Misclassification of the stages of syphilis: implications for surveillance.
OBJECTIVE
Syphilis cases were reviewed to see if reported stages met the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention case definition. Classification was excellent for primary and secondary and good for late latent, but half of early latent and unknown duration were misclassified. New surveillance definitions are suggested, comments requested.


BACKGROUND
Uncertainty when staging latent syphilis should lead clinicians to call it late latent (requires more treatment) and disease investigators to call it early latent (priority for partner investigation). Accurate surveillance requires consistent case definitions.


OBJECTIVE
Assess validity of reported syphilis stages.


METHODS
Record reviews in 6 jurisdictions to determine if reported cases met the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention case definitions.


RESULTS
Nine hundred seventy-three records from 6 jurisdictions in 2002 showed excellent agreement for reported primary (94.0%) and secondary (95.4%), good agreement for late latent (80.2%), and poor agreement for early latent (48.4%) and unknown duration (49.7%). Unknown duration (age < or =35 and nontreponemal test titer > or =32) was often misinterpreted to mean "not known." Early latent (within the past year, documented: seroconversion, fourfold titer increase, symptoms, or contact with an independently documented early syphilis case) was often misinterpreted to include patients with risky behavior, young age, or high nontreponemal test titers.


CONCLUSIONS
The unknown duration stage should be dropped. Surveillance of latent syphilis would be more consistent if cases were reported as having high or low titers on nontreponemal test. Alternative approaches are solicited from readers.
Peterman
Thomas A
TA
Division of STD Prevention, National Center for HIV, STD, and TB Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, USA. tap1@cdc.gov
Kahn
Richard H
RH
Ciesielski
Carol A
CA
Ortiz-Rios
Elizabeth
E
Furness
Bruce W
BW
Blank
Susan
S
Schillinger
Julia A
JA
Gunn
Robert A
RA
Taylor
Melanie
M
Berman
Stuart M
SM
D000328:Adult; D002487:Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008485:Medical Audit; D008499:Medical Records; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care; D010401:Penicillin G Benzathine / Q000008:administration & dosage; D011159:Population Surveillance; D011647:Puerto Rico / Q000453:epidemiology; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013588:Syphilis Serodiagnosis / Q000592:standards* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D013592:Syphilis, Latent / Q000097:blood / Q000145:classification / Q000453:epidemiology* / Q000517:prevention & control*; D014481:United States / Q000453:epidemiology
D010401:Penicillin G Benzathine
Sex Transm Dis. 2000 Jul;27(6):305-10
10907903
Sex Transm Dis. 2004 Jan;31(1):20-5
14695954
Am J Public Health. 1991 Oct;81(10):1259-62
1928522
Ann Intern Med. 1986 Mar;104(3):368-76
3511822
Sex Transm Dis. 2001 Mar;28(3):158-65
11289198
Sex Transm Dis. 1997 Oct;24(9):511-8
9339968
Am J Public Health. 1990 Jul;80(7):853-7
2356911
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2003 Dec 19;52(50):1229-32
14681596
Ann Intern Med. 1994 Jul 15;121(2):94-100
7912483
N Engl J Med. 1997 Jul 31;337(5):307-14
9235493
Int J STD AIDS. 2004 Feb;15(2):73-88
15006068
Sex Transm Dis. 1990 Oct-Dec;17(4):163-8
2264004
Sex Transm Dis. 1999 Apr;26(4):201-7
10225586
Sex Transm Dis. 2001 Sep;28(9):497-503
11518865
Sex Transm Dis. 1997 Apr;24(4):185-200
9101629
Ann Emerg Med. 1993 Aug;22(8):1286-90
8333629
Sex Transm Dis. 2002 Aug;29(8):486-90
12172535
Sex Transm Dis. 2002 May;29(5):277-84
11984444