Multicenter Evaluation of BD Max Enteric Parasite Real-Time PCR Assay for Detection of Giardia duodenalis, Cryptosporidium hominis, Cryptosporidium parvum, and Entamoeba histolytica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Common causes of chronic diarrhea among travelers worldwide include protozoan parasites. The majority of parasitic infections are caused by Giardia duodenalis, Entamoeba histolytica, Cryptosporidium parvum, and Cryptosporidium hominis Similarly, these species cause the majority of parasitic diarrhea acquired in the United States. Detection of parasites by gold standard microscopic methods is time-consuming and requires considerable expertise; enzyme immunoassays and direct fluorescent-antibody (DFA) stains have lowered hands-on time for testing, but improvements in sensitivity and technical time may be possible with a PCR assay. We performed a clinical evaluation of a multiplex PCR panel, the enteric parasite panel (EPP), for the detection of these common parasites using the BD Max instrument, which performs automated extraction and amplification. A total of 2,495 compliant specimens were enrolled, including 2,104 (84%) specimens collected prospectively and 391 (16%) specimens collected retrospectively. Approximately equal numbers were received in 10% formalin (1,273 specimens) and unpreserved (1,222 specimens). The results from the EPP were compared to those from alternate PCR and bidirectional sequencing (APCR), as well as DFA (G. duodenalis and C. parvum or C. hominis) or trichrome stain (E. histolytica). The sensitivity and specificity for prospective and retrospective specimens combined were 98.2% and 99.5% for G. duodenalis, 95.5% and 99.6 for C. parvum or C. hominis, and 100% and 100% for E. histolytica, respectively. The performance of the FDA-approved BD Max EPP compared well to the reference methods and may be an appropriate substitute for microscopic examination or immunoassays.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".