Indeterminate tcdB using a Clostridium difficile PCR assay: a retrospective cohort study
- PMID: 23865713
- PMCID: PMC3718660
- DOI: 10.1186/1471-2334-13-324
Indeterminate tcdB using a Clostridium difficile PCR assay: a retrospective cohort study
Abstract
Background: C. difficile (CD) real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for toxin B gene (tcdB) is more sensitive, and reduces turnaround time when compared to toxin immunoassay. We noted typical amplification curves with high tcdB cycle thresholds (Ct) and low endpoints (Ept) that are labeled negative by the Xpert(®) C. difficile assay (Cepheid) and undertook this study to determine their significance.
Methods: We defined an indeterminate CD assay result as detection of a typical PCR amplification curve with an Ept >10 that was interpreted as negative by the Xpert(®) assay. Samples with indeterminate Xpert(®) result were collected for 5 months and retested by Xpert(®), cultured for toxigenic CD, and isolates subjected to PCR ribotyping, detection of toxin genes and multilocus variable-number tandem repeat analysis (MLVA) typing. Chart reviews were completed to assess if patients met the Society of Healthcare Epidemiology of America and the Infectious Diseases Society of America CD infection (CDI) clinical case definition. Illness severity was compared with tcdB Ct and culture results.
Results: During the 5-month study period, 48/3620 (1%) of specimens were indeterminate and 387/3620 (11%) were positive. Of the 48 patients with indeterminate results, 39 (81%) met the clinical case definition of CDI, and 7 of these (18%) met criteria for severe CDI. Toxigenic stool cultures were positive for 86% (6/7) of patients with severe CDI, 19% (6/32) of patients with non-severe CDI, and 44% (4/9) of patients who did not meet the clinical case definition of CDI (p = 0.002). Lower tcdB Ct and higher Ept were associated with greater likelihood of toxigenic culture positivity (p = 0.03) and more severe symptoms (p = 0.06). Indeterminate results were not associated with a particular technologist or instrument module, or CD strain type.
Conclusions: A subset of specimens (1%) using the Xpert(®) C. difficile assay have typical amplification curves and are interpreted as negative. At least one-third of these results are associated with positive CD culture. The mechanism of these indeterminate results is not technique-related, equipment-related, or due to particular CD strains. Clinicians should be aware that even PCR testing has the potential to miss CDI cases and further highlights the importance of clinical context when interpreting results.
Figures

Similar articles
-
Emergence of Clostridium difficile ribotype 027 in Korea.Korean J Lab Med. 2011 Jul;31(3):191-6. doi: 10.3343/kjlm.2011.31.3.191. Epub 2011 Jun 28. Korean J Lab Med. 2011. PMID: 21779194 Free PMC article.
-
Algorithm combining toxin immunoassay and stool culture for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.J Clin Microbiol. 2009 Sep;47(9):2952-6. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00609-09. Epub 2009 Jul 22. J Clin Microbiol. 2009. PMID: 19625481 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of a new commercial TaqMan PCR assay for direct detection of the clostridium difficile toxin B gene in clinical stool specimens.J Clin Microbiol. 2009 Dec;47(12):3846-50. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01490-09. Epub 2009 Oct 21. J Clin Microbiol. 2009. PMID: 19846637 Free PMC article.
-
The prognostic value of toxin B and binary toxin in Clostridioides difficile infection.Gut Microbes. 2021 Jan-Dec;13(1):1884516. doi: 10.1080/19490976.2021.1884516. Epub 2021 Mar 4. Gut Microbes. 2021. PMID: 33660568 Free PMC article. Review.
-
An Update on Clostridioides difficile Binary Toxin.Toxins (Basel). 2022 Apr 27;14(5):305. doi: 10.3390/toxins14050305. Toxins (Basel). 2022. PMID: 35622552 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
False Negative Results in Clostridium difficile Testing.BMC Infect Dis. 2016 Aug 19;16(1):430. doi: 10.1186/s12879-016-1741-6. BMC Infect Dis. 2016. PMID: 27543102 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Tenover FC, Novak-Weekley S, Woods CW, Peterson LR, Davis T, Schreckenberger P, Fang FC, Dascal A, Gerding DN, Nomura JH, Goering RV, Akerlund T, Weissfeld AS, Baron EJ, Wong E, Marlowe EM, Whitmore J, Persing DH. Impact of strain type on detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile: comparison of molecular diagnostic and enzyme immunoassay approaches. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48(10):3719–3724. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00427-10. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Viala C, Le Monnier A, Maatoaoui N, Rousseau C, Colignon A, Poilane I. Comparison of commercial molecular assays for toxigenic Clostridium difficile detection in stools: BD GeneOhm Cdiff, XPert C. difficile and illumigene C. difficile. J Microbiol Methods. 2012;90(2):83–85. doi: 10.1016/j.mimet.2012.04.017. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Zidarič V, Kevorkijan BK, Oresic N, Janezic S, Rupnik M. Comparison of two commercial molecular tests for the detection of Clostridium difficile in the routine diagnostic laboratory. J Med Microbiol. 2011;60(Pt 8):1131–1136. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous