Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33109255›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2020

Performance of Ag-ELISA in the diagnosis of Taenia solium cysticercosis in naturally infected pigs in Tanzania.

Mwemezi L Kabululu, Maria V Johansen, James E D Mlangwa, Ernatus M Mkupasi, Uffe C Braae, Chiara Trevisan, Angela Colston, Claudia Cordel, Marshall W Lightowlers, Helena A Ngowi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Seroprevalence and risk factors forFood and waterborne parasitology · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Challenges in the Diagnosis ofVeterinary medicine international · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

Mwemezi L KabululuTanzania Livestock Research Institute (TALIRI)-Uyole, Mbeya, Tanzania. mwemezie@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8621-9411
Maria V JohansenDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
James E D MlangwaDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania.
Ernatus M MkupasiDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania.
Uffe C BraaeDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Chiara TrevisanDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Angela ColstonGlobal Alliance for Livestock Veterinary Medicines (GALVmed), Nairobi, Kenya.
Claudia CordelGlobal Alliance for Livestock Veterinary Medicines (GALVmed), Bloemfontein, Free State, South Africa.
Marshall W LightowlersUVet, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Werribee, VIC, Australia.
Helena A NgowiDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania.
Sokoine University of Agriculture · TZInstituut voor Tropische Geneeskunde · BEInternational Livestock Research Institute · KEStatens Serum Institut · DKTanzania Wildlife Research Institute · TZThe University of Melbourne · AUUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

Gates Foundation OPP1009497
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTaenia solium is a zoonotic parasite responsible for neurocysticercosis-a major cause of late-onset acquired epilepsy in humans. Lack of affordable, specific and sensitive diagnostic tools hampers control of the parasite. This study assessed the performance of an antigen detection enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Ag-ELISA) in the diagnosis of viable T. solium cysticercosis in naturally infected slaughter-age pigs in an endemic area in Tanzania.

methodsA total of 350 pigs were bled before they were slaughtered and their carcases examined. Serum was analyzed for circulating antigens by using a monoclonal antibody-based B158/B60 Ag-ELISA. Each carcase was examined for the presence of Taenia hydatigena cysticerci and half carcase musculature together with the whole brain, head muscles, tongue, heart and diaphragm were sliced with fine cuts (< 0.5 cm) to reveal and enumerate T. solium cysticerci. Half carcase dissection can detect at least 84% of infected pigs. Prevalence and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated in Stata 12. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios were determined.

resultsTwenty-nine pigs (8.3%, 95% CI: 5.6-11.7%) had viable T. solium cysticerci while 11 pigs had T. hydatigena cysticerci (3.1%, 95% CI: 1.6-5.5%). No co-infection was observed. Sixty-eight pigs (19.4%, 95% CI: 15.4-20%) tested positive on Ag-ELISA; of these, 24 had T. solium cysticerci and 7 had T. hydatigena cysticerci. Sensitivity and specificity were determined to be 82.7% and 86.3%, respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were 35.2% and 98.2%, respectively. Likelihood ratios for positive and negative Ag-ELISA test results were 6.0 and 0.2, respectively. There was a significant positive correlation between the titre of circulating antigens and intensity of T. solium cysticerci (r

conclusionsThe Ag-ELISA test characteristics reported in this study indicate that the test is more reliable in ruling out T. solium cysticercosis in pigs, than in confirming it. Hence, a negative result will almost certainly indicate that a pig has no infection, but a positive result should always be interpreted with caution. Estimates of T. solium prevalence based on Ag-ELISA results should, therefore, be adjusted for test performance characteristics and occurrence of T. hydatigena.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, HelminthCysticercosisEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayNeurocysticercosisSerologic TestsSwineSwine DiseasesTaenia soliumTanzaniaZoonosesAntibodies, HelminthAg-ELISADiagnosisPigsTaenia soliumTanzania

Identifiers

PMID33109255
PMCPMC7590492
OpenAlexW3094691865

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.