Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 26, Number 2—February 2020

Multiplex Mediator Displacement Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification for Detection of Treponema pallidum and Haemophilus ducreyi

Lisa Becherer, Sascha Knauf, Michael Marks, Simone Lueert, Sieghard Frischmann, Nadine Borst, Felix von Stetten, Sibauk Bieb, Yaw Adu-Sarkodie, Kingsley Asiedu, Oriol Mitjà1, and Mohammed Bakheit1Comments to Author 
Author affiliations: University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany (L. Becherer, N. Borst, F. von Stetten); Georg-August-University of Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany (S. Knauf); German Primate Centre, Goettingen (S. Knauf, S. Lueert); London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK (M. Marks); Hospital for Tropical Diseases, London (M. Marks); Mast Diagnostica GmbH, Reinfeld, Germany (S. Frischmann, M. Bakheit); Hahn-Schickard, Freiburg, Germany (N. Borst, F. von Stetten); Papua New Guinea Department of Health, Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea (S. Bieb); Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana (Y. Adu-Sarkod); World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland (K. Asiedu); Lihir Medical Centre-International SOS, Newcrest Mining, Lihir Island, Papua New Guinea (O. Mitjà); Fundacio Lluita contra la Sida-Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain (O. Mitjà); Barcelona Institute for Global Health-Hospital Clinic-University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (O. Mitjà)

Main Article

Table 1

Comparison of clinical performance of biplex loop-mediated isothermal amplification for detection of Treponema pallidum and Haemophilus ducreyi (TPHD-LAMP) against singleplex TaqMan quantitative PCR*

Characteristics Sample size Treponema pallidum Haemophilus ducreyi
Total samples, no. 293
No. positive 60 163
Sensitivity, % (95% CI) 84.7 (72.5–92.4) 91.6 (85.8–95.3)
Specificity, % (95% CI)

95.7 (92.0–97.8)
84.8 (77.4–90.1)
Lesions containing a single pathogen† 195
No. positive 48 151
Sensitivity, % (95% CI) 92.5 (78.5–98.0) 94.1 (88.4–97.2)
Specificity, % (95% CI)

95.7 (92.0–97.8)
84.8 (77.4–90.1)
Lesions containing both pathogens† 19
No. positive 12 12
Sensitivity, % (95% CI) 68.4 (43.5–86.4) 73.7 (48.6–89.9)
Specificity, % (95% CI)

Samples from Lihir Island, no. 57
No. positive 21 13
Sensitivity, % (95% CI) 90.5 (68.2–98.3) 76.5 (50.0–92.2)
Specificity, % (95% CI)

94.4 (80.0–99.0)
100.0 (89.1–100)
Samples from Karkar Island, no. 184
No. positive 33 119
Sensitivity, % (95% CI) 78.1 (59.6–90.1) 94.2 (87.5–97.7)
Specificity, % (95% CI)

94.7 (89.5–97.5)
74.7 (63.4–83.5)
Samples from Ghana, no. 52
No. positive 6 31
Sensitivity, % (95% CI) 100.0 (51.7–100) 90.9 (75.5–97.6)
Specificity, % (95% CI) 100.0 (90.4–100) 94.7 (71.9–99.7)

*NA, not applicable.
†Determined by quantitative PCR.

Main Article

1These senior authors contributed equally to this article.

Page created: January 17, 2020
Page updated: January 17, 2020
Page reviewed: January 17, 2020
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.