| Literature DB >> 19104656 |
Francesco Checchi1, João A N Filipe, Michael P Barrett, Daniel Chandramohan.
Abstract
Gambiense human African trypanosomiasis (HAT, sleeping sickness) is widely assumed to be 100% pathogenic and fatal. However, reports to the contrary exist, and human trypano-tolerance has been postulated. Furthermore, there is uncertainty about the actual duration of both stage 1 and stage 2 infection, particularly with respect to how long a patient remains infectious. Understanding such basic parameters of HAT infection is essential for optimising control strategies based on case detection. We considered the potential existence and relevance of human trypano-tolerance, and explored the duration of infectiousness, through a review of published evidence on the natural progression of gambiense HAT in the absence of treatment, and biological considerations. Published reports indicate that most gambiense HAT cases are fatal if untreated. Self-resolving and asymptomatic chronic infections probably constitute a minority if they do indeed exist. Chronic carriage, however, deserves further study, as it could seed renewed epidemics after control programmes cease.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2008 PMID: 19104656 PMCID: PMC2602732 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000303
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Figure 1Possible Outcomes of Untreated Gambiense Human African Trypanosomiasis.
Summary Findings from Eligible Reports about the Natural Progression of Untreated Gambiense HAT Cases, Ranked by Duration of Observation Period
| Author | Year of Patients' Diagnosis | Modern-Day Country of Infection | Method of Diagnosis | Type of Case Detection | Number of Patients | Years and Months under Observation | Outcome ( | CFR (%) | ||
| Dead | Alive ( | Unknown or Disappeared | ||||||||
| Lester | 1929–1931 | Nigeria | DM | A | ≈2700 | 1 m | 80 | ? | ? | ≈3 |
| Duggan | 1940s | Nigeria | DM | A | ? | 1–2 m | ? | ? | ? | ≈2 |
| Harding & Hutchinson | 1944–1945 | Sierra Leone | DM | A | 75 | 2 m | 0 | 75 (75) | 0 | 0 |
| Harding | 1934 | Nigeria | DM | A | ≈400 | 3 m | 20 | ? | ? | ≈5 |
| Van Hoof | 1940s | DRC | DM | A | 12 | 6 m | 0 | 12 (12) | 0 | 0 |
| Marshall & Vassallo | 1921 | Uganda | DM | A | 123 | 6 m | 18 | 90 | 15 | 15 |
| Marshall & Vassallo | 1921 | Uganda | DM | A | 118 | 7 m | 25 | 73 | 20 | 21 |
| Harding & Hutchinson | 1944–1945 | Sierra Leone | DM | A | 17 | 7–9 m | 0 | 14 (13) | 0 | 0 |
| Jamot | 1920s | Cameroon (“epidemic”) | DM | A | ? | 1 y | ? | ? | ? | 50–70 |
| Jamot | 1920s | Cameroon (“endemic”) | DM | A | ? | 1 y | ? | ? | ? | 25–30 |
| Marshall & Vassallo | 1921 | Uganda | DM | A | 40 | 1 y and 6 m | 20 | 12 (≤6) | 8 | 50 |
| Marshall & Vassallo | 1921 | Uganda | DM | A | 28 | 1 y and 6 m | 9 | 11 | 8 | 32 |
| Marshall & Vassallo | 1921 | Uganda | DM | A | 26 | 1 y and 8 m | 16 | 0 | 10 | 62 |
| Wade | 1911–1912 | Ghana | DM | C | 32 | 1–2 y | ? | ≥9 | ? | ? |
| Wade | 1910 | Ghana | DM | C | 97 | 3 y | ? | ≥20 | ? | ? |
| Kleine (in Yorke | 1911 | Cameroon | DM | C | 565 | 3 y | ? | ? | ? | 51 |
| Todd (in Yorke | 1903 | DRC | DM | C | 102 | 3 y | ? | 34 | ? | ? |
| Barlovatz | 1929 | DRC | CM | A | 14 | 3 y and 3 m | 6 | 8 (8) | 0 | 43 |
| Woodruff et al. | 1981 | DRC | PCR | V | 1 | 3 y and 3 m | 0 | 1 (0) | 0 | |
| Jamonneau et al. | 1995–1996 | Ivory Coast | CM, PCR | A | 15 | 3–4 y | 0 | 15 (11) | 0 | 0 |
| Heckenroth | 1907 | DRC | DM | C | 36 | 4 y | 21 | 6 (3) | 8 | 60 |
| Greggio | 1911 | DRC | DM | A | 33 | 4 y and 6 m | 24 | 9 | 0 | 73 |
| Ringenbach | 1907 | Republic of Congo | DM | C | 1 | 5 y | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Méda & Doua (in Pépin & Méda | Unknown | Ivory Coast | CM | Unknown | 5 | 3–6 y | 0 | 5 (0) | 0 | |
| Jamonneau et al. | 1995 | Ivory Coast | CM, PCR | A | 6 (subset of | 7 y | 0 | 6 (3) | 0 | |
| Todd | 1911 | Gambia | DM | C | 12 | 9 y | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
| Todd | 1911 | Gambia | DM | C | 1 (subset of | 13 y | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
DM = direct microscopy on blood, cerebrospinal fluid, or gland puncture fluid; CM = microscopy after blood concentration; PCR = polymerase chain reaction.
Case fatality ratio; only calculated if number of patients under observation >10.
A = active community screening; C = convenience screening; P = passive case detection; V = vertical transmission of HAT to patient's baby.
Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Summary Findings from Eligible Reports about the Duration of Untreated Stage 1 or 2 Gambiense HAT
| Author | Year of Patients' Diagnosis | Modern-Day Country of Infection | Method of Diagnosis | Type of Case Detection | Number of Patients | Period of observation | Years and Months to Outcome | |
| From | To | |||||||
| Kerandel | 1907 | Republic of Congo | DM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 1, ill | 4 m |
| Low & Manson-Bahr | 1922 | Nigeria | DM | P | 2 | Infection | Stage 1, ill | 3 m; <1 y |
| Stephens & Yorke | 1922 | Nigeria | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 1, ill | 7 m |
| Cooke et al. | 1936 | Nigeria | DM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 1, ill | 4 m |
| Crastnopol et al. | 1962 | Sudan | DM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 1, ill | 3 m |
| Coulaud et al. | 1973 | Gabon | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 1, ill | <9 m |
| Taelman et al. | 1982 | DRC | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 1, ill | ≥7 y |
| Scott et al. | 1990 | Nigeria or Gabon | DM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 1, ill | <3 y |
| Nattan-Larrier & Ringenbach | 1911 | Republic of Congo | DM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | <2 y and 5 m |
| Ortholan | 1911 | Republic of Congo | DM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | 1 y to 4 y |
| Sicé & Leger | 1920s | Various | DM | P | 6 | Infection | Stage 2 | Median: 10 m, range: 7 m to 1 y and 1 m |
| Low & Manson-Bahr | 1922 | DRC | DM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | 2 y to 5 y |
| Cooke et al. | 1930 | Ghana | DM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | <1 y and 5 m |
| Cates & McIlroy | 1950 | Gambia | Inoculation | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | ≥7 y |
| Dreyfus et al. | 1959 | Guinea or Chad | CM | A | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | 7 m to 3 y |
| Coulaud et al. | 1969–1975 | Gabon | CM | P | 2 | Infection | Stage 2 | 6 m; 2 y to 3 y |
| Taelman et al. | 1983 | DRC | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | ≥3 y and 1 m |
| Grau-Junyent et al. | 1986 | Equatorial Guinea | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | 3 y |
| Blanchot et al. | 1988 | Angola | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | 3 y and 2 m |
| Buissonnière et al. | 1989 | Senegal | Serology | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | <9 m |
| Otte et al. | 1993 | Cameroon | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | ≥2 y |
| Damian et al. | 1993 | Nigeria | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | 3 m to 4 m |
| Serrano-Gonzalez et al. | 1995 | Equatorial Guinea | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | ≥3 y |
| Kirchhoff | 1997 | West Africa | PCR | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | ≥12 y |
| Raffenot et al. | 1997 | Guinea | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | 9 m to 1 y and 3 m |
| Sahlas et al. | 2000 | DRC | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2 | ≥1 y and 3 m |
| Low & Manson-Bahr | 1922 | Equatorial Guinea | DM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2/moribund | <2 y and 4 m |
| Bonnal et al. | 1962 | Mali | Rx | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2/moribund | 4 y to 6 y |
| Bédat-Millet | 1995 | DRC | CM | P | 1 | Infection | Stage 2/moribund | ≥6 y (≥2 y to Stage 2) |
| Daniels | 1906 | Uganda | DM | P | 1 | Infection | death | 5 y |
| Duren & van den Branden | 1932 | DRC | DM | P | 1 | Stage 1, healthy | Stage 1, ill | 2 y and 1 m |
| Moustardier et al. | 1933 | Burkina Faso | DM | P | 1 | Stage 1, healthy | Stage 1, ill | ≥2 y and 1 m |
| Checchi et al. | 1990s–2000s | Uganda, Sudan | CM | A and P | 298 | Stage 1 serological suspect | Stage 2 | Mean: 1 y and 5 m, median: 1 y |
| Grant et al. | 1941 | Nigeria | DM | P | 1 | Stage 1, healthy | Stage 2 | 3 y |
| Robinson et al. | 1978 | Nigeria | CM | P | 1 | Stage 1, healthy | Stage 2 | ≥3 y |
| Martin & Darré | 1910 | Republic of Congo | DM | A | 1 | Stage 1, healthy | Death | 4 y |
| Moustardier et al. | 1933 | Various | DM | P | 6 | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | ≥2 y |
| Blanchard & Toullec | 1930 | Senegal | DM | P | 1 | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | ≥2 y |
| Riou & Moyne | 1933 | Senegal | DM | P | 1 | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | ≥4 y |
| Sartory et al. | 1910s | Unknown | DM | P | 1 | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | ≥8 y |
| Baonville et al. | 1920s | DRC | DM | P | 1 | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | ≥10 y |
| Pinard et al. | 1939 | Republic of Congo | DM | P | 1 | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | ≥15 y |
| Collomb et al. | 1950s | Various | DM | P | 26 | Stage 1 | Stage 2/moribund | Median: ≥3 y, range: ≥1 y to ≥4 y |
| Guérin (in Laveran | 1850s–1860s | Various (West African slaves) | clinical | P | ? | Stage 1 | Stage 2/moribund | ≥5–8y |
| Edan | 1970s | Republic of Congo | CM | P | 22 | Start of symptoms | Stage 2 | Median: 3 m, range: <3 m to 6 y |
| Milord et al. | 1987–1991 | DRC | CM | Unknown | 207 | Start of symptoms | Stage 2 | Mean: 2 y and 2 m, range: 4 m to 6 y and 6 m |
| Blum et al. | 1997–1998 | Angola | CM | A and P | 588 | Start of symptoms | Stage 2 | Median: 4 m to 6 m; >1 y in 27 patients (4.9%) |
| Blum et al. | 2000s | Various | CM | A and P | 2541 | Start of symptoms | Stage 2 | Median: 8 m, >2 y in 62 patients (2.8%) |
| Greggio | 1911 | DRC | DM | A | 183 | Stage 1 and 2, not too ill | Death | Median: 1 y and 2 m, range: 0 m to 7 y and 6 m |
| Checchi et al. | 1990s–2000s | Uganda, Sudan | n/a (model-based) | Stage 2 | Death | Mean: 1 y and 4 m, median: 11 m | ||
DM = direct microscopy on blood, cerebrospinal fluid or gland puncture fluid; CM = microscopy after blood concentration; PCR = polymerase chain reaction; Rx = empirical diagnosis based on dramatic improvement post antritrypanosomal treatment.
A = active community screening; C = convenience screening; P = passive case detection; V = vertical transmission of HAT to patient's baby.
Excluding patients treated for symptoms associated with trypanosomal chancre in the first month after reporting a tsetse bite.
Main Potential Sources of Bias, and Number of Eligible Reports Affected, by Type of Report
| Possible Source Of Bias | Implications | Natural Progression ( | Duration of Infection ( | Spontaneous Clearance ( |
| Insensitive diagnosis due to microscopy on non-concentrated blood only. | Absence of infection noted during the observation period cannot be taken as proof of clearance. | 23 | 19 | 4 |
| No certainty about sub-species. | Benign infections could actually be due to transient animal trypanosomes. | 25 | 39 | 4 |
| Information on symptoms and their duration are based on patient recall. | Patients might systematically over- or under-report the duration of symptoms, or provide inaccurate data. | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| Information on time of infection based on patient recall. | Patients might not accurately report when they were last exposed to tsetse bites (e.g., patients who had left Africa might not report the most recent trip). | 1 | 29 | 1 |
| No information about traditional or other treatments during observation period. | Patients might have been cured thanks to traditional therapies or antimicrobials taken for other infections, but which may have limited activity against HAT. | 27 | 22 | 3 |
| Group of patients is highly self-selected. | Patients with mild infections are more likely to be healthy and thus refuse treatment or be included in natural progression experiments. Patients who remain healthy are more likely to be observed for longer. Measuring the duration of disease based solely on patients who have already died may result in under-estimation. Patients who attend a health centre may be unrepresentative. | 6 | 7 | 1 |
Figure 2Examples of Negative Exponential and Gompertz (Non-Constant Hazard) Distributions of Survival in HAT Stages 1 or 2.
Possible Scenarios for Trypano-Tolerance, and Their Likely Implications for Control Strategies
| Occurrence of Trypano-Tolerant Cases | Nature of Trypano-Tolerance | |
| Self-Resolving Infection | Mostly Asymptomatic or Mildly Symptomatic Chronic Carriage | |
| Frequent | Might never be detected through passive screening, so would need to be detected actively; their contribution to transmission would depend on their infectiousness and on the average duration of infection before self-resolution. | Mass screening-based control would be imperative if chronic carriers have a significant level of infectiousness: its frequency, coverage and sensitivity would have to be very high to eliminate transmission. |
| Rare | Minimal influence on reproductive ratio, transmission could perhaps be interrupted through intensive passive screening even if these cases remain untreated. | Small influence on reproductive ratio, but, if not detected actively, could be responsible for perpetuating transmission even in settings with very intensive mass screening-based control. |