Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2005 Jul;73(1):199-203.

False-positive results of a Plasmodium falciparum histidine-rich protein 2-detecting malaria rapid diagnostic test due to high sensitivity in a community with fluctuating low parasite density

David R Bell  1 , Danny W Wilson, Laura B Martin
Affiliations
  • PMID: 16014858

False-positive results of a Plasmodium falciparum histidine-rich protein 2-detecting malaria rapid diagnostic test due to high sensitivity in a community with fluctuating low parasite density

David R Bell et al. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2005 Jul.

Abstract

The persistence of parasite histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2) in the circulation after parasite clearance has been considered a drawback for rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) targeting HRP2 and a major cause of false-positive results. This paper reports results of a study into whether a proportion of RDT HRP2 false-positive cases carried parasites using polymerase chain reaction analysis as the gold standard rather than microscopy. The high rate of RDT false-positive parasitemia results in comparison with microscopy was shown to predominantly represent cases that had a parasite density below the threshold for detection by microscopy. Despite the generally low disease-endemic prevalence of malaria in the area, there was a high prevalence of chronic infections with low, fluctuating, parasite densities that were better detected by RDT. Our results suggest that in areas known to have low-density parasitemias, RDTs targeting HRP2 may increase diagnostic sensitivity in comparison with microscopy. While microscopy remains the standard for comparison of malaria diagnostic accuracy, the limitations of microscopy, and the possibility that RDTs may have superior accuracy in some circumstances, should be taken into account when interpreting results of diagnostic trials.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types