Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32841284›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2020

A prospective cohort study of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis due to Leishmania major: Dynamics of the Leishmanin skin test and its predictive value for protection against infection and disease.

Jihène Bettaieb, Amine Toumi, Wissem Ghawar, Sadok Chlif, Mariem Nouira, Nabil Belhaj-Hamida, Adel Gharbi, Nissaf Ben-Alaya, Dhafer Laouini, Hechmi Louzir and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Healed Lesions of Human Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Caused ByFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Article
  8. 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

12 authors.

Jihène BettaiebDepartment of Medical Epidemiology, Institut Pasteur de Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.ORCID 0000-0003-0056-452X
Amine ToumiDepartment of Medical Epidemiology, Institut Pasteur de Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.
Wissem GhawarDepartment of Medical Epidemiology, Institut Pasteur de Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.
Sadok ChlifDepartment of Medical Epidemiology, Institut Pasteur de Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.
Mariem NouiraDepartment of Medical Epidemiology, Institut Pasteur de Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.
Nabil Belhaj-HamidaDepartment of Medical Epidemiology, Institut Pasteur de Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.
Adel GharbiDepartment of Medical Epidemiology, Institut Pasteur de Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.
Nissaf Ben-AlayaDepartment of Epidemiology, Observatoire National des Maladies Nouvelles et Emergentes, Tunis, Tunisia.
Dhafer LaouiniLaboratory of Transmission, Control and Immunobiology of Infections (LR11IPT02), Institut Pasteur de Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.
Hechmi LouzirLaboratory of Transmission, Control and Immunobiology of Infections (LR11IPT02), Institut Pasteur de Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.
Koussay DellagiLaboratory of Transmission, Control and Immunobiology of Infections (LR11IPT02), Institut Pasteur de Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.
Afif Ben SalahDepartment of Medical Epidemiology, Institut Pasteur de Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia.ORCID 0000-0001-6922-4625

Funding

L. major infection: Natural history and determinants of resistanceP50AI074178 · NIAID · INSTITUT PASTEUR DE TUNIS · PI BEN SALAH, AFIF · 2007 to 2011
$2.4M
NIAID NIH HHS P50 AI074178
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLeishmanin Skin Test (LST) is considered as a useful indicator of past infection by Leishmania parasites. However, the temporal dynamics of a positive LST under different epidemiologic scenarios and whether it relates to the protection against the recurrence of an overt disease are not fully documented. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsWe report here on a population based prospective study conducted on 2686 individuals living in two foci located in Central Tunisia, to assess over a one-year epidemiologic season, the incidence of Leishmania (L.) major infection and disease and changes in LST reactivity. The two foci were both endemic for Cutaneous Leishmaniasis (CL) due to L. major, but contrasted in their history for this disease (ie: an old focus versus a recent focus). We found that most infections occurred in the new focus (290/1000; 95% CI: 265-315 person-years) with an incidence rate of CL lesions 2.4 times higher than in the old focus. Likewise, the rates of LST reactivity reversion and loss, in the new focus, were 99/1000[38-116] person-years and 14/1000[8-21] person-years, respectively. Loss of LST reactivity was not noticed in the old focus. Interestingly, the incidence rates of symptomatic infection did not differ significantly according to the LST status at enrolment (negative versus positive) between the combined foci and the new one. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our findings confirm LST as a good tool for assessing L. major cryptic infection. However, the instability of the LST positivity in new foci should be considered as an important confounder of the outcome of this infection when developing a research protocol for vaccine trial.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansIncidenceLeishmania majorLeishmaniasis, CutaneousMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSkin TestsTunisiaYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID32841284
PMCPMC7473511

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.