Determination of the performance of a novel diagnostic test for Clostridioides difficile toxins A and B using latent class analysis
- PMID: 40162818
- PMCID: PMC12077097
- DOI: 10.1128/jcm.01807-24
Determination of the performance of a novel diagnostic test for Clostridioides difficile toxins A and B using latent class analysis
Abstract
The diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) remains challenging. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) targeting the C. difficile (CD) toxin B gene suffer from suboptimal specificity for CDI due to CD asymptomatic colonization. Enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) that detect the presence of CD toxins are more specific for CDI but suffer from low sensitivity. To address this challenge, assays detecting CD toxins were developed using single-molecule array (SIMOA) technology, which have much lower limits of toxin detection than conventional EIAs. In this study, stool specimens from 708 symptomatic patients were aliquoted for testing by cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA), toxigenic culture, NAAT, conventional CD toxin EIA, and SIMOA CD toxin EIAs. Using latent class analysis, we calculated the sensitivity and specificity of each of these diagnostic tests for detecting, separately, the presence of CD bacterium, CD toxin gene, and CD toxin. We estimated that the prevalence of CDI in our cohort was 14% (95% credible interval [CI]: 0.11-0.17). While the specificity of NAAT for detecting the presence of CD toxin was 95% (95% CI: 0.94-0.97), its positive predictive value was poor due to the low prevalence of CDI. The specificity of the conventional CD toxin EIA for CDI was excellent, but the sensitivity was only 48% (95% CI: 0.41-0.55). In comparison, the sensitivities of the SIMOA toxins A and B EIAs were 76% (95% CI: 0.67-0.84) and 77% (95% CI: 0.67-0.84), respectively, while maintaining excellent specificity. We conclude that SIMOA CD toxin EIAs are significantly more sensitive than conventional CD toxin EIAs.
Importance: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is the most important infectious cause of hospital-associated diarrhea worldwide, but its diagnosis remains challenging. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) targeting the C. difficile (CD) toxin B gene have suboptimal specificity due to the presence of CD asymptomatic colonization, while enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) that detect the toxin itself are much more specific but are limited by low sensitivity. New assays for detecting CD toxins were developed using single-molecule array (SIMOA) technology, which have much lower limits of toxin detection than conventional EIAs, potentially improving the sensitivity of these conventional EIAs while remaining highly specific. In this study, we use latent class analysis to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of different diagnostic tests for CD, including the novel SIMOA toxin assays, in detecting the different CD targets: the presence of CD bacterium, the presence of CD toxin gene, and the presence of CD toxin.
Keywords: Clostridioides difficile; latent class analysis; multiple latent variable model; single-molecule array.
Conflict of interest statement
A.B. and M.M. were employees of bioMérieux during the study period. V.G.L. has received consulting fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Figures

Similar articles
-
Sensitivity of Single-Molecule Array Assays for Detection of Clostridium difficile Toxins in Comparison to Conventional Laboratory Testing Algorithms.J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Jul 26;56(8):e00452-18. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00452-18. Print 2018 Aug. J Clin Microbiol. 2018. PMID: 29898996 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of three commercial rapid immunoassays for the diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile infection.Microbiol Spectr. 2025 Aug 5;13(8):e0340524. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.03405-24. Epub 2025 Jul 15. Microbiol Spectr. 2025. PMID: 40662699 Free PMC article.
-
Performance of Clostridium difficile toxin enzyme immunoassay and nucleic acid amplification tests stratified by patient disease severity.J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Mar;51(3):869-73. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02970-12. Epub 2012 Dec 26. J Clin Microbiol. 2013. PMID: 23269736 Free PMC article.
-
Laboratory Diagnostic Methods for Clostridioides difficile Infection: the First Systematic Review and Meta-analysis in Korea.Ann Lab Med. 2021 Mar 1;41(2):171-180. doi: 10.3343/alm.2021.41.2.171. Ann Lab Med. 2021. PMID: 33063678 Free PMC article.
-
Laboratory diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile infection: past, present and future.Anaerobe. 2025 Jun;93:102974. doi: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2025.102974. Epub 2025 May 23. Anaerobe. 2025. PMID: 40412504 Review.
References
-
- Lessa FC, Mu Y, Bamberg WM, Beldavs ZG, Dumyati GK, Dunn JR, Farley MM, Holzbauer SM, Meek JI, Phipps EC, Wilson LE, Winston LG, Cohen JA, Limbago BM, Fridkin SK, Gerding DN, McDonald LC. 2015. Burden of Clostridium difficile infection in the United States. N Engl J Med 372:825–834. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1408913 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- ECDC . 2024. Annual epidemiological report for 2018-2020. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Clostridiodes Difficle Infections. https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/AER-Clostridium....
-
- Planche TD, Davies KA, Coen PG, Finney JM, Monahan IM, Morris KA, O’Connor L, Oakley SJ, Pope CF, Wren MW, Shetty NP, Crook DW, Wilcox MH. 2013. Differences in outcome according to Clostridium difficile testing method: a prospective multicentre diagnostic validation study of C difficile infection. Lancet Infect Dis 13:936–945. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(13)70200-7 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . 2019. Short Summary: testing for C. difficile and standardized infection ratios National Healthcare Safety Network
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical