Keep the quality high: the benefits of lot testing for the quality control of malaria rapid diagnostic tests

Abstract

Background The production and use of malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) has risen dramatically over the past 20 years. In view of weak or non-existing in vitro diagnostics (IVD) regulations and post-marketing surveillance (PMS) systems in malaria endemic countries, the World Health Organization, later joined by the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, established an independent, centralized performance evaluation and Lot Testing (LT) programme to safeguard against poor quality of RDTs being distributed through the public health sector of malaria endemic countries. RDT performances and manufacturer quality management systems have evolved over the past decade raising questions about the future need for a centralized LT programme. Results Between 2007 and 2017, 6056 lots have been evaluated, representing approximately 1.6 Billion RDTs. A total of 69 lots (1.1%) failed the quality control. Of these failures, 26 were detected at receipt of the RDT lot in the LT laboratory, representing an estimated 7.9 million poor quality RDTs, and LT requesters were advised that RDTs were not of sufficient quality for use in patient management. Forty-three were detected after long-term storage in the laboratory, of which 24 (56%) were found to be due to a major issue with insufficient buffer volume in single use buffer vials, others predominantly showing loss of sensitivity. The annual cost of running the programme, based on expenses recorded in years 2014–2016, an estimated volume of 700 lots per year and including replenishment of quality control samples, was estimated at US$ 178,500 ($US 255 per lot tested). Conclusions Despite the clear benefits of the centralized LT programme and its low cost compared with the potential costs of each country establishing its own PMS system for RDTs, funding concerns have made its future beyond 2020 uncertain. In order to manage the risks of misdiagnosis due to low quality RDTs, and to ensure the continued safety and reliability of malaria case management, there is a need to ensure that an effective and implementable approach to RDT quality control continues to be available to programmes in endemic countries.

Long-Lasting Insecticidal Nets Incorporating Piperonyl Butoxide Reduce the Risk of Malaria in Children in Western Kenya: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

“…On the other hand, it is still possible that quality variations between different RDT products and lots produced the higher RDTpfPR. 68 Despite the limitations of RDT, in the present study, the data of RDT still indicated the effectiveness of PBO-LLINs.…”

Ten Years of Universal Testing: How the Rapid Diagnostic Test Became a Game Changer for Malaria Case Management and Improved Disease Reporting

“…In addition, a pre-procurement lot testing program checked the quality of each RDT lot procured by major donor organizations as well as country programs. 7 These two activities ensured that RDTs used in endemic countries were of good quality and led to an overall improvement in RDT performance, with the percentage of RDT products meeting WHO procurement criteria increasing from 26.8% to 79.4% between 2008 and 2018. 6,7 RDT performance evaluation is now incorporated into the WHO Pre-Qualification of in vitro diagnostics scheme and pre-procurement lot testing is currently not performed on all procurements but rather on an ad-hoc basis based on procurers' policies and practices.…”

Price, quality, and market dynamics of malaria rapid diagnostic tests: analysis of Global Fund 2009–2018 data

“…The programme was discontinued in 2019, and quality evaluations of RDTs were absorbed by the WHO Prequalification programme. The Prequalification programme will continue to conduct rigorous quality testing and make data on individual RDT performance available, however will no longer publish composite tables comparing RDT quality across products [ 13 , 23 ]. The results of these evaluations principally provide data on each RDT product’s panel detection scores as a measure of quality (see definition in Methods section) for both Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax detection, as well as false positive rates, thermal stability, and ease of use, among other RDT characteristics.…”