Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39571005›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2024

Comparing microbiological and molecular diagnostic tools for the surveillance of anthrax.

Sunday Ochonu Ochai, Ayesha Hassim, Edgar H Dekker, Thuto Magome, Kgaugelo Edward Lekota, S Marcus Makgabo, Lin-Mari de Klerk-Loris, Louis O van Schalkwyk, Pauline L Kamath, Wendy C Turner and 1 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Complete genome ofMicrobiology resource announcements · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Sunday Ochonu OchaiDepartment of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-0094-9537
Ayesha HassimDepartment of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, South Africa.
Edgar H DekkerOffice of the State Veterinarian, Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Government of South Africa, Skukuza, South Africa.
Thuto MagomeUnit for Environmental Sciences and Management, Microbiology, North West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.
Kgaugelo Edward LekotaUnit for Environmental Sciences and Management, Microbiology, North West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.
S Marcus MakgaboDepartment of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, South Africa.
Lin-Mari de Klerk-LorisAntimicrobial Research Unit, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Louis O van SchalkwykDepartment of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, South Africa.
Pauline L KamathSchool of Food and Agriculture, University of Maine, Orono, Maine, United States of America.
Wendy C TurnerU.S. Geological Survey, Wisconsin Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Forest and Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0302-1646
Henriette van HeerdenDepartment of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, South Africa.

Funding

Department of Agriculture (USDA)National Institutes of Health (NIH) DEB-2106221
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnosis of anthrax, a zoonotic disease caused by Bacillus anthracis can be complicated by detection of closely related species. Conventional diagnosis of anthrax involves microscopy, culture identification of bacterial colonies and molecular detection. Genetic markers used are often virulence gene targets such as B. anthracis protective antigen (pagA, also called BAPA, occurring on plasmid pXO1), lethal factor (lef, on pXO1), capsule-encoding capB/C (located on pXO2) as well as chromosomal Ba-1. Combinations of genetic markers using real-time/quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) are used to confirm B. anthracis from culture but can also be used directly on diagnostic samples to avoid propagation and its associated biorisks and for faster identification. We investigated how the presence of closely related species could complicate anthrax diagnoses with and without culture to standardise the use of genetic markers using qPCR for accurate anthrax diagnosis. Using blood smears from 2012-2020 from wildlife mortalities (n = 1708) in Kruger National Park in South Africa where anthrax is endemic, we contrasted anthrax diagnostic results based on qPCR, microscopy, and culture. From smears, 113/1708 grew bacteria in culture, from which 506 isolates were obtained. Of these isolates, only 24.7% (125 isolates) were positive for B. anthracis based on genetic markers or microscopy. However, among these, merely 4/125 (3.2%) were confirmed B. anthracis isolates (based on morphology, microscopy, and sensitivity testing to penicillin and gamma-phage) from the blood smear, likely due to poor survival of spores on stored smears. This study identified B. cereus sensu lato, which included B. cereus and B. anthracis, Peribacillus spp., and Priestia spp. clusters using gyrB gene in selected bacterial isolates positive for pagA region using BAPA probe. Using qPCR on blood smears, 52.1% (890 samples) tested positive for B. anthracis based on one or a combination of genetic markers which included the 25 positive controls. Notably, the standard lef primer set displayed the lowest specificity and accuracy. The Ba-1+BAPA+lef combination showed 100% specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy. Various marker combinations, such as Ba-1+capB, BAPA+capB, Ba-1+BAPA+capB+lef, and BAPA+lef+capB, all demonstrated 100.0% specificity and 98.7% accuracy, while maintaining a sensitivity of 96.6%. Using Ba-1+BAPA+lef+capB, as well as Ba-1+BAPA+lef with molecular diagnosis accurately detects B. anthracis in the absence of bacterial culture. Systematically combining microscopy and molecular markers holds promise for notably reducing false positives. This significantly enhances the detection and surveillance of diseases like anthrax in southern Africa and beyond and reduces the need for propagation of the bacteria in culture.

Indexed as

AnthraxBacillus anthracisAnimalsAntigens, BacterialBacterial ToxinsGenetic MarkersHumansMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificitySouth Africaanthrax toxinAntigens, BacterialBacterial ToxinsGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID39571005
PMCPMC11620650

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.