Advantages and limitations of current diagnostic laboratory approaches in syphilis and congenital syphilis

References

• Giacani L, Lukehart SA. The endemic treponematoses. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2014;27(1):89–115. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00070-13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeling RW, Mabey D, Kamb ML, et al. Syphilis. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2017;3(1):17073.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Walker EM, Zampighi GA, Blanco DR, et al. Demonstration of rare protein in the outer membrane of treponema pallidum subsp. pallidum by freeze-fracture analysis. J Bacteriol. 1989;171(9):5005–5011. doi: 10.1128/jb.171.9.5005-5011.1989
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radolf JD, Norgard MV, Schulz WW. Outer membrane ultrastructure explains the limited antigenicity of virulent Treponema pallidum. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989;86(6):2051–2055. doi: 10.1073/pnas.86.6.2051
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radolf JD, Robinson EJ, Bourell KW, et al. Characterization of outer membranes isolated from treponema pallidum, the syphilis spirochete. Infect Immun. 1995;63(11):4244–4252. doi: 10.1128/iai.63.11.4244-4252.1995
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox DL, Chang P, McDowall AW, et al. The outer membrane, not a coat of host proteins, limits antigenicity of virulent treponema pallidum. Infect Immun. 1992;60(3):1076–1083. doi: 10.1128/iai.60.3.1076-1083.1992
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu J, Howell JK, Bradley SD, et al. Cellular architecture of Treponema pallidum: novel flagellum, periplasmic cone, and cell envelope as revealed by cryo electron tomography. J Mol Biol. 2010;403(4):546–561. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2010.09.020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radolf JD. Treponema pallidum and the quest for outer membrane proteins. Mol Microbiol. 1995;16(6):1067–1073. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.1995.tb02332.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tudor ME, Al Aboud AM, Leslie SW, et al. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023 Jan [Updated 2023 May 30]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK534780/
   Google Scholar
• Golden MR, Marra CM, Holmes KK. Update on syphilis: resurgence of an old problem. JAMA. 2003;290(11):1510–1514. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.11.1510
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen SE, Klausner JD, Engelman J, et al. Syphilis in the modern era: an update for physicians. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2013;27(4):705–722. doi: 10.1016/j.idc.2013.08.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theel ES, Katz SS, Pillay A. Molecular and direct detection tests for Treponema pallidum subspecies pallidum: a review of the literature, 1964-2017. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71(Suppl 1):S4–S12. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa176
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Workowski KA, Bachmann LH, Chan PA, et al. Sexually transmitted infections treatment guidelines. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2021;70(4):1–187. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.rr7004a1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually transmitted infections prevalence, incidence, and cost estimates in the United States. (Ed.^(Eds). 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Organization WH. Syphilis. (Ed.^(Eds). 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC call to action: Let’s work together to stem the tide of rising syphilis in the US. (Ed.^(Eds). 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Organization WH. Global health sector strategy on sexually transmitted infections, 2016-2021. (Ed.^(Eds). 2016.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Sexually Transmitted Infections National Strategic Plan for the United States: 2021–2025. Washington (DC); 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt R, Carson PJ, Jansen RJ. Resurgence of syphilis in the United States: an assessment of contributing factors. Infect Dis (Auckl). 2019;12:1178633719883282. doi: 10.1177/1178633719883282
   Google Scholar
• Valentine JA, Bolan GA. Syphilis Elimination: Lessons Learned Again. Sex Transm Dis. 2018;45(9S Suppl 1):S80–S85. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000842
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hemarajata P. A Brief History of Laboratory Diagnostics for Syphilis. ASM Org. 2020 Jan 6.https://asm.org/Articles/2020/January/A-Brief-History-of-Laboratory-Diagnostics-for-Syph
   Google Scholar
• Forrestel AK, Kovarik CL, Katz KA. Sexually acquired syphilis: laboratory diagnosis, management, and prevention. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82(1):17–28. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.02.074
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsen SA, Pope V, Johnson R, et al. A manual of tests for syphilis. Washington (DC): Association of Public Health Laboratories; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Lejarraga-Canas C, Ayerdi-Aguirrebengoa O, Menendez-Prieto B, et al. Is dark-field microscopy still useful for the primary syphilis diagnosis in the 21(ST) century? Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin (Engl Ed). 2022;40(1):32–34. doi: 10.1016/j.eimce.2021.10.001
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Romanowski B, Forsey E, Prasad E, et al. 3rd. Detection of Treponema pallidum by a fluorescent monoclonal antibody test. Sex Transm Dis. 1987;14(3):156–159. doi: 10.1097/00007435-198707000-00007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hook EW 3rd, Roddy RE, Lukehart SA, et al. Detection of treponema pallidum in lesion exudate with a pathogen-specific monoclonal antibody. J Clin Microbiol. 1985;22(2):241–244. doi: 10.1128/jcm.22.2.241-244.1985
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buffet M, Grange PA, Gerhardt P, et al. Diagnosing Treponema pallidum in secondary syphilis by PCR and immunohistochemistry. J Invest Dermatol. 2007;127(10):2345–2350. doi: 10.1038/sj.jid.5700888
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee WS, Lee MG, Chung KY, et al. Detection of Treponema pallidum in tissue: a comparative study of the avidin-biotin-peroxidase complex, indirect immunoperoxidase, FTA-ABS complement techniques and the darkfield method. Yonsei Med J. 1991;32(4):335–341. doi: 10.3349/ymj.1991.32.4.335
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mullis KB, Faloona FA. Specific synthesis of DNA in vitro via a polymerase-catalyzed chain reaction. Methods Enzymol. 1987;155:335–350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwoh DY, Davis GR, Whitfield KM, et al. Transcription-based amplification system and detection of amplified human immunodeficiency virus type 1 with a bead-based sandwich hybridization format. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989;86(4):1173–1177. doi: 10.1073/pnas.86.4.1173
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castro R, Prieto E, Aguas MJ, et al. Detection of treponema pallidum sp pallidum DNA in latent syphilis. Int J STD AIDS. 2007;18(12):842–845. doi: 10.1258/095646207782716901
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang C, Cheng Y, Liu B, et al. Sensitive detection of Treponema pallidum DNA from the whole blood of patients with syphilis by the nested PCR assay. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2018;7(1):83. doi: 10.1038/s41426-018-0085-2
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Queiroz J, Correa ME, Ferreira TDS, et al. Detection of treponema pallidum in whole blood samples of patients with syphilis by the polymerase chain reaction. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2022;64:e75. doi: 10.1590/s1678-9946202264075
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Flipse J, Niekamp AM, Dirks A, et al. Refining timely diagnosis of early syphilis by using Treponema pallidum PCR or IgM immunoblotting next to conventional serology for syphilis. J Clin Microbiol. 2023;61(6):e0011223. doi: 10.1128/jcm.00112-23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organization WH. Genital ucler disease syndrome. Guidelines for the management of symptomatic sexually transmitted infections. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Koralur M, Chen CY, Pillay A, et al. Evaluation of a laboratory-developed multiplex real-time PCR assay for diagnosis of syphilis, herpes and chancroid genital ulcers in four public health laboratories in the USA. Sex Transm Infect. 2022;98(6):448–450. doi: 10.1136/sextrans-2021-055081
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. MPOX clinical recognition. (Ed.^(Eds). 2023
   Google Scholar
• Matthews HM, Yang TK, Jenkin HM. Unique lipid composition of treponema pallidum (Nichols virulent strain). Infect Immun. 1979;24(3):713–719. doi: 10.1128/iai.24.3.713-719.1979
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gao K, Shen X, Lin Y, et al. Origin of nontreponemal antibodies during treponema pallidum infection: evidence from a rabbit model. J Infect Dis. 2018;218(5):835–843. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiy241
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shukla M, Pereira L, Sun Y, et al. Considerations for endpoint titer determination in syphilis testing using newly marketed, automated rapid plasma reagin instruments. Public Health Rep. 2023;333549231176007:003335492311760. doi: 10.1177/00333549231176007
   Google Scholar
• Sena AC, Wolff M, Behets F, et al. Rate of decline in nontreponemal antibody titers and seroreversion after treatment of early syphilis. Sex Transm Dis. 2017;44(1):6–10. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000541
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lackner KJ, Muller-Calleja N. Antiphospholipid antibodies: their origin and development. Antibodies (Basel). 2016;5(2):15. doi: 10.3390/antib5020015
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Asherson RA, Cervera R. Antiphospholipid antibodies and infections. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62(5):388–393. doi: 10.1136/ard.62.5.388
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cervera R, Asherson RA, Acevedo ML, et al. Antiphospholipid syndrome associated with infections: clinical and microbiological characteristics of 100 patients. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(10):1312–1317. doi: 10.1136/ard.2003.014175
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Font J, Cervera R, Lopez-Soto A, et al. Anticardiolipin antibodies in patients with autoimmune diseases: isotype distribution and clinical associations. Clin Rheumatol. 1989;8(4):475–483. doi: 10.1007/BF02032099
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FDA. Possible false RPR reactivity with BioPlex 2200 syphilis total & RPR test kit following a COVID-19 Vaccine - letter to clinical laboratory staff and Health care providers. (Ed.^(Eds). 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Liu LL, Lin LR, Tong ML, et al. Incidence and risk factors for the prozone phenomenon in serologic testing for syphilis in a large cohort. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59(3):384–389. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciu325
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Post JJ, Khor C, Furner V, et al. Case report and evaluation of the frequency of the prozone phenomenon in syphilis serology - an infrequent but important laboratory phenomenon. Sex Health. 2012;9(5):488–490. doi: 10.1071/SH11156
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuddenham S, Katz SS, Ghanem KG. Syphilis laboratory guidelines: performance characteristics of nontreponemal antibody tests. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71(Suppl 1):S21–S42. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa306
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shukla MR, Pereira L, Gaynor AM, et al. Evaluation of three automated nontreponemal rapid plasma Reagin (RPR) tests for the laboratory diagnosis of syphilis. J Clin Microbiol. 2023;61(6):e0016823. doi: 10.1128/jcm.00168-23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park IU, Tran A, Pereira L, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of treponemal-specific tests for the diagnosis of syphilis. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71(Suppl 1):S13–S20. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa349
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osbak KK, Tsoumanis A, De Baetselier I, et al. Role of IgM testing in the diagnosis and post-treatment follow-up of syphilis: a prospective cohort study. BMJ Open. 2020;10(9):e035838. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035838
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosshard PP. Usefulness of IgM-specific enzyme immunoassays for serodiagnosis of syphilis: comparative evaluation of three different assays. J Infect. 2013;67(1):35–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2013.03.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Satyaputra F, Hendry S, Braddick M, et al. The laboratory diagnosis of syphilis. J Clin Microbiol. 2021;59(10):e0010021. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00100-21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawahata T, Kojima Y, Furubayashi K, et al. Bejel, a nonvenereal treponematosis, among men who have Sex with men, Japan. Emerg Infect Dis. 2019;25(8):1581–1583. doi: 10.3201/eid2508.181690
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trinity Biotech. Syphilis Health check. (Ed.^(Eds). 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Diagnostics C. DPP® HIV-Syphilis. (Ed.^(Eds).
   Google Scholar
• Pham MD, Ong JJ, Anderson DA, et al. Point-of-care Diagnostics for diagnosis of active syphilis infection: needs, challenges and the way forward. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(13):8172.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vargas SK, Qquellon J, Vasquez F, et al. Laboratory evaluation of the DPP syphilis screen & confirm assay. Microbiol Spectr. 2022;10(3):e0264221. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.02642-21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chembio Diagnostics I. Chembio Diagnostics awarded $3.2 million contract from the CDC for development and clinical validation of dual-path platform syphilis screen & confirm assay. (Ed.^(Eds)). 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Morshed MG, Singh AE, Papasian CJ. Recent trends in the serologic diagnosis of syphilis. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2015;22(2):137–147. doi:10.1128/CVI.00681-14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Association of Public Health Laboratories. Suggested reporting language for syphilis serology testing. (Ed.^(Eds). 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Binnicker MJ, Jespersen DJ, Rollins LO. Direct comparison of the traditional and reverse syphilis screening algorithms in a population with a low prevalence of syphilis. J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(1):148–150. doi:10.1128/JCM.05636-11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunseth CD, Ford BA, Krasowski MD. Traditional versus reverse syphilis algorithms: a comparison at a large academic medical center. Pract Lab Med. 2017;8:52–59. doi:10.1016/j.plabm.2017.04.007
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control. Discordant results from reverse sequence syphilis screening–five laboratories, United States, 2006-2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011;60(5):133–137.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rhoads DD, Genzen JR, Bashleben CP, et al. Prevalence of traditional and reverse-algorithm syphilis screening in laboratory practice: a survey of participants in the college of American pathologists syphilis serology proficiency testing program. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2017;141(1):93–97. doi:10.5858/2016-0110-CP
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ortiz DA, Shukla MR, Loeffelholz MJ. The traditional or reverse algorithm for diagnosis of syphilis: pros and cons. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71(Suppl 1):S43–S51. doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa307
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rourk AR, Nolte FS, Litwin CM. Performance characteristics of the reverse syphilis screening algorithm in a population with a moderately high prevalence of syphilis. Am J Clin Pathol. 2016;146(5):572–577. doi:10.1093/ajcp/aqw182
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen B, Peng X, Xie T, et al. The tradition algorithm approach underestimates the prevalence of serodiagnosis of syphilis in HIV-infected individuals. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11(7):e0005758. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0005758
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marra CM, Maxwell CL, Dunaway SB, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid Treponema pallidum particle agglutination assay for neurosyphilis diagnosis. J Clin Microbiol. 2017;55(6):1865–1870. doi:10.1128/JCM.00310-17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marks M, Lawrence D, Kositz C, et al. Diagnostic performance of PCR assays for the diagnosis of neurosyphilis: a systematic review. Sex Transm Infect. 2018;94(8):585–588. doi:10.1136/sextrans-2018-053666
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance (Ed.^(Eds). 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Grimprel E, Sanchez PJ, Wendel GD, et al. Use of polymerase chain reaction and rabbit infectivity testing to detect Treponema pallidum in amniotic fluid, fetal and neonatal sera, and cerebrospinal fluid. J Clin Microbiol. 1991;29(8):1711–1718. doi:10.1128/jcm.29.8.1711-1718.1991
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daffos F, Forestier F, Grangeot-Keros L, et al. Prenatal diagnosis of congenital rubella. Lancet. 1984;2(8393):1–3. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(84)91993-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitz JL, Gertis KS, Mauney C, et al. Laboratory diagnosis of congenital syphilis by immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgA immunoblotting. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 1994;1(1):32–37. doi:10.1128/cdli.1.1.32-37.1994
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Garner MF. The IgM FTA test for syphilis in the newborn. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1972;12(3):179–181. doi:10.1111/j.1479-828X.1972.tb00496.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jodie Dionne-Odom AS, Boutwell A, Corley-Topham G, et al. Syphilis diagnosis in pregnancy: is the reverse algorithm better than the traditional algorithm? American Journal Of Obstetrics And Gynecology. 2018 1;220(1):S422. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.11.659
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams JEP, Bazan JA, Turner AN, et al. Reverse sequence syphilis screening and discordant results in pregnancy. J Pediatr. 2020;219:263–266 e261. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2019.11.035
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• USPST F, Mangione CM, Barry MJ, et al. Screening for syphilis infection in nonpregnant adolescents and adults: US preventive Services task Force reaffirmation recommendation statement. JAMA. 2022;328(12):1243–1249. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.15322
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Force USPST. Syphilis infection in nonpregnant adolescents and adults: screening. (Ed.^(Eds). [2022 Sep 27].
   Google Scholar
• Aberg JA, Gallant JE, Ghanem KG, et al. Infectious diseases Society of A. Primary care guidelines for the management of persons infected with HIV: 2013 update by the HIV medicine association of the infectious diseases society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;58(1):e1–34. doi: 10.1093/cid/cit665
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Physicians AAoF. Clinical preventive service recommendation syphilis. (Ed.^(Eds) (2023)
   Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Screening recommendations and considerations referenced in treatment guidelines and original sources. (Ed.^(Eds). 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Persons in correctional facilities. (Ed.^(Eds). 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Zarei M. Advances in point-of-care technologies for molecular diagnostics. Biosens Bioelectron. 2017;98:494–506. doi:10.1016/j.bios.2017.07.024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthias JM, Rahman MM, Newman DR, et al. Effectiveness of prenatal screening and treatment to prevent congenital syphilis, Louisiana and Florida, 2013-2014. Sex Transm Dis. 2017;44(8):498–502. doi:10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000638
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow EPF, Callander D, Fairley CK, et al. Increased syphilis testing of men who have Sex with men: greater detection of asymptomatic early syphilis and relative reduction in secondary syphilis. Clin Infect Dis. 2017;65(3):389–395. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix326
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeling RW, Holmes KK, Mabey D, et al. Rapid tests for sexually transmitted infections (STIs): the way forward. Sex Transm Infect. 2006;82(Suppl 5):v1–6. doi:10.1136/sti.2006.024265
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Point-of-care tests for sexually transmitted infections: target product profiles. (Ed.^(Eds). [2023 Jul 18].
   Google Scholar
• Toskin I, Govender V, Blondeel K, et al. Call to action for health systems integration of point-of-care testing to mitigate the transmission and burden of sexually transmitted infections. Sex Transm Infect. 2020;96(5):342–347. doi: 10.1136/sextrans-2019-054358
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar