Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27326453›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2016

Improvement of POC-CCA Interpretation by Using Lyophilization of Urine from Patients with Schistosoma mansoni Low Worm Burden: Towards an Elimination of Doubts about the Concept of Trace.

Paulo Marcos Zech Coelho, Liliane Maria Vidal Siqueira, Rafaella Fortini Queiroz Grenfell, Nathalie Bonatti Franco Almeida, Naftale Katz, Áureo Almeida, Nídia Francisca de Figueiredo Carneiro, Edward Oliveira

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. New epidemiological profile of schistosomiasis from an area of low prevalence in Brazil.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Paulo Marcos Zech CoelhoSchistosomiasis Laboratory, Rene Rachou Research Center, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Liliane Maria Vidal SiqueiraSchistosomiasis Laboratory, Rene Rachou Research Center, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Rafaella Fortini Queiroz GrenfellSchistosomiasis Laboratory, Rene Rachou Research Center, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Nathalie Bonatti Franco AlmeidaSchistosomiasis Laboratory, Rene Rachou Research Center, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Naftale KatzSchistosomiasis Laboratory, Rene Rachou Research Center, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Áureo AlmeidaSchistosomiasis Laboratory, Rene Rachou Research Center, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Nídia Francisca de Figueiredo CarneiroZoonoses Control Centre, Montes Claros, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Edward OliveiraClinical Research Laboratory, Rene Rachou Research Center, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate diagnostic techniques for schistosomiasis are essential for prevalence determination and identification of positive patients. A point-of-care test for detecting schistosome circulating cathodic antigen (POC-CCA) has been evaluated for its accuracy in different endemic regions. This reagent strip/dipstick based assay has showed high sensitivity for individuals with high or moderate worm burden, but the interpretation of light infections is less clear, especially for trace readings. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsWe introduced a urine lyophilization step to the POC-CCA assay to improve its sensitivity and clarify the interpretation of traces. We evaluated POC-CCA sensitivity and specificity within individuals with low parasite burdens in a Brazilian endemic area where a high number of traces were detected. Patients that were positive for other helminths were also evaluated for cross reactions. In all cases, a combined parasitological diagnosis using Kato-Katz (24 slides) and Saline Gradient (1 g of feces) were used as reference. At baseline, diagnosis by POC-CCA (1-2 cassettes) showed 6% sensitivity, inaccurately predicting a low prevalence of Schistosoma mansoni infections (2 POC-CCA positives/32 egg positives). After urine lyophilization, the sensitivity was increased significantly (p < 0.05). Prevalence rates changed from 2% to 32% (27 POC-CCA positives/32 egg positives), equivalent to parasitological techniques. Most of the trace readings changed to positive after lyophilization while some negatives turned into traces. Cross reaction analysis confirmed the specificity of POC-CCA. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Trace readings cannot be primarily defined as positive or negative cases. It is critical to verify case-by-case by concentrating urine 10 fold by lyophilization for the diagnosis. Following lyophilization, persistent trace readings should be read as negatives. No trained technician is needed and cost is restricted to the cost of a lyophilizer and the electricity to run it.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care TestingAlbendazoleAnimalsAnthelminticsAntigens, HelminthFecesFreeze DryingGlycoproteinsHelminth ProteinsHumansParasite Egg CountParasitologyPraziquantelSchistosoma mansoniSchistosomiasis mansoniSensitivity and SpecificityAlbendazoleAnthelminticsAntigens, HelminthCCA protein, Schistosoma mansoniGlycoproteinsHelminth ProteinsPraziquantel

Identifiers

PMID27326453
PMCPMC4915691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.