the control band was an invalid test. All invalid tests were repeated [15]. The study focused on only P. falciparum because it causes almost 99% of malaria in Ghana [16].
Molecular detection of P. falciparum in the DBS.
Nucleic acid extraction using saponin-chelex method. The DBS was cut into pieces and placed in 2.0 mL microcentrifuge tubes. Exactly, 1 mL of freshly prepared 0.5% saponin in 1× phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) was added to each tube to completely soak the filter paper. The set up was vortexed and incubated at 4°C overnight. After the overnight incubation, the microcentrifuge tube was centrifuged at 12000 revolutions per minute (rpm) for 2 min and the supernatant comprising saponin and the debris, evacuated by suctioning. One milliliter of 1×PBS was then added to each sample and centrifuged again at 12000 rpm for 2 min. The process was repeated until there was no heme (red color) seen in the sample tubes. Subsequently, 50 μL of 20% chelex suspension and 100 μL of nuclease free water was added to each sample and heated at 96°C for 10 min in order to detach the nucleic acids into the chelex solution. Finally, the set-up was centrifuged at 5000 rpm for 5 min and 120 μL of the supernatant containing the nucleic acids was transferred into a newly labelled microcentrifuge tubes. The nucleic acids were stored at -20°C until nPCR analysis.
Amplification of P. falciparum small subunit rRNA (ssrRNA) gene. P. falciparum ssrRNA gene was amplified through nPCR protocol. The first run primer set was rPLU6 (5’-TTAAAATTGTTGCAGTTAAAAC-3’) and rPLU5 (5’- CCTGTTGTTGCCTTAAACTTC-3’) and the second run nPCR primer set was rFAL1 (5’- TTAAACTGGTTTGGGAAAACCAAATATATT-3’) and rFAL2 (5’- ACACAATGAACTCAATCATGACTACCCGTC-3’) [17]. The nPCR reactions, for the first run was made up of 6.25 μL OneTaq Quick load 2x master mix, 0.25 μL each of 22 μM forward and reverse primers, 2 μL DNA template and nuclease free water to make 12.5 μL. The Plasmodium ssrRNA gene was amplified using the following condition; 24 cycles of 95°C for 1 min; 55°C for 2 min and 72°C for 5 min. The second run nPCR was made up of 10 μL of OneTaq Quick load 2x master mix, 0.2 μL each of 22 μM forward and reverse primers, 1 μL DNA template and nuclease free water to make 20 μL volume. The second run nPCR conditions were 35 cycles of 95°C for 1 min; 55°C for 2 min and 72°C, and 5 min final extension. A final band size of 205 base pairs (bp) was diagnostic of P. falciparum.
Analysis of results
Both descriptive and inferential data analyses were done with SPSS Version 24 (Chicago, IL, USA). The demographic variables were presented as percentages. The association of the demographic variables with the malaria nPCR outcome was done with Chi square. Further, the detection rates of each testing methods was done by dividing the number of samples that were positive samples by the total number of samples analyzed. In addition, the sensitivities, specificities, accuracies, positive and negative predictive values and accuracies of the malaria rapid test kits were determined using the nPCR as reference. The Kappa inter-rater agreements of the techniques were rated as follows: 0.01–0.20 slight agreement, 0.21–0.40 fair agreement, 0.41–0.60 moderate agreement, 0.61–0.80 substantial agreement and 0.81–1.00 almost perfect or perfect agreement [18]. Regarding the inferential statistics, p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Result
Characteristics of the study participants
Two hundred (200) archived blood samples, collected from the patients suspected of malaria, were analyzed. Majority of the samples were collected from Mayera-Faase Health Center (59.9%) and 55% of the samples were collected from females. The overall age range was 0 and 91 years with mean, modal and median ages being 22 years, 1 year and 18 years, respectively. First quartile to third quartile of the age distribution was 5–33 years, with interquartile range being 28 years. Majority of the study participants were over 14 years (53.5%). The other demographic details are presented in Table 2. Majority of the study participants were recruited from the outpatient departments (88.5%, 177/200) of the health facilities. The nPCR positivity was significantly higher among inpatients (72.2%, 13/18) compared to outpatients (40.7%, 72/177) (p = 0.02). The mean temperature was significantly higher among those confirmed with malaria (37.4°C ± 0.8) compared to those without (36.9°C ± 0.55) (t-test = 4.31, p <0.0001). The mean hemoglobin level for patients with malaria (11.8±2.5 g/dL) did not differ from those without (11.9 ± 2 g/dL) (t-test = 0.22, p = 0.818). Sixty-three samples (31.5%) yielded parasitemia ranging from 1068–283944 parasites/μL of blood, whilst in 137 (68.5%) of the samples, no parasites were detected by microscopy. Among the 137 samples found to be negative by microscopy, First Response, CareStart and Oscar mRDTs detected PfHRP2 in 6, 4 and 1 samples, respectively. However, Standard Q did not detect PfHRP2 in one sample that was positive by microscopy. The nPCR detected 23 (16.8%) of P. falciparum ssRNA genes from the 137 microscopy negative samples whilst in all the microscopy positive samples, P. falciparum ssRNA genes were detected (Table 3).
Detection rates of malaria by testing methods
The detection rate of malaria microscopy was 31.5% (63/200). The rates obtained by the mRDT kits varied. The detection rates found for First Response, CareStart, Oscar-PfHRP2 and Standard Q were 34.5% (69/200), 33.5% (67/200), 32% (64/200) and 31% (62/200) respectively. None of the samples tested by Oscar was positive for Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH). The highest detection rate was obtained by nPCR (43%) (Table 4). The detection rates obtained by the microscopy, mRDT kits and nPCR were significantly different (x2 = 6.1, p = 0.046). However, the performance of the mRDT kits were similar (x2 = 0.37, p = 0.831).
The diagnostic efficiencies of mRDTs compared to the reference technique
Table 5 shows the comparative diagnostic performance of the mRDTs kits. Among the four mRDT kits, the sensitivities of First Response and CareStart were the same, 77.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 67.7–86.1). However, CareStart, Oscar-PfHRP2 and Standard Q were very specific (100%) while the specificity of the First Response was marginally lower (97.1%). On the other hand, the sensitivity of Oscar-PfHRP2 (74.4%, 95% CI: 63.9–83.2) was marginally higher than that of Standard Q (72.1%, 95% CI: 61.4–81.2). The negative predictive values for First Response (85.5%) and CareStart (85.7%) were similar, while that of Oscar-PfHRP2 (83.8%) and Standard Q (82.6%) were marginally lower. The accuracies of the kits ranged from 88%– 90.5%. Given the overlap between confidence intervals of the approved and unapproved kits, their accuracies were statistically similar.
Diagnostic agreements between the diagnostic techniques
Table 6 details of the diagnostic agreements between the diagnostic techniques. All the four mRDT kits agreed substantially with the reference technique. However, among the mRDT kits, each agreed perfectly with the other. That notwithstanding, the Kappa agreement was stronger between First Response and CareStart (κ = 0.98). However, Oscar-PfHRP2 agreed better with CareStart (κ = 0.94) and First Response (κ = 0.92) compared to the agreement between Standard Q and the approved kits.
Characteristics of the discordant mRDT kits results
Three same samples (Samples 1–3) were negative for Oscar-PfHRP2 and Standard Q. The parasitemia range was 2338–3564 parasites/μL by microscopy. The samples were kept refrigerated in EDTA tube between 4°C for between 233–275 days. The patients were mildly (10.1 g/dL) to moderately (9.6 g/dL and 9.9 g/dL) anemic. Standard Q yielded two more discordant results than Oscar-PfHRP2 did. Samples 4 and 5 was stored for almost similar (232–262) number of days before analysis. The hemoglobin levels (10.8 and 11.0 g/dL) of the patients with the malaria and parasitemia (2118 and 2740 parasites/μL) were also almost similar (Table 7).
Discussion
This study independently assessed the detection rates of malaria using microscopy, First Response, CareStart, Oscar-PfHRP2, Standard Q mRDT kits and nPCR, among patients suspected of malaria. During the assessment, readers of each testing method was oblivious of the results of the other technique. The overall detection rates of P. falciparum by nPCR was significantly higher than that of microscopy, First Response, CareStart, Oscar-PfHRP2 and Standard Q mRDT kits. In spite of the fact that the nPCR technique yielded the highest detection, it is not amenable to resource-limited laboratories, where malaria is mostly prevalent. Therefore, health facilities in such resource-limited settings depended on microscopy and mRDT kits for malaria diagnosis. However, mRDT kits is overtaking malaria microscopy as the method of choice for diagnosing malaria, especially at the outpatients departments and other screening points such as pharmacy shops. For this reason, several mRDT kits have flooded the Ghanaian market. Two of such kits are the Oscar and the Standard Q mRDT kits. Comparing the diagnostic indices of the Ministry of Health (MOH) deployed kits, the accuracies of the CareStart mRDT did not differ from the First Response kit. This is because; they were almost of equal sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. Moreover, the confidence intervals of the positive and negative predictive values overlapped.
Comparing Oscar-PfHRP2 and Standard Q, they were of equal specificity with the same positive predictive values. However, Oscar-PfHRP2 mRDT kit was slightly more sensitive, accurate with higher negative predictive value compared to Standard Q. Surprisingly, to the best of our knowledge, the performances of Oscar-PfHRP2 and Standard Q mRDT kits have not been assessed in any published work. That notwithstanding, the performance of Oscar-PfHRP2 and Standard Q mRDT kits agreed perfectly with that of First Response and CareStart, although, the Kappa agreement found for CareStart with the MOH approved kits was better than that of Standard Q.
The Oscar-PfHRP2 and Standard Q mRDT kits yielded three and five discordant results respectively. It is not clear why the MOH-approved kits and nPCR detected Plasmodium antigens and genes in these samples but Oscar-PfHRP2 and Standard Q did not. However, it must be noted that the samples were kept refrigerated in EDTA tube between 4°C for between 232–275 days. Plasmodium histidine-rich protein 2 (PfHRP2) may have been degraded in that samples and the remaining quantities were below the detection limits of the Oscar-PfHRP2 and Standard Q mRDT kits. PfHRP2, like all other proteins, has been found to be unstable during storage [19]. The stability of proteins during storage is affected by various factors such as temperature [20], pH [21] and humidity [22]. According to a study, PfHRP2 proteins stored at -80°C in 50% glycerol remained stable for up to 6 months [23] and when stored at -20°C in 50% glycerol proteins remained stable for up to 12 months [23]. Therefore, the storage conditions for these five samples could have contributed to the protein degradation. Further, the samples containing parasites between 2118–3564 parasites/μL were collected from patients with malaria that were mildly or moderately anemic. The samples were stored in EDTA tubes. Given that EDTA causes hemolysis in relatively a short storage time [24], the parasite proteins were degraded during storage. EDTA cause irreversible structural, biochemical and functional damage to blood platelets and other cellular proteins [25]. For this reason, it is imperative that future diagnostic evaluation are done on freshly collected samples. Samples analysed in this study had to be stored for that long due to difficulties in First Response and CareStart for this study. To avoid biased due to day-to-day variabilities in the samples, it was essential that all the samples were analysed on the same day.
Comparing the manufacturer details of the mRDT kits, the testing time for Oscar-PfHRP2 and Standard Q were relatively shorter compared to First Response and CareStart. Additionally, all the mRDT kits detect only PfHRP2, except Oscar-PfHRP2 that have the added advantage of detecting Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH). With this additional advantage, Oscar mRDT kit can distinguish active P. falciparum infection from past infection, since pLDH is a marker for parasite viability [9,22,23]. Additionally, pLDH helps to detect parasites with PfHRP2 deletions [26] and finally, detect the presence of other parasites since the enzyme is present in all parasites [27].
The sensitivity of mRDTs have been shown in several studies to be of higher sensitivity compared to microscopy [28–30]. However, this study found the mRDTs to be only 0.5–3% more sensitive than microscopy. In the case of Standard Q, the sensitivity was 0.5% lower than that of microscopy. This observation is not farfetched since several factors affect the efficacy of mRDT kits. The clinical status of the patient is one factor where patients with asymptomatic, subclinical, submicroscopic or subpatent malaria are most likely to have false negative mRDT outcome compared to patients with clinical malaria [31]. This is because the higher the parasitemia, the better the performance of mRDT kits [32]. Further, malaria immunity conferred on individuals as a result of multiple or sustained exposure to the malaria parasite leads to depressed parasite multiplication [33], which can result in false negative mRDT test. In addition, the presence of antibodies against malaria antigens and antibodies Mycoplasma pneumoniae can interfere with mRDT performance, causing either false-positive or false-negative results [34]. Moreover, the age of the patient also affect the performance of mRDT kits. Children less than 5 years have either low or no immunity to malaria, and for that matter, malaria parasitemia could get to high densities in no time, leading to better mRDT kits performance [35–37].
In spite of the merits of mRDT kits, the PfHRP2-based kits have some limitations. The PfHRP2 protein could persist in the blood stream several weeks after malaria has resolved [38]. In addition, considering the emergence of non-falciparum Plasmodium in Africa [39] and specifically in Ghana [16], PfHRP2-based kits may yield false negative results. Finally, some of the malaria parasites have mutated their hrp2 genes, making them unable to synthesis the HRP2 proteins [40] and parasites in Ghana are not exception. In a study published in 2022 by Duah-Quashie et al. [41], it was revealed that 30.7% and 17.2% of malaria parasites had their pfhrp2 and pfhrp3 genes, respectively deleted. It is for these reasons that mRDTs that detect both PfHRP2 and pLDH is preferred. Detection of the pLDH enzyme will not only indicate the presence of non-falciparum Plasmodium [42] but also parasite viability [43,44].
Conclusion
Given the overlap among the confidence intervals recorded for the kits, this study can conclude that Oscar and Standard Q performed statistically similar to CareStart and First Response. In spite of this observation, the accuracy of a newly introduced mRDT kits needs to be assessed prior to deployment for use.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to the management and staff of Obom and Mayera-Faase Health Centers, and Taifa Polyclinic for supporting this study. Additionally, we thank the laboratory staffs of the School of Basic and Biomedical Sciences, University of Health and Allied Sciences for assisting with the laboratory work.
References
- 1. Berzosa P. et al., “Comparison of three diagnostic methods (microscopy, RDT, and PCR) for the detection of malaria parasites in representative samples from Equatorial Guinea,” Malar. J., vol. 17, no. 1, p. 333, Dec. 2018, pmid:30223852
- 2. Ohrt C., Purnomo , Sutamihardja M. A., Tang D., and Kain K. C., “Impact of Microscopy Error on Estimates of Protective Efficacy in Malaria‐Prevention Trials,” J. Infect. Dis., vol. 186, no. 4, pp. 540–546, Aug. 2002, pmid:12195382
- 3. Fitri L. E., Widaningrum T., Endharti A. T., Prabowo M. H., Winaris N., and Nugraha R. Y. B., “Malaria diagnostic update: From conventional to advanced method,” J. Clin. Lab. Anal., vol. 36, no. 4, Apr. 2022, pmid:35247002
- 4. Thepsamarn P. et al., “The ICT Malaria Pf: a simple, rapid dipstick test for the diagnosis of Plasmodium falciparum malaria at the Thai-Myanmar border.,” Southeast Asian J. Trop. Med. Public Health, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 723–6, Dec. 1997, [Online]. Available: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9656392 pmid:9656392
- 5. Cunningham J. et al., “A review of the WHO malaria rapid diagnostic test product testing programme (2008–2018): performance, procurement and policy,” Malar. J., vol. 18, no. 1, p. 387, Dec. 2019, pmid:31791354
- 6. WHO, “Universal access to malaria diagnostic testing: an operational manual,” 2013.
- 7. WHO, “Malaria rapid diagnostic tests,” 2019. [Online]. Available: https://cdn-auth-cms.who.int/media/docs/default-source/malaria/diagnosis/archive-malaria-rdts-22dec2020.pdf.
- 8. Mouatcho J. C. and Goldring J. P. D., “Malaria rapid diagnostic tests: challenges and prospects,” J. Med. Microbiol., vol. 62, no. 10, pp. 1491–1505, Oct. 2013, pmid:24048274
- 9. Kolekang A. S. et al., “Challenges with adherence to the ‘test, treat, and track’ malaria case management guideline among prescribers in Ghana,” Malar. J., vol. 21, no. 1, p. 332, Nov. 2022, pmid:36376961
- 10. Patra K. P., Letendre S. L., Vinetz J. M., Bharti A. R., and Smith D. M., “Malaria Diagnosis by a Polymerase Chain Reaction–Based Assay Using a Pooling Strategy,” Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg., vol. 81, no. 5, pp. 754–757, Nov. 2009, pmid:19861605
- 11. Abdel Hamid M. M. et al., “Pf7: an open dataset of Plasmodium falciparum genome variation in 20,000 worldwide samples,” Wellcome Open Res., vol. 8, p. 22, Jan. 2023, pmid:36864926
- 12. Aninagyei E., Smith-Graham S., Boye A., Egyir-Yawson A., and Acheampong D. O., “Evaluating 18s-rRNA LAMP and selective whole genome amplification (sWGA) assay in detecting asymptomatic Plasmodium falciparum infections in blood donors,” Malar. J., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2019, pmid:31234871
- 13. Aninagyei E., “Repeated sampling improved the sensitivity of malaria microscopy in children under six years,” BMC Res. Notes, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 508, Dec. 2020, pmid:33148309
- 14. WHO, “Basic Malaria Microscopy: Part I Learner’s Guide, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland,” 1991.
- 15. Aninagyei E., Doku E. T., Adu P., Egyir-Yawson A., and Acheampong D. O., “Storage related haematological and biochemical changes in Plasmodium falciparum infected and sickle cell trait donor blood,” BMC Hematol., vol. 18, no. 1, p. 30, Dec. 2018, pmid:30450212
- 16. Aninagyei E. et al., “Molecular speciation of Plasmodium and multiplicity of P. falciparum infection in the Central region of Ghana,” PLOS Glob. Public Heal., vol. 4, no. 1, p. e0002718, Jan. 2024, pmid:38236793
- 17. Dinko B., Oguike M. C., Larbi J. A., Bousema T., and Sutherland C. J., “Persistent detection of Plasmodium falciparum, P. malariae, P. ovale curtisi and P. ovale wallikeri after ACT treatment of asymptomatic Ghanaian school-children,” Int. J. Parasitol. Drugs Drug Resist., vol. 3, pp. 45–50, Dec. 2013, pmid:24533292
- 18. Landis J. R. and Koch G. G., “The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.,” Biometrics, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 159–74, Mar. 1977. pmid:843571
- 19.
Pathania S., Parmar P., and Tiwari B. K., “Stability of Proteins During Processing and Storage,” in Proteins: Sustainable Source, Processing and Applications, Elsevier, 2019, pp. 295–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816695-6.00010–6
- 20. Rosa M., Roberts C. J., and Rodrigues M. A., “Connecting high-temperature and low-temperature protein stability and aggregation,” PLoS One, vol. 12, no. 5, p. e0176748, May 2017, pmid:28472066
- 21. Talley K. and Alexov E., “On the pH‐optimum of activity and stability of proteins,” Proteins Struct. Funct. Bioinforma., vol. 78, no. 12, pp. 2699–2706, Sep. 2010, pmid:20589630
- 22. Björkesten J. et al., “Stability of Proteins in Dried Blood Spot Biobanks,” Mol. Cell. Proteomics, vol. 16, no. 7, pp. 1286–1296, Jul. 2017, pmid:28501802
- 23. Hirai M. et al., “Direct Evidence for the Effect of Glycerol on Protein Hydration and Thermal Structural Transition,” Biophys. J., vol. 115, no. 2, pp. 313–327, Jul. 2018, pmid:30021107
- 24. Witeska M. and Wargocka W., “Disodium EDTA used as anticoagulant causes hemolysis in common carp blood,” Turkish J. Vet. Anim. Sci., vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 99–104, 2011,
- 25. Antwi-Baffour S., “Prolong Storage of Blood in EDTA Has an Effect on the Morphology and Osmotic Fragility of Erythrocytes,” Int. J. Biomed. Sci. Eng., vol. 1, no. 2, p. 20, 2013,
- 26. Atchade P. S. et al., “Is a Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase (pLDH) enzyme-linked immunosorbent (ELISA)-based assay a valid tool for detecting risky malaria blood donations in Africa?,” Malar. J., vol. 12, no. 1, p. 279, Dec. 2013, pmid:23927596
- 27. Martiáñez-Vendrell X. et al., “Quantification of malaria antigens PfHRP2 and pLDH by quantitative suspension array technology in whole blood, dried blood spot and plasma,” Malar. J., vol. 19, no. 1, p. 12, Dec. 2020, pmid:31918718
- 28. Ogunfowokan O., Ogunfowokan B. A., and Nwajei A. I., “Sensitivity and specificity of malaria rapid diagnostic test (mRDT CareStatTM) compared with microscopy amongst under five children attending a primary care clinic in southern Nigeria,” African J. Prim. Heal. Care Fam. Med., vol. 12, no. 1, Jun. 2020, pmid:32634015
- 29. Elechi H., Rabasa A., Bashir M., Gofama M., Ibrahim H., and Askira U., “Uncomplicated malaria in children: The place of rapid diagnostic test,” Niger. Med. J., vol. 56, no. 2, p. 85, 2015, pmid:25838621
- 30. Orimadegun A. et al., “Comparative evaluation of three histidine-rich Protein-2 based rapid diagnostic tests, microscopy and PCR for guiding malaria treatment in Ibadan, Southwest Nigeria,” Niger. J. Clin. Pract., vol. 24, no. 4, p. 496, 2021, pmid:33851670
- 31. Kaaya R. D. et al., “The Impact of Submicroscopic Parasitemia on Malaria Rapid Diagnosis in Northeastern Tanzania, an Area with Diverse Transmission Patterns,” Infect. Dis. Rep., vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 798–809, Oct. 2022, pmid:36412740
- 32. Shankar H., Singh M. P., Phookan S., Singh K., and Mishra N., “Diagnostic performance of rapid diagnostic test, light microscopy and polymerase chain reaction during mass survey conducted in low and high malaria-endemic areas from two North-Eastern states of India,” Parasitol. Res., vol. 120, no. 6, pp. 2251–2261, Jun. 2021, pmid:33772349
- 33. Doolan D. L., Dobaño C., and Baird J. K., “Acquired Immunity to Malaria,” Clin. Microbiol. Rev., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 13–36, Jan. 2009, pmid:19136431
- 34. Haberichter K. L., Johnson P. C., Chittick P. J., Millward P., Robinson-Dunn B., and Boyanton B. L., “The Brief Case: False-Positive Rapid Malaria Antigen Test Result in a Returned Traveler,” J. Clin. Microbiol., vol. 55, no. 8, pp. 2294–2297, Aug. 2017, pmid:28743705
- 35. Zhu W. et al., “High value of rapid diagnostic tests to diagnose malaria within children: A systematic review and meta-analysis,” J. Glob. Health, vol. 10, no. 1, Jun. 2020, pmid:32373330
- 36. Hu J., Zhang C., Wang S., Chen X., Hu J., and Liu X., “Accuracy of rapid diagnostic test to diagnose malaria in children under 5 years of age, a meta-analysis,” Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis., vol. 100, no. 2, p. 115351, Jun. 2021, pmid:33743294
- 37. Baiden F. et al., “Accuracy of Rapid Tests for Malaria and Treatment Outcomes for Malaria and Non-Malaria Cases among Under-Five Children in Rural Ghana,” PLoS One, vol. 7, no. 4, p. e34073, Apr. 2012, pmid:22514617
- 38. Amoah L. E., Abankwa J., and Oppong A., “Plasmodium falciparum histidine rich protein-2 diversity and the implications for PfHRP 2: based malaria rapid diagnostic tests in Ghana,” Malar. J., vol. 15, no. 1, p. 101, Dec. 2016, pmid:26891848
- 39. Ruas R., Pinto A., Nuak J., Sarmento A., and Abreu C., “Non ‑ falciparum malaria imported mainly from Africa: a review from a Portuguese hospital,” Malar. J., pp. 1–5, 2017, pmid:28743266
- 40. Rogier E. et al., “Plasmodium falciparum pfhrp2 and pfhrp3 Gene Deletions from Persons with Symptomatic Malaria Infection in Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, and Rwanda,” Emerg. Infect. Dis., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 608–616, Mar. 2022, pmid:35201739
- 41. Duah-Quashie N. O. et al., “Genetic deletions and high diversity of Plasmodium falciparum histidine-rich proteins 2 and 3 genes in parasite populations in Ghana,” Front. Epidemiol., vol. 2, Oct. 2022, pmid:38455301
- 42. Barney R. et al., “Diagnostic Characteristics of Lactate Dehydrogenase on a Multiplex Assay for Malaria Detection Including the Zoonotic Parasite Plasmodium knowlesi.,” Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg., vol. 106, no. 1, pp. 275–282, Nov. 2021, pmid:34781260
- 43. Brown W. M. et al., “Comparative Structural Analysis and Kinetic Properties of Lactate Dehydrogenases from the Four Species of Human Malarial Parasites,” Biochemistry, vol. 43, no. 20, pp. 6219–6229, May 2004, pmid:15147206
- 44. Lee J. et al., “Genetic diversity of Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparum lactate dehydrogenases in Myanmar isolates,” Malar. J., vol. 19, no. 1, p. 60, Dec. 2020, pmid:32019541