ArticleBMC infectious diseases2018
Serological evaluation for Chagas disease in migrants from Latin American countries resident in Rome, Italy.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Primary care and community-based screening for Chagas disease in London, United Kingdom, August 2023 to January 2025.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2026Observational
- Screening and Diagnosis Access for Neglected and Tropical Parasitic Diseases in Italy: A National Survey.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
- Community-based serological screening for Chagas disease in London: a cross-sectional, observational pilot study.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Uncovering the Mechanism of Action of Antiprotozoal Agents: A Survey on Photoaffinity Labeling Strategy.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Assessment of Alinity s ChagasLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Chagas Disease in the Non-Endemic Area of Rome, Italy: Ten Years of Experience and a Brief Overview.Infectious disease reports · 2024Article
- Chagas disease in Italy: an update of epidemiological studies.Le infezioni in medicina · 2023Article
- Chagas Heart Disease: Beyond a Single Complication, from Asymptomatic Disease to Heart Failure.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Gold Nanoshells-Based Lateral Flow Assay for the Detection of Chagas Disease at the Point-of-Care.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2022Article
- Community-based screening of Chagas disease among Latin American migrants in a non-endemic country: an observational study.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2021Observational
- Describing nearly two decades of Chagas disease in Germany and the lessons learned: a retrospective study on screening, detection, diagnosis, and treatment of Trypanosoma cruzi infection from 2000 - 2018.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Chagas Disease in the New York City Metropolitan Area.Open forum infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Chagas Disease and Healthcare Rights in the Bolivian Immigrant Community of São Paulo, Brazil.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2020Article
- Immune reactivity to Trypanosoma cruzi chimeric proteins for Chagas disease diagnosis in immigrants living in a non-endemic setting.BMC infectious diseases · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChagas disease (CD) is a systemic parasitic infection caused by the protozoan Trypanosoma cruzi, whose chronic phase may lead to cardiac and intestinal disorders. Endemic in Latin America where it is transmitted mainly by vectors, large-scale migrations to other countries have turned CD into a global health problem because of its alternative transmission routes through blood transfusion, tissue transplantation, or congenital. Aim of this study was to compare the performance of two commercially available tests for serological diagnosis of CD in a group of Latin American migrants living in a non-endemic setting (Rome, Italy). The study was based on a cross-sectional analysis of seroprevalence in this group. Epidemiological risk factors associated to CD were also evaluated in this study population.
methodsThe present study was conducted on 368 subjects from the Latin American community resident in Rome. Following WHO guidelines, we employed a diagnostic strategy based on two tests to detect IgG antibodies against T. cruzi in the blood (a lysate antigen-based ELISA and a chemiluminescent microparticle CMIA composed of multiple recombinant antigens), followed by a third test (an immunochromatographic assay) on discordant samples.
resultsOur diagnostic approach produced 319/368 (86.7%) concordant negative and 30/368 (8.1%) concordant positive results after the first screening. Discrepancies were obtained for 19/368 (5.2%) samples that were tested using the third assay, obtaining 2 more positive and 17 negative results. The final count of positive samples was 32/368 (8.7% of the tested population). Increasing age, birth in Bolivia, and previous residence in a mud house were independent factors associated with T. cruzi positive serology.
conclusionsSerological diagnosis of CD is still challenging, because of the lack of a reference standard serological assay for diagnosis. Our results reaffirm the importance of performing CD screening in non-endemic countries; employing a fully automated and highly sensitive CMIA assay first could be a cost- and resource-effective strategy for mass screening of low-risk patients. However, our results also suggest that the WHO strategy of using two different serological assays, combined with epidemiological information, remains the best approach for patients coming from endemic countries.
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.