Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32725060›Full record

ArticleMemorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz2020

Application of WHO International Biological Reference Standards to evaluate commercial serological tests for chronic Chagas disease.

Amadeo Sáez-Alquezar, Angela Cristina Verissimo Junqueira, Andressa da Matta Durans, André Valpassos Guimarães, José Abol Corrêa, D William Provance, Pedro Hernan Cabello, José Rodrigues Coura, Pedro Albajar Viñas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, 2020. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

9 authors.

Amadeo Sáez-AlquezarPrograma Nacional de Controle de Qualidade, Sociedade Brasileira de Análises Clínicas, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Angela Cristina Verissimo JunqueiraLaboratório de Doenças Parasitárias, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz-Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Andressa da Matta DuransCentro de Desenvolvimento Tecnológico em Saúde, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz-Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
André Valpassos GuimarãesPrograma Nacional de Controle de Qualidade, Sociedade Brasileira de Análises Clínicas, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
José Abol CorrêaPrograma Nacional de Controle de Qualidade, Sociedade Brasileira de Análises Clínicas, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
D William ProvanceCentro de Desenvolvimento Tecnológico em Saúde, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz-Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Pedro Hernan CabelloLaboratório de Genética Humana, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz-Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
José Rodrigues CouraLaboratório de Doenças Parasitárias, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz-Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Pedro Albajar ViñasDepartment of Control of Neglected Tropical Diseases, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND Chagas disease, resulting from Trypanosoma cruzi infections, continues to be a health concern mainly in Latin American countries where the parasite is endemic. The laboratory diagnosis of a chronic infection is determined through serological assays for antibodies against T. cruzi and several tests are available that differ in key components, formats and methodologies. To date, no single test meets the criteria of a gold standard. The situation is further complicated by the difficulties associated with performance comparisons between different immunoassays or methodologies executed at different times and geographical areas. OBJECTIVE To improve the diagnosis of Chagas disease, the WHO coordinated the development of two International Biological Reference Standards for antibodies against anti-T. cruzi: NIBSC 09/186 and NIBSC 09/188 that respectively represent geographical regions with the highest prevalence of TcII and TcI lineages of the parasite. METHODS The principle goal of this study was to verify the behavior of these standards when assayed by several commercially available serological tests that employ different methods to capture and detect human anti-T. cruzi antibodies. FINDINGS AND MAIN CONCLUSIONS The results reinforce the recommendation that these standards be considered for performance evaluations of commercialised immunoassays and should be an integral step in the development of new test components or assay paradigms.

Indexed as

Antibodies, ProtozoanChagas DiseaseHumansImmunoassayReference StandardsSerologic TestsTrypanosoma cruziWorld Health OrganizationAntibodies, Protozoan

Identifiers

PMID32725060
PMCPMC7379854

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.