PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 31, 2026Journal of Vector Borne Diseases0 citationsOpen Access

Comparative evaluation of Plasmodium falciparum glutamate dehydrogenase with known Plasmodium falciparum diagnostic targets using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction

View Full Paper
AAAmreen AhmadSNShrikant NemaSKSri Krishna

Key Points

  • The study aims to assess the diagnostic potential of Plasmodium falciparum glutamate dehydrogenase compared to established markers.
  • Retrospective analysis of 150 Pf-positive and 50 malaria-negative DNA samples.
  • Utilized quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) for detection.
  • Calculated sensitivity, specificity, and area under the ROC curve (AUC) for each target.
  • Sensitivity of pfgdh was 69%, compared to pfhrp2 at 72%, and pfhrp3 at 71%.
  • Specificity was high for all targets, with pfhrp2 at 100% and pfgdh at 98%.
  • pfgdh exhibited an AUC of 83%, indicating strong diagnostic predictivity.

Abstract

Background & objectives Accurate diagnosis is crucial for early malaria treatment and for preventing its transmission. However, efforts to eliminate malaria face significant challenges, including limited treatment options and inadequate diagnostic tools for detecting Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) infections. This study evaluates P. falciparum glutamate dehydrogenase ( pfgdh ) as a novel diagnostic target, comparing its performance to established markers- pfhrp2, pfhrp3, pfaldolase , and pfldh for detecting Pf infections. Methods: A retrospective analysis of stored DNA samples was conducted using 150 Pf-positive samples and 50 malaria-negative samples, which were analysed by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). Sensitivity, Specificity, positive predictive value, negative 2 predictive value, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) were calculated for each gene, using a threshold cycle value of ≤37 as the cutoff. Results: Sensitivities of pfhrp2, pfhrp3, pfgdh, pfaldolase , and pfldh were 72%, 71%, 69%, 29%, and 19%, respectively, while their specificities were 100%, 96%, 98%, 100%, and 100%, respectively. The AUC values, reflecting diagnostic predictivity, were 86%, 84%, 83%, 64%, and 60%, respectively. Interpretation & conclusion: These findings suggest that pfgdh demonstrates notable diagnostic potential compared to the other genes. Its reliability as a target could help overcome challenges posed by pfhrp2 gene deletions, making pfgdh a promising alternative for detecting Pf .

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Ahmad et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1bd2845783ba022b6fe09ahttps://doi.org/10.4103/jvbd.jvbd_276_25
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper