Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33407819›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2021

Validation of loop-mediated isothermal amplification for the detection of Loa loa infection in Chrysops spp in experimental and natural field conditions.

Glory Ngongeh Amambo, Raphael Awah Abong, Fanny Fri Fombad, Abdel Jelil Njouendou, Franck Nietcho, Amuam Andrew Beng, Ritter Manuel, Mathias Eyong Esum, Kebede Deribe, Jerome Fru Cho and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

15 authors at 4 institutions in 6 countries.

Glory Ngongeh AmamboParasites and Vector Research Unit (PAVRU), Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Buea, P.O. Box 63, Buea, Cameroon.
Raphael Awah AbongParasites and Vector Research Unit (PAVRU), Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Buea, P.O. Box 63, Buea, Cameroon.
Fanny Fri FombadParasites and Vector Research Unit (PAVRU), Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Buea, P.O. Box 63, Buea, Cameroon.
Abdel Jelil NjouendouParasites and Vector Research Unit (PAVRU), Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Buea, P.O. Box 63, Buea, Cameroon.
Franck NietchoParasites and Vector Research Unit (PAVRU), Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Buea, P.O. Box 63, Buea, Cameroon.
Amuam Andrew BengParasites and Vector Research Unit (PAVRU), Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Buea, P.O. Box 63, Buea, Cameroon.
Ritter ManuelInstitute of Medical Microbiology, Immunology and Parasitology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Mathias Eyong EsumParasites and Vector Research Unit (PAVRU), Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Buea, P.O. Box 63, Buea, Cameroon.
Kebede DeribeGlobal Health and Infection Department, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, BN1 9PX, UK.
Jerome Fru ChoParasites and Vector Research Unit (PAVRU), Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Buea, P.O. Box 63, Buea, Cameroon.
Peter Ivo EnyongParasites and Vector Research Unit (PAVRU), Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Buea, P.O. Box 63, Buea, Cameroon.
Catherine PooleNew England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA, USA.
Achim HoeraufInstitute of Medical Microbiology, Immunology and Parasitology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Clotilde CarlowNew England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA, USA.
Samuel WanjiParasites and Vector Research Unit (PAVRU), Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Buea, P.O. Box 63, Buea, Cameroon. swanji@yahoo.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0022-8366
University of Buea · CMNew England Biolabs (United States) · USUniversity Hospital Bonn · DEBrighton and Sussex Medical School · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe mass drug administration of ivermectin for onchocerciasis control has contributed to a significant drop in Loa loa microfilaria loads in humans that has, in turn, led to reduction of infection levels in Chrysops vectors. Accurate parasite detection is essential for assessing loiasis transmission as it provides a potential alternative or indirect strategy for addressing the problem of co-endemic loiasis and lymphatic filariasis through the Onchocerciasis Elimination Programme and it further reflects the true magnitude of the loiasis problem as excess human mortality has been reported to be associated with the disease. Although microscopy is the gold standard for detecting the infection, the sensitivity of this method is compromised when the intensity of infection is low. The loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay of parasite DNA is an alternative method for detecting infection which offers operational simplicity, rapidity and versatility of visual readout options. The aim of this study was to validate the Loa loa LAMP assay for the detection of infected Chrysops spp. under experimental and natural field conditions.

methodsTwo sets of 18 flies were fed on volunteers with either a low (< 10 mf/ml) or high (> 30,000mf/ml) microfilarial load. The fed flies were maintained under laboratory conditions for 14 days and then analysed using LAMP for the detection of L. loa infection. In addition, a total of 9270 flies were collected from the north-west, east, and south-west regions (SW 1 and 2) of Cameroon using sweep nets and subjected to microscopy (7841 flies) and LAMP (1291 flies plus 138 nulliparous flies) analyses.

resultsThe LAMP assay successfully detected parasites in Chrysops fed on volunteers with both low and high microfilariaemic loads. Field validation and surveillance studies revealed LAMP-based infection rates ranging from 0.5 to 31.6%, with the lowest levels in SW 2 and the highest infection rates in SW 1. The LAMP assay detected significantly higher infection rates than microscopy in four of the five study sites.

conclusionThis study demonstrated the potential of LAMP as a simple surveillance tool. It was found to be more sensitive than microscopy for the detection of experimental and natural L. loa infections in Chrysops vectors.

Indexed as

AnimalsCameroonDipteraDisease ReservoirsDisease VectorsDNA, HelminthHumansInsect VectorsLoaLoiasisMicrofilariaeMicroscopyMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesOnchocerciasisParasite LoadDNA, HelminthChrysopsIvermectinLoa loaMicroscopyRF4-based LAMP

Identifiers

PMID33407819
PMCPMC7788981
OpenAlexW3119417145

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.