ArticleTransactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene2023
Profile of loiasis infection through clinical and laboratory diagnostics: the importance of biomarkers.
Article in Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laboratory diagnosis of loiasis to support individual patient management: A systematic review.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Pooled it
- Guideline
- Analysis of diagnostic test outcomes in a large loiasis cohort from an endemic region: Serological tests are often false negative in hyper-microfilaremic infections.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDetection of Loa loa microfilariae in peripheral blood is insensitive given only 30% of individuals are microfilaraemic while 70% are amicrofilaraemic with a variety of clinical signs. Biomarkers may improve the diagnosis of loiasis.
methodsA total of 545 individuals exposed to L. loa were analysed using clinical data collected through a questionnaire (requesting information on eye worm, Calabar swelling, pruritis) and detection of microfilariae, immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4), DNA and antigens using microscopy, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and Western blot, respectively.
resultsThe results revealed that the rates of detection of L. loa microfilariae in the blood, of DNA by qPCR, of IgG4 by ELISA and of antigen by Western blot were 4.7%, 5.5%, 15.60% and 10.09%, respectively.
conclusionsThis study showed that clinical signs based on a questionnaire are highly subjective. Therefore it is imperative to use IgG4 and DNA biomarkers as well as antigens detected by Western blot to identify individuals infected with L. loa.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.