Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Sep 1;48(9):675-679.
doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000001386.

Limited Utility of Reverse Algorithm Syphilis Testing in HIV Clinic Among Men Who Have Sex With Men

Jodie Dionne-Odom  1 , Barbara Van Der Pol  1 , Alex Boutwell  1 , Niranjan Biligowda  2 , Daphne G Schmid  1 , Edward W Hook 3rd  1
Affiliations

Limited Utility of Reverse Algorithm Syphilis Testing in HIV Clinic Among Men Who Have Sex With Men

Jodie Dionne-Odom et al. Sex Transm Dis. .

Abstract

Background: The reverse algorithm for syphilis diagnosis consists of a treponemal antibody screening immunoassay followed by confirmatory nontreponemal antibody testing. It is increasingly used in the United States despite studies suggesting limited cost-effectiveness in high-prevalence groups.

Methods: In this retrospective cross-sectional study, we included men who have sex with men tested with the reverse algorithm in an Alabama HIV clinic between March 2015 and February 2017. Trep-Sure enzyme immunoassay (EIA) was used for the initial screen, followed by reflex nontreponemal reactive rapid plasma reagin (RPR) testing of specimens with positive results. Sociodemographic and clinical data were extracted from the electronic medical record and stratified according to EIA screen positivity. Quantitative EIA antibody index values were collected to assess test performance at various thresholds.

Results: Among 1693 men tested for syphilis with the reverse algorithm in HIV clinic, 808 (48%) had a positive initial EIA screen. A majority (53%) of men with subsequent RPR testing had a nonreactive RPR (EIA+/RPR-), and 19% (19/98) of these EIA+/RPR- samples tested had a negative confirmatory Treponema pallidum particle agglutination testing result. Analysis of quantitative EIA index values using a receiver operating characteristics curve suggested that a threshold >8 (rather the current threshold of antibody index 1.2) improved the performance of the test.

Conclusions: Among men who have sex with men tested in HIV clinic, the syphilis reverse algorithm was inefficient because of high rates of prior syphilis and false-positive EIA screening. Frequent syphilis screening in high-prevalence populations is an important part of the US epidemic response, and the traditional algorithm is preferred.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest and Sources of Funding: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1 –
Figure 1 –
Reverse Algorithm Syphilis Testing in 1693 Men who have Sex with Men with HIV
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
EIA Index Values in Men with HIV with Reverse Algorithm Syphilis Screen Positivity (n=808)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance Report 2018. 2019. https://www.cdc.gov/std/stats18/default.htm
    1. Kidd S, Torrone E, Su J, Weinstock H. Reported Primary and Secondary Syphilis Cases in the United States: Implications for HIV Infection. Sex Transm Dis 2018;45(9S Suppl 1):S42–s47. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Workowski KA, Bolan GA. Sexually Transmitted Diseases Treatment Guidelines, 2015. MMWR Recomm Rep 2015;64(Rr-03):1–137. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pillay A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Syphilis Summit-Diagnostics and Laboratory Issues. Sex Transm Dis 2018;45(9S Suppl 1):S13–s16. - PMC - PubMed
    1. 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. - PubMed

Publication types