High sensitivity and reproducibility of in‐house <scp>ELISA</scp>s using different genotypes of <i>Trypanosoma cruzi</i>

Caballero, Eva; Corrêa, Rosângela da Silveira; Nascimento, Marilda Savóia; Villarreal, Alcibiades; Llanes, Alejandro; Kesper, Norival

doi:10.1111/pim.12627

Cited by 7 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 64 publications

(159 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The 43 selected studies were published between 2010 and 2019, with between 3 and 6 studies being published per year, except for 2015, a year in which there were no publications. 27 articles [9,21,22,24,25,[27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35]38,41,42,[44][45][46]48,51,53,55,[57][58][59] evaluated ELISA tests; 14 used RDT [10,23,26,32,37,39,40,43,47,50,52,54,60,61] and 2 [36,56] evaluated both tests (Table 1).…”

Section: Study Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rapid diagnostic tests and ELISA for diagnosing chronic Chagas disease: Systematic revision and meta-analysis

Carrero

Tadger²,

Cuellar³

et al. 2022

PLoS Negl Trop Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To determine the diagnostic validity of the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDT) among individuals with suspected chronic Chagas Disease (CD). Methodology A search was made for studies with ELISA and RDT assays validity estimates as eligibility criteria, published between 2010 and 2020 on PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and LILACS. This way, we extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias and applicability of the studies using the QUADAS-2 tool. The bivariate random effects model was also used to estimate the overall sensitivity and specificity through forest-plots, ROC space, and we visually assessed the heterogeneity between studies. Meta-regressions were made using subgroup analysis. We used Deeks’ test to assess the risk of publication bias. Results 43 studies were included; 27 assessed ELISA tests; 14 assessed RDTs; and 2 assessed ELISA and RDTs, against different reference standards. 51.2 % of them used a non-comparative observational design, and 46.5 % a comparative clinical design (“case-control” type). High risk of bias was detected for patient screening and reference standard. The ELISA tests had a sensitivity of 99% (95% CI: 98–99) and a specificity of 98% (95% CI: 97–99); whereas the Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDT) had values of 95% (95% CI: 94–97) and 97% (95% CI: 96–98), respectively. Deeks’ test showed asymmetry on the ELISA assays. Conclusions ELISA and RDT tests have high validity for diagnosing chronic Chagas disease. The analysis of these two types of evidence in this systematic review and meta-analysis constitutes an input for their use. The limitations included the difficulty in extracting data due to the lack of information in the articles, and the comparative clinical-type design of some studies.

show abstract

Section: Study Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rapid diagnostic tests and ELISA for diagnosing chronic Chagas disease: Systematic revision and meta-analysis

Carrero

Tadger²,

Cuellar³

et al. 2022

PLoS Negl Trop Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results of this study showed that the sensitivity index did not vary, with percentages of 100% for all strains in both tests. However, the specificity index for the ELISA tests showed differences between 92 and 98% but was reduced to 78-89% when the Leishmania-positive sera were included [82].…”

Section: The World Of Diagnosis For Chagas Disease: a Discordant Paramentioning

confidence: 89%

More than a Hundred Years in the Search for an Accurate Diagnosis for Chagas Disease: Current Panorama and Expectations

López‐Monteon¹,

Dumonteil²,

Ramos-Ligonio³

2019

Current Topics in Neglected Tropical Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chagas disease, or American trypanosomiasis, is a parasitic disease of the Americas. In nature, Trypanosoma cruzi is transmitted through various species of triatomine bugs. However, non-vectorial transmission can also occur, such as transmission through blood products or by transplanting infected organs, by vertical transmission, and lately by oral route. Currently, Chagas disease affects approximately 6-7 million people worldwide, and the process of urbanization in Latin America and migratory movements from endemic countries have led to Chagas disease being diagnosed in areas where the infection is not endemic. There are several methods for diagnosing Chagas disease. Some of these are mostly used for research purposes, while others are used in routine diagnostic laboratories. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), chronic Chagas disease diagnosis is based on two serological techniques. To establish a definitive diagnosis, the results must be concordant. In the case of discordances, the WHO proposes repeating serology in a new sample, and if results remain inconclusive, a confirmatory test should be performed. This chapter shows aspects of the diagnosis of Chagas disease, which varies in its sensitivity and specificity, and its use depends on the geographical location, the available resources, and the purpose of the diagnosis.

show abstract

“…A total of 2198 subjects were studied. Sensitivity ranged from 2.0 to 99%, with a median of 76.0%, CI 95% (67,84), while the test for equality of sensitivities presented a χ 2 = 516.43, df = 12, p-value = 2e-16. Study specificity ranged from 45.0 to 100%, with a median of 98.0%, 95%CI (82,100); the test for equality of specificities showed χ 2 = 315.74, df = 12, p-value = 2e-16.…”

Section: Polymerase Chain Reactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of the diagnostic tests for the detection of Chagas disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Candia-Puma

Machaca-Luque

Roque-Pumahuanca

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present systematic review and meta-analysis about the accuracy of diagnostic tests aim to describe the findings of literature over the last thirty years for the diagnosis of Chagas disease (CD). This work aimed to determine the accuracy of diagnostic techniques for CD in the disease's acute and chronic phases. The PubMed database was searched for studies published between 1990 and 2021 on CD diagnostic. Fifty-six published studies that met the criteria were analyzed and included in the meta-analysis, evaluating diagnostic accuracy through sensitivity and specificity. For Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA), Fluorescent Antibody Technique (IFAT), Hemagglutination Test (HmT), Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) and (Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction qPCR diagnosis methods, the sensitivity had a median of 99.0%, 78.0%, 75.0%, 76.0% and 94.0%, respectively; while specificity presented a median of 99.0%, 99.0%, 99.0%, 98.0% and 98.0%, respectively. This meta-analysis showed that ELISA and qPCR techniques had a higher performance compared to other methods of diagnosing CD in the chronic and acute phases, respectively. It was concluded by means of the AUC restricted to the false positive rates, that the ELISA diagnostic test presents the highest performance in diagnosing acute and chronic CD, compared to serological and molecular tests. Future studies focusing on new CD diagnostics approaches should be targeted.

show abstract

High sensitivity and reproducibility of in‐house ELISAs using different genotypes of Trypanosoma cruzi

Cited by 7 publications

References 64 publications

Rapid diagnostic tests and ELISA for diagnosing chronic Chagas disease: Systematic revision and meta-analysis

Rapid diagnostic tests and ELISA for diagnosing chronic Chagas disease: Systematic revision and meta-analysis

More than a Hundred Years in the Search for an Accurate Diagnosis for Chagas Disease: Current Panorama and Expectations

Accuracy of the diagnostic tests for the detection of Chagas disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About