Cargando…

Detecting Leishmania in dogs: A hierarchical-modeling approach to investigate the performance of parasitological and qPCR-based diagnostic procedures

BACKGROUND: Domestic dogs are primary reservoir hosts of Leishmania infantum, the agent of visceral leishmaniasis. Detecting dog infections is central to epidemiological inference, disease prevention, and veterinary practice. Error-free diagnostic procedures, however, are lacking, and the performanc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vital, Tamires, Teixeira, Ana Izabel Passarella, Silva, Débora Marcolino, de Carvalho, Bruna Caroline, Dallago, Bruno, Hagström, Luciana, Hecht, Mariana Machado, Nitz, Nadjar, Abad-Franch, Fernando
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9803295/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36525465
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0011011
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Domestic dogs are primary reservoir hosts of Leishmania infantum, the agent of visceral leishmaniasis. Detecting dog infections is central to epidemiological inference, disease prevention, and veterinary practice. Error-free diagnostic procedures, however, are lacking, and the performance of those available is difficult to measure in the absence of fail-safe “reference standards”. Here, we illustrate how a hierarchical-modeling approach can be used to formally account for false-negative and false-positive results when investigating the process of Leishmania detection in dogs. METHODS/FINDINGS: We studied 294 field-sampled dogs of unknown infection status from a Leishmania-endemic region. We ran 350 parasitological tests (bone-marrow microscopy and culture) and 1,016 qPCR assays (blood, bone-marrow, and eye-swab samples with amplifiable DNA). Using replicate test results and site-occupancy models, we estimated (a) clinical sensitivity for each diagnostic procedure and (b) clinical specificity for qPCRs; parasitological tests were assumed 100% specific. Initial modeling revealed qPCR specificity < 94%; we tracked the source of this unexpected result to some qPCR plates having subtle signs of possible contamination. Using multi-model inference, we formally accounted for suspected plate contamination and estimated qPCR sensitivity at 49–53% across sample types and dog clinical conditions; qPCR specificity was high (95–96%), but fell to 81–82% for assays run in plates with suspected contamination. The sensitivity of parasitological procedures was low (~12–13%), but increased to ~33% (with substantial uncertainty) for bone-marrow culture in seriously-diseased dogs. Leishmania-infection frequency estimates (~49–50% across clinical conditions) were lower than observed (~60%). CONCLUSIONS: We provide statistical estimates of key performance parameters for five diagnostic procedures used to detect Leishmania in dogs. Low clinical sensitivies likely reflect the absence of Leishmania parasites/DNA in perhaps ~50–70% of samples drawn from infected dogs. Although qPCR performance was similar across sample types, non-invasive eye-swabs were overall less likely to contain amplifiable DNA. Finally, modeling was instrumental to discovering (and formally accounting for) possible qPCR-plate contamination; even with stringent negative/blank-control scoring, ~4–5% of positive qPCRs were most likely false-positives. This work shows, in sum, how hierarchical site-occupancy models can sharpen our understanding of the problem of diagnosing host infections with hard-to-detect pathogens including Leishmania.