ArticlePloS one2015
Oral Outbreak of Chagas Disease in Santa Catarina, Brazil: Experimental Evaluation of a Patient's Strain.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Orally transmitted Chagas disease outbreaks in Latin America: a comprehensive systematic review and public health implications.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Kinetics of Biomarkers for Therapeutic Assessment in Swiss Mice Infected with a VirulentPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Deforestation effects and house invasion by chagas disease vectors in Brazil.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Host Genetics Background Influence in the IntragastricFrontiers in immunology · 2020Article
- Review
- Oral Versus Intragastric Inoculation: Similar Pathways ofFrontiers in immunology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chagas disease is a worldwide public health problem. Although the vectorial transmission of Chagas disease has been controlled in Brazil there are other ways of transmission, such as the ingestion of T. cruzi contaminated food, which ensures the continuation of this zoonosis. Here, we demonstrate the influence of the inoculation route on the establishment and development of the SC2005 T. cruzi strain infection in mice. Groups of Swiss mice were infected intragastrically (IG) or intraperitoneally (IP) with the T. cruzi SC2005 strain derived from an outbreak of oral Chagas disease. The results revealed that 100% of IP infected mice showed parasitemia, while just 36% of IG infected showed the presence of the parasite in blood. The parasitemia peaks were later and less intense in the IG infected mice. Mortality of the IP infected animals was more intense and earlier when compared to the IG infected mice. In the IP infected mice leucopenia occurred in the early infection followed by leucocytosis, correlating positively with the increase of the parasites. However, in the IG infected mice only an increase in monocytes was observed, which was positively correlated with the increase of the parasites. Histopathological analyses revealed a myotropic pattern of the SC2005 strain with the presence of inflammatory infiltrates and parasites in different organs of the animals infected by both routes as well as fibrosis foci and collagen redistribution. The flow cytometric analysis demonstrated a fluctuation of the T lymphocyte population in the blood, spleen and mesenteric lymph nodes of the infected animals. T. cruzi DNA associated with the presence of inflammatory infiltrates was detected by PCR in the esophagus, stomach and intestine of all infected mice. These findings are important for the understanding of the pathogenesis of T. cruzi infection by both inoculation routes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.