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

Introduction

The unicellular fungus Pneumocystis jirovecii is an opportunistic pathogen causing pneumonia in immunocompromised hosts,¹ such as those with HIV/AIDS.² It is also the commonest fungal cause of pneumonia in non-HIV infected children under 5 years.³ Despite global improvements in HIV prevention and treatment, the burden of P. jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) remains considerable due to the increasing use of immunosuppressive agents for transplantation, malignancy, and autoimmune disorders, along with sub-optimal control of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in developing countries.^{4, 5}

Because P. jirovecii is not culturable in vitro, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the gold standard diagnostic method in many countries.^{6, 7} P. jirovecii PCR is generally performed on lower respiratory tract specimens, such as induced sputum or broncho-alveolar lavage fluid. However, patients may be too frail, young, or hypoxic to undergo such procedures, especially fibre-optic bronchoscopy which may result in unintended morbidity and mortality.⁸ Lower respiratory tract specimen collection may be invasive and carries a risk of patient discomfort, such as bronchospasm from sputum induction.⁹ It also requires trained staff as well as costly equipment and facilities, such as negative pressure rooms, resulting in service inequity for patients in rural or remote locations and developing countries.^{7, 8}

There is, therefore, a need for specimens obtainable via low-cost, minimally invasive methods on which P. jirovecii PCR can be performed, but which do not compromise test performance. Nasopharyngeal swabs may be such an alternative. Nevertheless, to our knowledge, the only evidence comparing nasopharyngeal and lower respiratory tract specimens comes from children in a developing country high HIV prevalence setting published over a decade ago,¹⁰ indicating a gap in the contemporary evidence. In this study, we aimed to evaluate P. jirovecii PCR performed on nasopharyngeal swabs as a diagnostic test for PJP, as well as the impact of specimen quality on test performance.

Methods

Results

One hundred and eleven patients met the inclusion criteria; their characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Data on ERV3 loads in lower respiratory tract specimens and nasopharyngeal swabs were missing in 3/111 (2.7%) and 13/111 (11.7%) patients, respectively.

From the data in Table 1, the diagnostic sensitivity of nasopharyngeal swab P. jirovecii PCR was 0.66, while its 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 were not significantly different in true positive and true negative patients (4.25×10³ vs. 8.56×10³; P=0.06). Median nasopharyngeal swab ERV3 loads were also not significantly different between these two groups (6.20×10² vs. 1.71×10³; P=0.07). However, the median ERV3 load in nasopharyngeal swabs from true positives was significantly higher than in false negatives (7.55×10² vs. 3.67×10²; P=0.05).

Discussion

We found nasopharyngeal swabs for diagnosis of P. jirovecii PCR to be highly specific but poorly sensitive for diagnosing PJP compared to lower respiratory tract specimens. Given the absence of false positives, therefore, this indicates that a positive PCR on nasopharyngeal swab is sufficient to diagnose PJP. It follows also that our results suggest that colonization of the upper respiratory tract by P. jirovecii is not a barrier to performing PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs for this purpose in adults.

Additionally, we showed that false negative nasopharyngeal swabs contained significantly lower ERV3 loads than true positives, demonstrating the importance of proper specimen collection to ensure adequate quality and prevent misclassification.¹⁴ One method of improving the chances of adequate specimen collection is to collect more than one swab for testing in parallel. This has the added benefit of increasing sensitivity, since the sensitivity would be expected to increase to 88% with two swabs and to 96% with three. Such augmentation of the performance of low-sensitivity assays with multiple testing has been demonstrated with SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests in a real-world population during the current COVID-19 pandemic.¹⁵

To our knowledge, this is the first study of the use of P. jirovecii PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs for PJP diagnosis in immunosuppressed adult patients living in a developed country, low HIV prevalence setting. Another benefit of using nasopharyngeal swabs is the ability to test for concurrent or alternative diagnoses simultaneously e.g., with a multiplex PCR panel; in our cohort, 12/71 patients with PJP and 6/41 without PJP also had a PCR-confirmed viral respiratory infection.

Our results are not generalizable to children, as none featured in our dataset. The number of patients in this study was small which, together with its observational nature focused on patients with high pre-test probabilities for PJP, are potential sources of bias. This risk was mitigated by including patients fitting the inclusion criteria from all Queensland public hospitals over the span of two years. While we expect P. jirovecii PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs to perform similarly in adult patients from other low HIV prevalence settings, this hypothesis should be tested as part of future research. Ideally this would be a prospective study including all patients clinically suspected of having PJP in a wider range of settings and patient demographics, with paired lower respiratory tract specimens and two to three NP swabs collected from each patient using the correct technique on the same day.

In conclusion, our hypothesis-generating study demonstrates the potential utility of NP swabs for the diagnosis of PJP and lends support for a large-scale prospective study to address this important question, the answer to which will have immediate clinical impact.