IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0188860.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Diagnostic performance of the (1–3)-β-D-glucan assay in patients with Pneumocystis jirovecii compared with those with candidiasis, aspergillosis, mucormycosis, and tuberculosis, and healthy volunteers

Author

Listed:
  • Hyo-Ju Son
  • Heungsup Sung
  • Se Yoon Park
  • Taeeun Kim
  • Hyun Jeong Lee
  • Sun-Mi Kim
  • Yong Pil Chong
  • Sang-Oh Lee
  • Sang-Ho Choi
  • Yang Soo Kim
  • Jun Hee Woo
  • Sung-Han Kim

Abstract

Background: Diagnosis of pneumocystis pneumonia (PCP) relies on microscopic visualization of P. jirovecii, or detection of Pneumocystis DNA in respiratory specimens, which involves invasive procedures such as bronchoalveolar lavage. The (1–3)-β-D-glucan (BG) assay has been proposed as a less invasive and less expensive diagnostic test to rule out PCP. We therefore compared blood levels of BG in patients with PCP with those of patients with candidemia, chronic disseminated candidiasis (CDC), invasive aspergillosis, mucormycosis, and tuberculosis and those of healthy volunteers. Methods: Adult patients who were diagnosed with PCP, candidemia, CDC, invasive aspergillosis, mucormycosis, and tuberculosis whose blood samples were available, and healthy volunteers were enrolled in a tertiary hospital in Seoul, South Korea, during a 21-month period. The blood samples were assayed with the Goldstream Fungus (1–3)-β-D-glucan test (Gold Mountain River Tech Development, Beijing, China). Results: A total of 136 individuals including 50 patients P. jirovecii,15 candidemia, 6 CDC, 15 invasive aspergillosis, 10 mucormycosis, and 40 controls (20 TB and 20 healthy volunteers) were included. The mean±SD of the concentration of 1–3-β-D-glucan in the patients with PCP (290.08 pg/mL±199.98) were similar to those of patients with candidemia (314.14 pg/mL±205.60, p = 0.90 at an α = 0.005) and CDC (129.74 pg/mL±182.79, p = 0.03 at an α = 0.005), but higher than those of patients with invasive aspergillosis (131.62 pg/mL±161.67, p = 0.002 at an α = 0.005), mucormycosis (95.08 pg/mL±146.80, p 31.25 pg/mL, which is highly sensitive for PCP versus tuberculosis plus healthy volunteers at the expense of specificity, the BG assay had a sensitivity of 92% (95% CI 81%-98%) and a specificity of 55% (95% CI 39%-71%). Conclusions: The BG assay appears to be a useful adjunct test for PCP.

Suggested Citation

  • Hyo-Ju Son & Heungsup Sung & Se Yoon Park & Taeeun Kim & Hyun Jeong Lee & Sun-Mi Kim & Yong Pil Chong & Sang-Oh Lee & Sang-Ho Choi & Yang Soo Kim & Jun Hee Woo & Sung-Han Kim, 2017. "Diagnostic performance of the (1–3)-β-D-glucan assay in patients with Pneumocystis jirovecii compared with those with candidiasis, aspergillosis, mucormycosis, and tuberculosis, and healthy volunteers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(11), pages 1-11, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0188860
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188860
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0188860
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0188860&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0188860?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julie R Harris & Barbara J Marston & Nalinee Sangrujee & Desiree DuPlessis & Benjamin Park, 2011. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Diagnostic Options for Pneumocystis Pneumonia (PCP)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(8), pages 1-1, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0188860. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.