Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Comparison of nasopharyngeal swab vs. lower respiratory tract specimen PCR for the diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia

View ORCID ProfileRusheng Chew, Sarah Tozer, Kimberly Ulett, David L. Paterson, David Whiley, Theo Sloots, David Fielding, Christopher Zappala, Farzad Bashirzadeh, Justin Hundloe, Cheryl Bletchley, Marion L. Woods
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.10.28.23297710
Rusheng Chew
1Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Bangkok, Thailand
2Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
3Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Rusheng Chew
  • For correspondence: chris{at}tropmedres.ac
Sarah Tozer
4UQ Centre for Clinical Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kimberly Ulett
5Department of General Medicine, Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service, Gold Coast, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David L. Paterson
4UQ Centre for Clinical Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
6Department of Infectious Diseases, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, Australia
7Pathology Queensland, Central Laboratory, Brisbane, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David Whiley
4UQ Centre for Clinical Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Theo Sloots
3Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David Fielding
3Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
8Department of Thoracic Medicine, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher Zappala
3Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
8Department of Thoracic Medicine, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Farzad Bashirzadeh
8Department of Thoracic Medicine, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Justin Hundloe
8Department of Thoracic Medicine, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cheryl Bletchley
7Pathology Queensland, Central Laboratory, Brisbane, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marion L. Woods
3Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
6Department of Infectious Diseases, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background and objective Diagnosis of P. jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) is by PCR on lower respiratory tract specimens, the collection of which is not always well-tolerated and requires trained staff and costly equipment not usually available in low-resource settings. We aimed to evaluate P. jirovecii PCR performed on nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) as a diagnostic test for PJP, as well as the impact of specimen quality on test performance.

Methods Patients with clinically-suspected PJP in public hospitals in Queensland, Australia, who had quantitative P. jirovecii PCR performed on lower respiratory tract specimens from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2016, and also had NPS collected by healthcare staff within seven days of lower respiratory tract specimen collection were included in this retrospective cohort study. Quantitative P. jirovecii PCR was performed, and sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. Specimen quality was assessed by quantifying endogenous retrovirus 3 (ERV3) loads, with higher values indicating better specimen quality.

Results One hundred and eleven patients were included. The sensitivity of NPS P. jirovecii PCR was 0.66 and specificity was 1.0. The positive predictive value was 1.0 and the negative predictive value was 0.63. Median ERV3 loads in lower respiratory tract specimens and NPS were not significantly different in true positive vs. true negative patients, but was significantly higher in true positives vs. false negatives (7.55×102 vs. 3.67×102; P=0.05).

Conclusion P. jirovecii PCR on NPS was highly specific but poorly sensitive. Proper specimen collection is essential to ensure adequate quality and prevent misclassification.

Summary at a Glance Using nasopharyngeal swabs instead of lower respiratory tract specimens for PCR to diagnose P. jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) may be better tolerated and improve diagnostic accessibility. In this two-year retrospective cohort study of patients with clinically-suspected PJP from Queensland, Australia, P. jirovecii PCR on NPS had high specificity but low sensitivity.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This research was funded by a Study, Education, and Research Trust Fund grant from Pathology Queensland. RC was supported by the UK Government through a Commonwealth Scholarship and the Royal Australasian College of Physicians through the Bushell Travelling Fellowship in Medicine or the Allied Sciences. The funders had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the manuscript.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The Royal Brisbane and Womens Hospital Ethics Committee gave ethical approval for this work.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Conflicts of interest All authors declare no competing interests.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted October 30, 2023.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Comparison of nasopharyngeal swab vs. lower respiratory tract specimen PCR for the diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Comparison of nasopharyngeal swab vs. lower respiratory tract specimen PCR for the diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia
Rusheng Chew, Sarah Tozer, Kimberly Ulett, David L. Paterson, David Whiley, Theo Sloots, David Fielding, Christopher Zappala, Farzad Bashirzadeh, Justin Hundloe, Cheryl Bletchley, Marion L. Woods
medRxiv 2023.10.28.23297710; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.10.28.23297710
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Comparison of nasopharyngeal swab vs. lower respiratory tract specimen PCR for the diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia
Rusheng Chew, Sarah Tozer, Kimberly Ulett, David L. Paterson, David Whiley, Theo Sloots, David Fielding, Christopher Zappala, Farzad Bashirzadeh, Justin Hundloe, Cheryl Bletchley, Marion L. Woods
medRxiv 2023.10.28.23297710; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.10.28.23297710

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Respiratory Medicine
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (349)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Anesthesia (181)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (2648)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (316)
  • Dermatology (223)
  • Emergency Medicine (399)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (942)
  • Epidemiology (12228)
  • Forensic Medicine (10)
  • Gastroenterology (759)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (4103)
  • Geriatric Medicine (387)
  • Health Economics (680)
  • Health Informatics (2657)
  • Health Policy (1005)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (985)
  • Hematology (363)
  • HIV/AIDS (851)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13695)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (797)
  • Medical Education (399)
  • Medical Ethics (109)
  • Nephrology (436)
  • Neurology (3882)
  • Nursing (209)
  • Nutrition (577)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (739)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (695)
  • Oncology (2030)
  • Ophthalmology (585)
  • Orthopedics (240)
  • Otolaryngology (306)
  • Pain Medicine (250)
  • Palliative Medicine (75)
  • Pathology (473)
  • Pediatrics (1115)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (466)
  • Primary Care Research (452)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3432)
  • Public and Global Health (6527)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1403)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (814)
  • Respiratory Medicine (871)
  • Rheumatology (409)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (410)
  • Sports Medicine (342)
  • Surgery (448)
  • Toxicology (53)
  • Transplantation (185)
  • Urology (165)