Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28273127›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2017

Accuracy of chimeric proteins in the serological diagnosis of chronic chagas disease - a Phase II study.

Fred Luciano Neves Santos, Paola Alejandra Fiorani Celedon, Nilson Ivo Tonin Zanchin, Wayner Vieira de Souza, Edimilson Domingos da Silva, Leonardo Foti, Marco Aurélio Krieger, Yara de Miranda Gomes

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Standardization of Serodiagnostic Methods for Trypanosoma cruzi.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Assessment of Cross-Reactivity of ChimericDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Fred Luciano Neves SantosAggeu Magalhães Research Center, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-3944-0818
Paola Alejandra Fiorani CeledonMolecular Biology Institute of Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Nilson Ivo Tonin ZanchinCarlos Chagas Institute, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Wayner Vieira de SouzaAggeu Magalhães Research Center, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.
Edimilson Domingos da SilvaChagas Disease Integrated Program, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Leonardo FotiMolecular Biology Institute of Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Marco Aurélio KriegerChagas Disease Integrated Program, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Yara de Miranda GomesAggeu Magalhães Research Center, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRInstituto de Biologia Molecular do Paraná · BRFundação Carlos Chagas · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe performance of current serologic tests for diagnosing chronic Chagas disease (CD) is highly variable. The search for new diagnostic markers has been a constant challenge for improving accuracy and reducing the number of inconclusive results. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsHere, four chimeric proteins (IBMP-8.1 to -8.4) comprising immunodominant regions of different Trypanosoma cruzi antigens were tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The proteins were used to detect specific anti-T. cruzi antibodies in the sera of 857 chagasic and 689 non-chagasic individuals to evaluate their accuracy for chronic CD diagnosis. The antigens were recombinantly expressed in Escherichia coli and purified by chromatographic methods. The sensitivity and specificity values ranged from 94.3% to 99.3% and 99.4% to 100%, respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) values were 6,462 for IBMP-8.1, 3,807 for IBMP-8.2, 32,095 for IBMP-8.3, and 283,714 for IBMP-8.4. These chimeric antigens presented DORs that were higher than the commercial test Pathozyme Chagas. The antigens IBMP-8.3 and -8.4 also showed DORs higher than the Gold ELISA Chagas test. Mixtures with equimolar concentrations were tested in order to improve the diagnosis accuracy of negative samples with high signal and positive samples with low signal. However, no gain in accuracy was observed relative to the individual antigens. A total of 1,079 additional sera were used to test cross-reactivity to unrelated diseases. The cross-reactivity rates ranged from 0.37% to 0.74% even for Leishmania spp., a pathogen showing relatively high genome sequence identity to T. cruzi. Imprecision analyses showed that IBMP chimeras are very stable and the results are highly reproducible. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our findings indicate that the IBMP-8.4 antigen can be safely used in serological tests for T. cruzi screening in blood banks and for chronic CD laboratory diagnosis.

Indexed as

AmericasAntibodies, ProtozoanAntigens, ProtozoanChagas DiseaseChromatographyChronic DiseaseEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayEscherichia coliGene ExpressionHumansRecombinant ProteinsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySerologic TestsTrypanosoma cruziAntibodies, ProtozoanAntigens, ProtozoanRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID28273127
PMCPMC5358787
OpenAlexW2594090180

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.