ArticleParasitology research2023
Accuracy of serological tests in diagnosing mucosal leishmaniasis.
Article in Parasitology research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this serum panel-based study, we evaluated the accuracy of serological tests originally developed for visceral leishmaniasis (VL), for diagnosis of mucosal leishmaniasis (ML). A total of five tests were evaluated, four of which are registered at the National Agency of Sanitary Surveillance (Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária-ANVISA) (RIDASCREEN® Leishmania Ab from R-Biopharm AG., Leishmania ELISA IgG + IgM from Vircell S.L., IFI Leishmaniose Humana-BioManguinhos, and IT-LEISH® from Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.), and the other a direct agglutination test (DAT-LPC) prototype kit developed at Fiocruz. The panel was composed of 40 serum samples from patients with confirmed ML and 20 from patients with mucosal involvement and negative parasitological/molecular tests for leishmaniasis and confirmation of another etiology. All cases were treated from 2009 to 2016 in a referral center for leishmaniasis in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil (Instituto René Rachou, Fiocruz). Diagnostic accuracy, based on the cut-off point for VL diagnosis, was 86.2% with RIDASCREEN® Leishmania Ab, 73.3% with Leishmania ELISA IgG + IgM, and 66.7% with IFI Leishmaniose Humana, while IT-LEISH® and DAT-LPC had the lowest accuracy (38.3%), despite high specificity (100% and 95%, respectively). New cut-off points defined with sera from ML patients improved accuracy from 86.2 to 89% (p = 0.64) and 73.3 to 88% (p = 0.04) for RIDASCREEN® Leishmania Ab and Leishmania ELISA IgG + IgM, respectively. Moreover, these tests presented greater sensitivity and immunoreactivity in patients with moderate/severe clinical ML forms. The data of this study suggest that ELISA assays can contribute to laboratory diagnosis, especially for patients with moderate or severe mucosal involvement.
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.