Back to Search Start Over

Performance of two serodiagnostic tests for loiasis in a Non-Endemic area.

Authors :
Federico Gobbi
Dora Buonfrate
Michel Boussinesq
Cedric B Chesnais
Sebastien D Pion
Ronaldo Silva
Lucia Moro
Paola Rodari
Francesca Tamarozzi
Marco Biamonte
Zeno Bisoffi
Source :
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Vol 14, Iss 5, p e0008187 (2020)
Publication Year :
2020
Publisher :
Public Library of Science (PLoS), 2020.

Abstract

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.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
19352727 and 19352735
Volume :
14
Issue :
5
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.1fc66e54498a4a619c6805cba947d95d
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008187