Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28727723›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2017

Analytical sensitivity and specificity of a loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) kit prototype for detection of Trypanosoma cruzi DNA in human blood samples.

Susana A Besuschio, Mónica Llano Murcia, Alejandro F Benatar, Severine Monnerat, Israel Cruz, Albert Picado, María de Los Ángeles Curto, Yutaka Kubota, Diana P Wehrendt, Paula Pavia and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation 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 50 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Genomics in parasitology: Accomplishments and challengesBiomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Frontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Clinical use of molecular methods forFrontiers in parasitology · 2023
    Article
  19. Laboratory diagnosis ofFrontiers in parasitology · 2023
    Review
  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

14 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Susana A BesuschioLaboratorio de Biología Molecular de la Enfermedad de Chagas, Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas (INGEBI-CONICET), Buenos Aires Argentina.
Mónica Llano MurciaLaboratorio de Parasitología Molecular, Facultad de Ciencias -Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia.
Alejandro F BenatarLaboratorio de Biología Molecular de la Enfermedad de Chagas, Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas (INGEBI-CONICET), Buenos Aires Argentina.
Severine MonneratFoundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.
Israel CruzFoundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.
Albert PicadoFoundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.
María de Los Ángeles CurtoLaboratorio de Biología Molecular de la Enfermedad de Chagas, Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas (INGEBI-CONICET), Buenos Aires Argentina.
Yutaka KubotaEiken Chemical Company, Tokyo, Japan.
Diana P WehrendtLaboratorio de Biología Molecular de la Enfermedad de Chagas, Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas (INGEBI-CONICET), Buenos Aires Argentina.
Paula PaviaLaboratorio de Parasitología Molecular, Facultad de Ciencias -Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia.
Yasuyoshi MoriEiken Chemical Company, Tokyo, Japan.
Concepción PuertaLaboratorio de Parasitología Molecular, Facultad de Ciencias -Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia.
Joseph M Ndung'uFoundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.
Alejandro G SchijmanLaboratorio de Biología Molecular de la Enfermedad de Chagas, Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas (INGEBI-CONICET), Buenos Aires Argentina.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9805-3415
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas · ARFIND · CHPontificia Universidad Javeriana · COEiken Chemical (Japan) · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to assess analytical parameters of a prototype LAMP kit that was designed for detection of Trypanosoma cruzi DNA in human blood. The prototype is based on the amplification of the highly repetitive satellite sequence of T.cruzi in microtubes containing dried reagents on the inside of the caps. The reaction is carried out at 65°C during 40 minutes. Calcein allows direct detection of amplified products with the naked eye. Inclusivity and selectivity were tested in purified DNA from Trypanosoma cruzi stocks belonging to the six discrete typing units (DTUs), in DNA from other protozoan parasites and in human DNA. Analytical sensitivity was estimated in serial dilutions of DNA samples from Sylvio X10 (Tc I) and CL Brener (Tc VI) stocks, as well as from EDTA-treated or heparinized blood samples spiked with known amounts of cultured epimastigotes (CL Brener). LAMP sensitivity was compared after DNA extraction using commercial fiberglass columns or after "Boil & Spin" rapid preparation. Moreover, the same DNA and EDTA-blood spiked samples were subjected to standardized qPCR based on the satellite DNA sequence for comparative purposes. A panel of peripheral blood specimens belonging to Chagas disease patients, including acute, congenital, chronic and reactivated cases (N = 23), as well as seronegative controls (N = 10) were evaluated by LAMP in comparison to qPCR. LAMP was able to amplify DNAs from T. cruzi stocks representative of the six DTUs, whereas it did not amplify DNAs from Leishmania sp, T. brucei sp, T. rangeli KPN+ and KPN-, P. falciparum and non-infected human DNA. Analytical sensitivity was 1x10-2 fg/μL of both CL Brener and Sylvio X10 DNAs, whereas qPCR detected up to 1x 10-1 fg/μL of CL Brener DNA and 1 fg/μl of Sylvio X10 DNA. LAMP detected 1x10-2 parasite equivalents/mL in spiked EDTA blood and 1x10-1 par.eq/mL in spiked heparinized blood using fiberglass columns for DNA extraction, whereas qPCR detected 1x10-2 par.eq./mL in EDTA blood. Boil & Spin extraction allowed detection of 1x10-2 par.eq /mL in spiked EDTA blood and 1 par.eq/ml in heparinized blood. LAMP was able to detect T.cruzi infection in peripheral blood samples collected from well-characterised seropositive patients, including acute, congenital, chronic and reactivated Chagas disease. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a prototype LAMP kit with appropriate analytical sensitivity for diagnosis of Chagas disease patients, and potentially useful for monitoring treatment response.

Indexed as

Chagas DiseaseDNA, ProtozoanFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMaleMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesSensitivity and SpecificityTrypanosoma cruziDNA, Protozoan

Identifiers

PMID28727723
PMCPMC5544240
OpenAlexW2739019385

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.