Cargando…
Performance of two serodiagnostic tests for loiasis in a Non-Endemic area
Loiasis, caused by the filarial nematode Loa loa, is endemic in Central and West Africa where about 10 million people are infected. There is a scarcity of convenient, commercial diagnostics for L. loa. Microscopy requires trained personnel and has low sensitivity, while the serodiagnosis is currentl...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7274468/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32453734 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008187 |
_version_ | 1783542590414520320 |
---|---|
author | Gobbi, Federico Buonfrate, Dora Boussinesq, Michel Chesnais, Cedric B. Pion, Sebastien D. Silva, Ronaldo Moro, Lucia Rodari, Paola Tamarozzi, Francesca Biamonte, Marco Bisoffi, Zeno |
author_facet | Gobbi, Federico Buonfrate, Dora Boussinesq, Michel Chesnais, Cedric B. Pion, Sebastien D. Silva, Ronaldo Moro, Lucia Rodari, Paola Tamarozzi, Francesca Biamonte, Marco Bisoffi, Zeno |
author_sort | Gobbi, Federico |
collection | PubMed |
description | Loiasis, caused by the filarial nematode Loa loa, is endemic in Central and West Africa where about 10 million people are infected. There is a scarcity of convenient, commercial diagnostics for L. loa. Microscopy requires trained personnel and has low sensitivity, while the serodiagnosis is currently not standardized. Individual case management is also important in non-endemic countries to treat migrants, expatriates and tourists. We retrospectively compared the performance of a Loa Antibody Rapid Test (RDT) and a commercial ELISA pan-filarial test on 170 patients, 65 with loiasis [8 with eyeworm, 29 with positive microfilaremia, 28 with neither microfilaremia nor history of eyeworm but eosinophilia and history of Calabar swelling (probable loiasis)], 95 with other common parasitic infections and no previous exposure to L. loa (37 with M. perstans, 1 with Brugia sp., 18 with strongyloidiasis, 20 with schistosomiasis, 5 with hookworm, 4 with Ascaris lumbricoides infection, 10 with hyper-reactive malarial splenomegaly), and 10 uninfected controls. The sensitivity of the RDT and of the ELISA were 93.8% (61/65) and 90.8% (59/65), respectively. For the RDT, most of the cross-reactions were observed in patients with M. perstans: 7/37 (18.9%), followed by 1/10 (10%) with hyper-reactive malarial splenomegaly and 1/20 (5%) with schistosomiasis. None of the 27 subjects infected with intestinal nematodes was found positive at this test. The ELISA is meant to be a pan-filarial assay, and reacted extensively with cases of M. perstans (95%), as expected, and also in 11/18 (61.1%) patients with strongyloidiasis and in 3/5 (60%) with hookworm infection. The RDT and the ELISA are both highly sensitive for the diagnosis of loiasis. The main difference lies in the extent of cross-reactivity with other parasites. Considering that the RDT is specifically meant for Loa loa infection, and its high sensitivity, this test could be a useful tool for the diagnosis of occult loiasis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7274468 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72744682020-06-16 Performance of two serodiagnostic tests for loiasis in a Non-Endemic area Gobbi, Federico Buonfrate, Dora Boussinesq, Michel Chesnais, Cedric B. Pion, Sebastien D. Silva, Ronaldo Moro, Lucia Rodari, Paola Tamarozzi, Francesca Biamonte, Marco Bisoffi, Zeno PLoS Negl Trop Dis Research Article Loiasis, caused by the filarial nematode Loa loa, is endemic in Central and West Africa where about 10 million people are infected. There is a scarcity of convenient, commercial diagnostics for L. loa. Microscopy requires trained personnel and has low sensitivity, while the serodiagnosis is currently not standardized. Individual case management is also important in non-endemic countries to treat migrants, expatriates and tourists. We retrospectively compared the performance of a Loa Antibody Rapid Test (RDT) and a commercial ELISA pan-filarial test on 170 patients, 65 with loiasis [8 with eyeworm, 29 with positive microfilaremia, 28 with neither microfilaremia nor history of eyeworm but eosinophilia and history of Calabar swelling (probable loiasis)], 95 with other common parasitic infections and no previous exposure to L. loa (37 with M. perstans, 1 with Brugia sp., 18 with strongyloidiasis, 20 with schistosomiasis, 5 with hookworm, 4 with Ascaris lumbricoides infection, 10 with hyper-reactive malarial splenomegaly), and 10 uninfected controls. The sensitivity of the RDT and of the ELISA were 93.8% (61/65) and 90.8% (59/65), respectively. For the RDT, most of the cross-reactions were observed in patients with M. perstans: 7/37 (18.9%), followed by 1/10 (10%) with hyper-reactive malarial splenomegaly and 1/20 (5%) with schistosomiasis. None of the 27 subjects infected with intestinal nematodes was found positive at this test. The ELISA is meant to be a pan-filarial assay, and reacted extensively with cases of M. perstans (95%), as expected, and also in 11/18 (61.1%) patients with strongyloidiasis and in 3/5 (60%) with hookworm infection. The RDT and the ELISA are both highly sensitive for the diagnosis of loiasis. The main difference lies in the extent of cross-reactivity with other parasites. Considering that the RDT is specifically meant for Loa loa infection, and its high sensitivity, this test could be a useful tool for the diagnosis of occult loiasis. Public Library of Science 2020-05-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7274468/ /pubmed/32453734 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008187 Text en © 2020 Gobbi et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Gobbi, Federico Buonfrate, Dora Boussinesq, Michel Chesnais, Cedric B. Pion, Sebastien D. Silva, Ronaldo Moro, Lucia Rodari, Paola Tamarozzi, Francesca Biamonte, Marco Bisoffi, Zeno Performance of two serodiagnostic tests for loiasis in a Non-Endemic area |
title | Performance of two serodiagnostic tests for loiasis in a Non-Endemic area |
title_full | Performance of two serodiagnostic tests for loiasis in a Non-Endemic area |
title_fullStr | Performance of two serodiagnostic tests for loiasis in a Non-Endemic area |
title_full_unstemmed | Performance of two serodiagnostic tests for loiasis in a Non-Endemic area |
title_short | Performance of two serodiagnostic tests for loiasis in a Non-Endemic area |
title_sort | performance of two serodiagnostic tests for loiasis in a non-endemic area |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7274468/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32453734 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008187 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gobbifederico performanceoftwoserodiagnostictestsforloiasisinanonendemicarea AT buonfratedora performanceoftwoserodiagnostictestsforloiasisinanonendemicarea AT boussinesqmichel performanceoftwoserodiagnostictestsforloiasisinanonendemicarea AT chesnaiscedricb performanceoftwoserodiagnostictestsforloiasisinanonendemicarea AT pionsebastiend performanceoftwoserodiagnostictestsforloiasisinanonendemicarea AT silvaronaldo performanceoftwoserodiagnostictestsforloiasisinanonendemicarea AT morolucia performanceoftwoserodiagnostictestsforloiasisinanonendemicarea AT rodaripaola performanceoftwoserodiagnostictestsforloiasisinanonendemicarea AT tamarozzifrancesca performanceoftwoserodiagnostictestsforloiasisinanonendemicarea AT biamontemarco performanceoftwoserodiagnostictestsforloiasisinanonendemicarea AT bisoffizeno performanceoftwoserodiagnostictestsforloiasisinanonendemicarea |