Observational studyActa parasitologica2026
High Seropositivity for Helminths in Immunosuppressed Patients with Peripheral Eosinophilia.
Observational study in Acta parasitologica, 2026. 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.
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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeEosinophilia is a hallmark of many helminthic infections. However, the underlying parasitic etiology often goes undetected-especially in immunosuppressed patients. We aimed to evaluate the helminthic seropositivity in immunosuppressed patients with peripheral eosinophilia at a tertiary care hospital in north India.
methodsIn this retrospective observational cross-sectional study, a total of 115 immunosuppressed patients with eosinophilia were subjected to serological testing for six common helminths, i.e., IgG antibodies against Strongyloides stercoralis, Toxocara canis, Trichinella spiralis, Echinococcus granulosus, and Taenia solium by ELISA; IgG4 antibodies against Wuchereria bancrofti by ELISA; and W. bancrofti antigen by immunochromatographic assay. Absolute eosinophil counts (AEC) and clinical-demographic data were analyzed using non-parametric tests and Spearman correlation statistics.
resultsOverall, 34 patients (29.6%) were positive for at least one parasitic serology, with S. stercoralis being the most common (18.3%), followed by T. canis (11.3%), T. spiralis (6.1%), W. bancrofti (5.2%), E. granulosus (5.2%), and T. solium (1.7%). Multiple seropositivities were detected in 14 (12.2%) patients. Seropositive patients had significantly higher median AEC than seronegatives (3021 vs. 1495 cells/µL, Wilcoxon p = 0.008). A statistically significant correlation was found between AEC and number of positive serologies per patient (Spearman's ρ = 0.269, p = 0.003). A graded relationship between increasing seropositivity and severity of AEC was noted (Cochran-Armitage trend p = 0.006).
conclusionNearly 30% of immunosuppressed patients with peripheral eosinophilia had serological evidence of helminthic infections. Helminth serology panel testing for persistent or unexplained eosinophilia along with clinical evaluation may facilitate early diagnosis and management in immunocompromised hosts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41528407What 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.