Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34449763›Full record

SynthesisPLoS neglected tropical diseases2021

Detection of anti-M. leprae antibodies in children in leprosy-endemic areas: A systematic review.

Louise Pierneef, Anouk van Hooij, Anneke Taal, Raisa Rumbaut, Mauricio Lisboa Nobre, Wim van Brakel, Annemieke Geluk

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Seroprevalence ofThe Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Leprosy.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2024
    Review
  6. Target product profiles: leprosy diagnostics.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2024
    Article
  7. Challenges and advances in serological and molecular tests to aid leprosy diagnosis.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Detection and Monitoring ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2021
    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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Louise PierneefDept. Infectious Diseases, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2231-919X
Anouk van HooijDept. Infectious Diseases, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Anneke TaalNLR, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2387-6297
Raisa RumbautNational Leprosy Program, Ministry of Public Health of Cuba, Havana, Cuba.
Mauricio Lisboa NobreGiselda Trigueiro Hospital and Institute of Tropical Medicine of Rio Grande do Norte, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Wim van BrakelNLR, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0277-2907
Annemieke GelukDept. Infectious Diseases, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Leiden University Medical Center · NLNetherlands Leprosy Relief · NLMinisterio de Salud Pública · CUUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLeprosy elimination primarily targets transmission of Mycobacterium leprae which is not restricted to patients' households. As interruption of transmission is imminent in many countries, a test to detect infected asymptomatic individuals who can perpetuate transmission is required. Antibodies directed against M. leprae antigens are indicative of M. leprae infection but cannot discriminate between active and past infection. Seroprevalence in young children, however, reflects recent M. leprae infection and may thus be used to monitor transmission in an area. Therefore, this literature review aimed to evaluate what has been reported on serological tests measuring anti-M. leprae antibodies in children without leprosy below the age of 15 in leprosy-endemic areas. METHODS AND

findingsA literature search was performed in the databases Pubmed, Infolep, Web of Science and The Virtual Health Library. From the 724 articles identified through the search criteria, 28 full-text articles fulfilled all inclusion criteria. Two additional papers were identified through snowballing, resulting in a total of 30 articles reporting data from ten countries. All serological tests measured antibodies against phenolic glycolipid-I or synthetic derivatives thereof, either quantitatively (ELISA or UCP-LFA) or qualitatively (ML-flow or NDO-LID rapid test). The median seroprevalence in children in endemic areas was 14.9% and was stable over time if disease incidence remained unchanged. Importantly, seroprevalence decreased with age, indicating that children are a suitable group for sensitive assessment of recent M. leprae infection. However, direct comparison between areas, solely based on the data reported in these studies, was impeded by the use of different tests and variable cut-off levels.

conclusionsQuantitative anti-PGL-I serology in young children holds promise as a screening test to assess M. leprae infection and may be applied as a proxy for transmission and thereby as a means to monitor the effect of (prophylactic) interventions on the route to leprosy elimination.

Indexed as

Antibodies, BacterialAntigens, BacterialChildChild, PreschoolContact TracingEndemic DiseasesFamily CharacteristicsHumansLeprosyMycobacterium lepraeAntibodies, BacterialAntigens, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID34449763
PMCPMC8428563
OpenAlexW3193483133

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.