Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36862710›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Recombinant protein KR95 as an alternative for serological diagnosis of human visceral leishmaniasis in the Americas.

Mahyumi Fujimori, Ruth Tamara Valencia-Portillo, José Angelo Lauletta Lindoso, Beatriz Julieta Celeste, Roque Pacheco de Almeida, Carlos Henrique Nery Costa, Alda Maria da Cruz, Angelita Fernandes Druzian, Malcolm Scott Duthie, Carlos Magno Castelo Branco Fortaleza and 7 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. The potential ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Mahyumi FujimoriInstituto de Medicina Tropical, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ruth Tamara Valencia-PortilloInstituto de Medicina Tropical, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-3552-8318
José Angelo Lauletta LindosoDepartamento de Doenças Infecciosas e Parasitárias, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Beatriz Julieta CelesteInstituto de Medicina Tropical, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Roque Pacheco de AlmeidaDepartamento de Medicina Interna e Patologia, Hospital Universitário/EBSERH, Universidade Federal de Sergipe, Aracaju, Sergipe, Brazil.
Carlos Henrique Nery CostaInstituto Natan Portella para Doenças Tropicais, Universidade Federal do Piauí, Teresina, Piauí, Brazil.
Alda Maria da CruzLaboratório Interdisciplinar de Pesquisas Médicas, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz/FIOCRUZ, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-7455-2447
Angelita Fernandes DruzianFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil.
Malcolm Scott DuthieHDT Bio, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Carlos Magno Castelo Branco FortalezaDepartamento de Doenças Tropicais e Diagnóstico por Imagem, Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Botucatu, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ana Lúcia Lyrio de OliveiraFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil.
Anamaria Mello Miranda PaniagoFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil.
Igor Thiago QueirozHospital Giselda Trigueiro, Secretaria Estadual da Saúde Pública, Natal, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-2346-0272
Steve ReedHDT Bio, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Aarthy C VallurInBios International Inc, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Hiro GotoInstituto de Medicina Tropical, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Maria Carmen Arroyo SanchezInstituto de Medicina Tropical, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-4055-5556
Universidade de São Paulo · BRUniversidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul · BRFundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRInBios International (United States) · USSecretaria da Saúde · BRUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BRUniversidade Federal de Sergipe · BRUniversidade Federal do Piauí · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the Americas, visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is caused by the protozoan Leishmania infantum, leading to death if not promptly diagnosed and treated. In Brazil, the disease reaches all regions, and in 2020, 1,933 VL cases were reported with 9.5% lethality. Thus, an accurate diagnosis is essential to provide the appropriate treatment. Serological VL diagnosis is based mainly on immunochromatographic tests, but their performance may vary by location, and evaluation of diagnostic alternatives is necessary. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the performance of ELISA with the scantily studied recombinant antigens, K18 and KR95, comparing their performance with the already known rK28 and rK39. Sera from parasitologically confirmed symptomatic VL patients (n = 90) and healthy endemic controls (n = 90) were submitted to ELISA with rK18 and rKR95. Sensitivity (95% CI) was, respectively, 83.3% (74.2-89.7) and 95.6% (88.8-98.6), and specificity (95% CI) was 93.3% (85.9-97.2) and 97.8% (91.8-99.9). For validation of ELISA with the recombinant antigens, we included samples from 122 VL patients and 83 healthy controls collected in three regions in Brazil (Northeast, Southeast, and Midwest). When comparing the results obtained with the VL patients' samples, significantly lower sensitivity was obtained by rK18-ELISA (88.5%, 95% CI: 81.5-93.2) compared with rK28-ELISA (95.9%, 95% CI: 90.5-98.5), but the sensitivity was similar comparing rKR95-ELISA (95.1%, 95% CI: 89.5-98.0), rK28-ELISA (95.9%, 95% CI: 90.5-98.5), and rK39-ELISA (94.3%, 95% CI: 88.4-97.4). Analyzing the specificity, it was lowest with rK18-ELISA (62.7%, 95% CI: 51.9-72.3) with 83 healthy control samples. Conversely, higher and similar specificity was obtained by rKR95-ELISA (96.4%, 95% CI: 89.5-99.2), rK28-ELISA (95.2%, 95% CI: 87.9-98.5), and rK39-ELISA (95.2%, 95% CI: 87.9-98.5). There was no difference in sensitivity and specificity across localities. Cross-reactivity assessment, performed with sera of patients diagnosed with inflammatory disorders and other infectious diseases, was 34.2% with rK18-ELISA and 3.1% with rKR95-ELISA. Based on these data, we suggest using recombinant antigen KR95 in serological assays for VL diagnosis.

Indexed as

Leishmaniasis, VisceralBiological AssayBrazilCross ReactionsEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayHumansRecombinant ProteinsRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID36862710
PMCPMC9980733
OpenAlexW4322757797

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.