Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Participant screening results.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 1.

Comparison of ELISA and qPCR results.

Participant stools were monitored for oocyst shedding during the inpatient period and follow-up visits using both ELISA and plate-based qPCR with a Ct cut-off of 35. A) This heatmap depicts the day-to-day comparison of the qPCR result (orange hues) versus the normalized ELISA OD value (blue hues) for the same sample. The more intense the coloration, the lower the qPCR Ct value or the higher the ELISA OD value. Quantitative PCR was conducted on all trial days, while ELISA was conducted on trial days -1, 1, 2, 4, 6, 19–24, and 41–55. B) Semi-quantitative correlation analysis of ELISA vs. qPCR. CFZ, participant randomized to the clofazimine arm of the study; PCB, participant randomized to the placebo arm of the study. P, positive; N, negative; grey square, no value/not tested.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 2.

Cross-tabulation of qPCR and ELISA results.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

For each participant in Part A of the CRYPTOFAZ study, the results from all DNA-based assays are displayed, including the plate-based Cryptosporidium 18s qPCR Ct value for the Day 0 first sample of the day, the array card-based Cryptosporidium 18s qPCR Ct value for the Day 0 first sample of the day, species and subtyping results from dideoxysequencing, and the co-pathogens detected through the array card (Ct value listed in parentheses).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 2.

Mean normalized ELISA optical density over time.

Normalized OD values from days -1, 1, 2, 4, 6, 19–24, and 41–55 were averaged according to participant randomization to the CFZ or placebo arms of the trial. Circle markers—participants randomized to CFZ; square markers—participants randomized to placebo.

More »

Fig 2 Expand