Literature DB >> 22693548

Leishmaniasis worldwide and global estimates of its incidence.

Jorge Alvar1, Iván D Vélez, Caryn Bern, Mercé Herrero, Philippe Desjeux, Jorge Cano, Jean Jannin, Margriet den Boer.   

Abstract

As part of a World Health Organization-led effort to update the empirical evidence base for the leishmaniases, national experts provided leishmaniasis case data for the last 5 years and information regarding treatment and control in their respective countries and a comprehensive literature review was conducted covering publications on leishmaniasis in 98 countries and three territories (see 'Leishmaniasis Country Profiles Text S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, S9, S10, S11, S12, S13, S14, S15, S16, S17, S18, S19, S20, S21, S22, S23, S24, S25, S26, S27, S28, S29, S30, S31, S32, S33, S34, S35, S36, S37, S38, S39, S40, S41, S42, S43, S44, S45, S46, S47, S48, S49, S50, S51, S52, S53, S54, S55, S56, S57, S58, S59, S60, S61, S62, S63, S64, S65, S66, S67, S68, S69, S70, S71, S72, S73, S74, S75, S76, S77, S78, S79, S80, S81, S82, S83, S84, S85, S86, S87, S88, S89, S90, S91, S92, S93, S94, S95, S96, S97, S98, S99, S100, S101'). Additional information was collated during meetings conducted at WHO regional level between 2007 and 2011. Two questionnaires regarding epidemiology and drug access were completed by experts and national program managers. Visceral and cutaneous leishmaniasis incidence ranges were estimated by country and epidemiological region based on reported incidence, underreporting rates if available, and the judgment of national and international experts. Based on these estimates, approximately 0.2 to 0.4 cases and 0.7 to 1.2 million VL and CL cases, respectively, occur each year. More than 90% of global VL cases occur in six countries: India, Bangladesh, Sudan, South Sudan, Ethiopia and Brazil. Cutaneous leishmaniasis is more widely distributed, with about one-third of cases occurring in each of three epidemiological regions, the Americas, the Mediterranean basin, and western Asia from the Middle East to Central Asia. The ten countries with the highest estimated case counts, Afghanistan, Algeria, Colombia, Brazil, Iran, Syria, Ethiopia, North Sudan, Costa Rica and Peru, together account for 70 to 75% of global estimated CL incidence. Mortality data were extremely sparse and generally represent hospital-based deaths only. Using an overall case-fatality rate of 10%, we reach a tentative estimate of 20,000 to 40,000 leishmaniasis deaths per year. Although the information is very poor in a number of countries, this is the first in-depth exercise to better estimate the real impact of leishmaniasis. These data should help to define control strategies and reinforce leishmaniasis advocacy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22693548      PMCID: PMC3365071          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0035671

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


Introduction

Although estimated to cause the ninth largest disease burden among individual infectious diseases, leishmaniasis is largely ignored in discussions of tropical disease priorities [1], [2]. This consignment to critical oblivion results from its complex epidemiology and ecology, the lack of simple, easily-applied tools for case management and the paucity of current incidence data, and often results in a failure on the part of policy-makers to recognize its importance [3], [4]. Based on the World Health Assembly Resolution 2007/60.13, the World Health Organization (WHO) convened the Expert Committee on Leishmaniasis in March 2010, which subsequently issued the first updated technical report on leishmaniasis in more than 20 years [5], [6]. Both the WHA Resolution and the Expert Committee report highlighted the need to update the epidemiological evidence base in order to plan appropriate approaches to the control of leishmaniasis. Estimates of disease burden are widely used by policy-makers and funding organizations to establish priorities [7], [8], [9], [10]. These estimates are most commonly expressed as disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) lost, a measurement first promoted in the 1993 World Development Report and the focus of intense scrutiny ever since [11], [12], [13]. The accuracy of this measure depends on the reliability of the incidence, duration, severity and mortality data for a given condition, as well as the underlying assumptions used in the calculations [7], [14]. Although a new round of global disease burden estimation is currently underway, empirical data collection and field validation are neither included nor supported as part of the exercise [15]. Underreporting considered moderate (2–4-fold) based on recent introduction of VL into the country. Underreporting considered mild (1.2–1.8-fold) based on data from Brazil [25]. Underreporting considered moderate (2–4-fold). Underreporting considered severe (4.2–8.1-fold). Underreporting considered mild (1.2–1.8). Underreporting considered mild (1.2–1.8-fold). Underreporting considered moderate (2–4-fold). Underreporting considered moderate (2–4-fold). Underreporting considered mild (1.2–1.8). Underreporting considered moderate (2.0–4.0-fold; based on lower proportion of cases treated in private sector compared to India). Underreporting range based on 2 assessments in Bihar [27], [28]. Underreporting considered mild (2.8–4.6-fold) based on data from Argentina [29]. Underreporting considered moderate (5–10-fold). Underreporting considered moderate (5–10-fold). Based on conference report (Armauer Hansen Research Institute, Federal Ministry of Health of Ethiopia and World Health Organization. Consultative meeting for the control of cutaneous leishmaniasis in Ethiopia; June 4–5, 2011; Addis Ababa, Ethiopia). Based on estimates by Dr. Nuha Hamid, national project officer, WHO-Khartoum, Sudan (see Annex). Underreporting considered mild (2.8–4.6) [29]. Underreporting considered moderate (5–10-fold) based on estimates of incidence from population-based surveys [30]. Underreporting considered mild (2.8–4.6) [29]. Underreporting considered moderate (5–10-fold). Based on estimates by Dr RA Bumb, Department of Skin, STD and Leprosy, SP Medical College, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India. Underreporting considered mild (2.8–4.6) [29]. 3/3 (100%) of high burden countries (India, Bangladesh, Nepal) reported 5 years of data. Reports incomplete for Sri Lanka, Bhutan and Thailand. The evidence base for the neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) is acknowledged to be particularly problematic [9], [16]. Leishmaniasis, like many other NTDs, occurs in a focal distribution and in remote locations, making extrapolation from official data sources difficult [4]. Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) results in death if not treated, the majority of leishmaniasis deaths go unrecognized, and even with treatment access, VL may result in case-fatality rates of 10–20% [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22]. Reported leishmaniasis case figures are widely acknowledged to represent gross underestimates of the true burden, but studies that measure the degree of underreporting are rare [23]. As part of the WHO effort to update the leishmaniasis evidence base, a series of regional meetings were held. National program managers and expert professionals were asked to provide detailed information on epidemiology, ecology, geographical distribution and trends, drug access and management of leishmaniasis for their respective countries. These data, accompanied by literature reviews, are compiled in extensive profiles of each endemic country or territory in the Annex of this publication (see ‘Leishmaniasis Country Profiles Text S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, S9, S10, S11, S12, S13, S14, S15, S16, S17, S18, S19, S20, S21, S22, S23, S24, S25, S26, S27, S28, S29, S30, S31, S32, S33, S34, S35, S36, S37, S38, S39, S40, S41, S42, S43, S44, S45, S46, S47, S48, S49, S50, S51, S52, S53, S54, S55, S56, S57, S58, S59, S60, S61, S62, S63, S64, S65, S66, S67, S68, S69, S70, S71, S72, S73, S74, S75, S76, S77, S78, S79, S80, S81, S82, S83, S84, S85, S86, S87, S88, S89, S90, S91, S92, S93, S94, S95, S96, S97, S98, S99, S100, S101’). This paper focuses on an analysis of the findings, and estimates of leishmaniasis incidence derived from the epidemiological data.

Methods

From 2007 to 2010, WHO organized a series of regional meetings (EMRO countries, Geneva 2007; PAHO countries, Medellin 2008; EURO countries, Istanbul 2009; AFRO countries, Addis Ababa 2010; SEARO countries, Paro 2011). In preparation for each meeting, country representatives were asked to provide yearly reported VL and cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) incidence data for at least the last 5 years prior to the meeting. In addition, an electronic epidemiological questionnaire was sent to the national control program managers and/or to reputable national scientists to fill information gaps. Data collected included administrative divisions affected, whether VL and CL case notification is mandatory, characteristics of known reservoirs and vector control programs, estimated and reported case numbers, and outbreaks in the previous 5 years. A comprehensive literature search was also conducted, and the resulting information was used as an independent validation of these data. We reviewed the literature based on MEDLINE searches using the terms leishmaniasis and epidemiology with the name of each endemic country or territory. For the initial search, we included all articles listed in MEDLINE in English, French, Spanish or Russian up to October 2010, when the search was conducted. We selected articles that explicitly addressed incidence, geographic distribution, surveillance and/or trends over time, and preferentially chose articles published since 2000 if available. For countries with sparse data on leishmaniasis, we broadened the review to include all articles that shed light on the occurrence of the disease within that country. We reviewed titles for all references, abstracts when available for those whose titles were not sufficient to lead us to exclude the paper, and the full article when the abstract indicated possible relevance. The search for country-specific literature yielded 3242 potentially relevant articles, of which 340 were retained based on our selection criteria. Five recent review articles were also included. Twenty-six additional unpublished reports were provided by national or international experts. The literature was reviewed by at least 2 authors and regular meetings were held among the authors to discuss the findings in depth. A MEDLINE search was also performed using the terms leishmaniasis and underreporting to identify articles that would aid in making incidence estimates. This search yielded 8 articles of which 5 presented data on the magnitude of leishmaniasis underreporting. One additional article was identified from author literature collections, yielding 3 articles with empirical data regarding VL and 3 for CL underreporting [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29]. These articles were used to establish probable degrees of underreporting for the countries in which their analyses were performed, and were also used for estimates in countries judged similar in their degree of underreporting. National and international experts provided their judgements of the magnitude of underreporting. In addition, for countries where reporting is sparse, but surveys have been performed, the published data were used as a basis to select the appropriate degree of underreporting [30]. Wherever possible, estimated plausible VL and CL incidence ranges were assigned by country and/or region based on reported incidence and multiplication by the probable underreporting factors. Estimates less than 20 were retained as the precise product of the reported case number times the underreporting factor, those between 20 and 1000 were rounded to the nearest 10 and those over 1000 were rounded to the nearest 100. Where reporting was absent but incidence was known to be substantial, estimates were assigned based on the judgment of national and international experts. The regional estimates represent the sum of the country estimates followed by the same rounding process. Similarly, the global estimates represent the sum of the regional estimates followed by rounding as described above. In order to facilitate expert judgment regarding the probable accuracy of the figures presented here, we defined geographical regions consistent with the major ecological foci of leishmaniasis transmission, rather than official WHO regions [31], [32], [33]. A second questionnaire addressed access to antileishmanial medicines, and included specific questions: whether the public sector provides health care free of charge; the existence of a national program for control of leishmaniasis; inclusion of antileishmanial medicines in the National Essential Drug List; the number of different medicines purchased for the public sector or donations received in the last two years; sale of antileishmanial drugs in the private sector and price per tablet or vial; percentage of people using the for-profit private sector versus public sector for leishmaniasis treatment; health care level providing treatment in the public sector; presence of NGOs or other non-profit agencies providing leishmaniasis treatment; and barriers to access for treatment of leishmaniasis. Basic social and health data from each country were obtained from the websites of the relevant international agencies [34], [35], [36], [37], [38]. The epidemiological data were used to produce maps with 2008 as the reference year using ArcGIS 9.3– Desktop (Esri, Redlands, CA) and following WHO guidelines for GIS usage. The numbers of confirmed cases by clinical form (VL, CL, mucocutaneous leishmaniasis) were mapped by official first level administrative division. These data were used to calculate annual incidence rates. A single standard range of values was used for each clinical form to facilitate visual comparison between countries. Draft maps were shared with data providers and other leishmaniasis experts for validation. The following maps were developed for each country: situational map with neighbouring countries and world globe, maps of cases by clinical form, and maps of incidence per 10,000 inhabitants. All maps follow a consistent set of characteristics: five categories of colours in a yellow-to-red scale were chosen for the maps of cases, and six categories of colours in blue tones scale were chosen for the maps of incidence. The sparse information in a few countries required the use of ad hoc scales. Only WHO GIS shapefile databases were used; the maps follow the administrative limits and frontiers recognized by United Nations conventions. The parasitological information has been reproduced from the WHO Technical Report Series 949 (http://whqlibdoc.who.int/trs/WHO_TRS_949_eng.pdf) published in 2010. Basic social and health data, results of literature reviews, data on the magnitude of underreporting, maps, data regarding epidemiology, case load, access to treatment and access to drugs, and parasitological information are presented in a series of extensive Profiles of each endemic individual country and territory and are presented in the Annex of this publication (see ‘Leishmaniasis Country Profiles Text S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, S9, S10, S11, S12, S13, S14, S15, S16, S17, S18, S19, S20, S21, S22, S23, S24, S25, S26, S27, S28, S29, S30, S31, S32, S33, S34, S35, S36, S37, S38, S39, S40, S41, S42, S43, S44, S45, S46, S47, S48, S49, S50, S51, S52, S53, S54, S55, S56, S57, S58, S59, S60, S61, S62, S63, S64, S65, S66, S67, S68, S69, S70, S71, S72, S73, S74, S75, S76, S77, S78, S79, S80, S81, S82, S83, S84, S85, S86, S87, S88, S89, S90, S91, S92, S93, S94, S95, S96, S97, S98, S99, S100, S101’).

Results

A total of 98 countries and 3 territories on 5 continents reported endemic leishmaniasis transmission (Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12). In total, official case counts totalled more than 58,000 VL cases and 220,000 CL cases per year (Tables 13 and 14). However, only about two-thirds of countries had reported incidence data for a five-year period; data were sparsest for the foci in Africa. A number of countries are listed here as endemic despite the lack of reported human cases, usually reflecting an absence of surveillance or other investigations. [39] For example, although Mongolia has not reported human CL cases, L. major genetically identical to that found in countries with proven endemic transmission has been isolated on multiple occasions from gerbils. [40] Only countries with circulating species known to be pathogenic to humans are included as endemic. For this reason, Australia is not considered endemic despite reports of CL among red kangaroos caused by a newly described leishmanial species. [41] Human infections due to lower trypanosomatids are also excluded. [42].
Table 1

Reported and estimated incidence of visceral leishmaniasis in the American region.

Reported VL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual VL incidence
Argentina82004–200820to301
Bolivia02008
Brazil34812003–20074200to63002
Colombia602004–200870to1102
El Salvadorno data
Guatemala152004–200820to302
Honduras62004–20087to102
Mexico72004–20088to122
Nicaragua32003–20073to52
Paraguay482004–2008100to2001
Venezuela402004–200850to702
Region36684500to6800

Underreporting considered moderate (2–4-fold) based on recent introduction of VL into the country.

Underreporting considered mild (1.2–1.8-fold) based on data from Brazil [25].

Table 2

Reported and estimated incidence of visceral leishmaniasis in the sub-Saharan African region.

Reported VL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual VL incidence
Central African Republicno data
Cameroonno data
Chadno data
Cote d’Ivoire02004–2008
DR Congo02004–2008
Gambiano data
Mauritaniano data
Nigerno data
Nigeria12004–2008
Senegal02004–2008
Zambiano data
Region1
Table 3

Reported and estimated incidence of visceral leishmaniasis in the East African region.

Reported VL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual VL incidence
Djiboutino data
Eritrea1002008200to4001
Ethiopia18602004–20083700to74001
Kenya1452004–2008610to12002
Somalia67920091400to27001
Sudan37422005–200915,700to30,3002
South Sudan17562004–20087400to14,2002
Uganda2882004–2008350to5203
Region856929,400to56,700

Underreporting considered moderate (2–4-fold).

Underreporting considered severe (4.2–8.1-fold).

Underreporting considered mild (1.2–1.8).

Table 4

Reported and estimated incidence of visceral leishmaniasis in the Mediterranean region.

Reported VL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual VL incidence
Albania1142004–2008140to2101
Algeria1112004–2008130to2001
Bosnia and Herzegovina22002–20052to31
Bulgaria72004–20088to121
Croatia52004–20086to81
Cyprus220082to41
Egypt120081to21
France182004–200820to301
Greece422004–200850to801
Israel22003–20073to41
Italy1342003–2007160to2401
Jordan02004–20080to0
Lebanon02004–20080to0
Libya32004–20085to102
Macedonia72005–20099to131
Malta22002–20053to41
Monacono data
Montenegro32004–20084to51
Morocco1522004–2008300to6102
Palestine52004–200810to202
Portugal152003–200720to301
Sloveniano data
Spain1172004–2008140to2101
Syria142004–200830to602
Tunisia892004–2008110to1601
Turkey292003–200760to1202
Region87512002000

Underreporting considered mild (1.2–1.8-fold).

Underreporting considered moderate (2–4-fold).

Table 5

Reported and estimated incidence of visceral leishmaniasis in the Middle East to Central Asia.

Reported VL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual VL incidence
Afghanistanno data
Armenia72004–200810to301
Azerbaijan282004–200860to1101
China3782004–2008760to15001
Georgia1642004–2008330to6601
Iran (Islamic Republic of)1492004–2008300to6001
Iraq17112004–20083400to68001
Kazakhstan12004–20082to41
Kyrgyzstan02004–2008
Oman12004–20082to41
Pakistanno data
Saudi Arabia342004–200840to602
Tajikistan152004–200830to601
Turkmenistan02004–2008
Ukraine22005–20084to71
Uzbekistan72004–200810to301
Yemen02004–200820to501
Region2496500010,000

Underreporting considered moderate (2–4-fold).

Underreporting considered mild (1.2–1.8).

Table 6

Reported and estimated incidence of visceral leishmaniasis in the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia.

Reported VL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual VL incidence
Bangladesh62242004–200812,400to24,9001
Bhutan22005–200910to202
India34,9182004–2008146,700to282,8003
Nepal14772004–20083000to59001
Sri Lankano data6to104
Thailand22006–20105to105
Region42,623162,100to313,600

Underreporting considered moderate (2.0–4.0-fold; based on lower proportion of cases treated in private sector compared to India).

Underreporting range based on 2 assessments in Bihar [27], [28].

Table 7

Reported and estimated incidence of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the American region.

Reported CL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual CL incidence
Argentina2612004–2008730to12001
Belizeno data
Bolivia26472004–20087400to12,2001
Brazil26,0082003–200772,800to119,6001
Colombia17,4202005–200948,800to80,1001
Costa Rica12492002–20063500to57001
Dominican Republicno data0to0
Ecuador17242004–20084800to79001
El Salvadorno data0to0
French Guyana2332004–2008650to11001
Guatemala6842004–20081900to31001
Guyana162006–200850to701
Honduras11592006–20083200to53001
Mexico8112004–20082300to37001
Nicaragua32222003–20079000to14,8001
Panama21882005–20096100to10,1001
Paraguay4312004–20081200to20001
Peru64052004–200817,900to29,5001
Suriname32005–20078to141
Venezuela24802004–20086900to11,4001
REGION66,941187,200307,800

Underreporting considered mild (2.8–4.6-fold) based on data from Argentina [29].

Table 8

Reported and estimated incidence of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the sub-Saharan African region.

Reported CL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual CL incidence
Burkina Fasono data
Cameroon552007–2009280to5501
Chadno data
Cote d’Ivoire12004–20085to101
DR Congo02009
Ghana272004–2008140to2701
Guineano data
Guinea-Bissauno data
Mali582004–2008290to5801
Mauritaniano data
Namibiano data
Nigerno data
Nigeria52004–200830to501
Senegal82004–200840to801
South Africano data
REGION155790to15001

Underreporting considered moderate (5–10-fold).

Table 9

Reported and estimated incidence of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the East African region.

Reported CL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual CL incidence
Djiboutino data
Eritrea502008250to5001
Ethiopiano data20,000to50,0002
Kenyano data
Sudanno data15,000to40,0003
South Sudanno data
REGION5035,300to90,500

Underreporting considered moderate (5–10-fold).

Based on conference report (Armauer Hansen Research Institute, Federal Ministry of Health of Ethiopia and World Health Organization. Consultative meeting for the control of cutaneous leishmaniasis in Ethiopia; June 4–5, 2011; Addis Ababa, Ethiopia).

Based on estimates by Dr. Nuha Hamid, national project officer, WHO-Khartoum, Sudan (see Annex).

Table 10

Reported and estimated incidence of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the Mediterranean.

Reported CL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual CL incidence
Albania62004–2008
Algeria44,0502004–2008123,300to202,6001
Bosnia and Herzegovina02008
Bulgaria02008
Croatia22004–20086to101
Cyprus12006–2008
Egypt47120081300to22001
France22004–20086to101
Greece32004–20088to131
Israel5792003–20071600to27001
Italy492003–2007140to2301
Jordan2272004–2008630to10001
Lebanon02004–2008
Libya35402004–20089900to16,3001
Macedonia02008
Malta02008
Monacono data
Montenegro02008
Morocco34302004–20089600to15,8001
Palestine2182005–2009610to10001
Portugal02004–2008
Sloveniano data
Spain02004–2008
Syria22,8822004–200864,100to105,3001
Tunisia76312004–200821,400to35,1001
Turkey24652003–20076900to11,3001
REGION85,555239,500393,600

Underreporting considered mild (2.8–4.6) [29].

Table 11

Reported and estimated incidence of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the Middle East to Central Asia.

Reported CL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual CL incidence
Afghanistan22,6202003–2007113,100to226,2001
Armenia02008
Azerbijan172004–200850to802
China02004–2008
Georgia52004–2008
Iran (Islamic Republic of)24,6302004–200869,000to113,3002
Iraq16552004–20088300to16,5003
Kazakhstan152004–200840to702
Kyrgyzstan02004–2008
Mongoliano data
Oman52004–200815to202
Pakistan77522004–200821,700to35,7002
Saudi Arabia34452004–20089600to15,8002
Tajikistan252007–2008125to2503
Turkmenistan992004–2008490to9903
Ukraine22004–200810to203
Uzbekistan1422004–2008710to14003
Yemen6032005–20093000to60003
REGION61,013226,200416,400

Underreporting considered moderate (5–10-fold) based on estimates of incidence from population-based surveys [30].

Underreporting considered mild (2.8–4.6) [29].

Underreporting considered moderate (5–10-fold).

Table 12

Reported and estimated incidence of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the Indian subcontinent.

Reported CL cases/yearYears of reportEstimated annual CL incidence
India1562005–20091000to20001
Sri Lanka3222004–2008900to15002
REGION4781900to3500

Based on estimates by Dr RA Bumb, Department of Skin, STD and Leprosy, SP Medical College, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India.

Underreporting considered mild (2.8–4.6) [29].

Table 13

Global reported and estimated incidence of visceral leishmaniasis.

Reported VL cases/yearCountries with 5 years of dataEstimated annual VL incidence
Americas36628/11 (73%)4500to6800
Sub-Saharan Africa13/11 (27%)
East Africa85695/8 (63%)29,400to56,700
Mediterranean87521/26 (81%)1200to2000
Middle East to Central Asia249614/17 (82%)5000to10,000
South Asia42,6233/6 (50%)* 162,100to313,600
Global total58,22754/79 (68%)202,200to389,100

3/3 (100%) of high burden countries (India, Bangladesh, Nepal) reported 5 years of data. Reports incomplete for Sri Lanka, Bhutan and Thailand.

Table 14

Global reported and estimated incidence of cutaneous leishmaniasis.

Reported CLcases/yearCountries with 5 yearsof dataEstimated annual CL incidence
Americas66,94114/20 (70%)187,200to307,800
Sub-Saharan Africa1555/15 (33%)770to1500
East Africa500/6 (0%)35,300to90,500
Mediterranean85,55517/26 (65%)239,500to393,600
Middle East to Central Asia61,01316/18 (89%)226,200to416,400
South Asia3222/2 (100%)1900to3500
Global total214,03653/87 (61%)690,900to1,213,300
There are few published empirical assessments of underreporting in official surveillance data. Two studies from Bihar, India, compared VL case numbers ascertained through active house-to-house surveys to those reported in the official surveillance system; official figures were shown to be 4.2-fold and 8.1-fold lower than the incidence found by active case detection in the two studies, respectively. [27], [28] A study in Brazil used the capture-recapture method to estimate underreporting of VL, based on data from 3 different sources; the degree of underreporting was found to be 1.3- to 1.7-fold. [25] Data from one province in Argentina estimated the degree of CL underreporting to be 2.8 to 4.6-fold; however, studies from Guatemala and Jordan indicate that CL incidence may be underestimated by 40- to 47-fold in national surveillance data. [24], [26], [29] Based on these publications, country-level VL underreporting magnitude was categorized as follows: mild (1.2- to 1.8-fold based on data from Brazil [25]); severe (4.0- to 8.0-fold based on data from India [27], [28]); and an intermediate category of moderate (2.0 to 4.0-fold) underreporting. Despite the high published range of CL underreporting [24], [26], we chose conservative multipliers: mild (2.8 to 4.6-fold based on data from Argentina [29]) and moderate (5.0- to 10.0-fold). No estimates could be made for most countries in sub-Saharan Africa, where almost no data were available. Based on these estimates, approximately 0.2 to 0.4 million VL cases and 0.7 to 1.2 million CL cases occur each year. More than 90% of global VL cases occur in just six countries: India, Bangladesh, Sudan, South Sudan, Brazil and Ethiopia (Table 13). Cutaneous leishmaniasis is more widely distributed, with about one-third of cases occurring in each of three regions, the Americas, the Mediterranean basin, and western Asia from the Middle East to Central Asia (Table 14). The ten countries with the highest estimated case counts, Afghanistan, Algeria, Colombia, Brazil, Iran, Syria, Ethiopia, North Sudan, Costa Rica and Peru, together account for 70 to 75% of global estimated CL incidence. Mortality data are extremely sparse and generally represent hospital-based deaths only. The reported case-fatality rate for VL in Brazil in 2006 was 7.2%. In the Indian subcontinent, the focus responsible for the largest proportion of global VL cases, reported case-fatality rates ranged from 1.5% (93 deaths/6224 VL cases from 2004–2008) in Bangladesh to 2.4% (853/34,918) in India and 6.2% (91/1477) in Nepal. However, community-based studies that included active searches for deaths due to kala-azar estimate case-fatality rates of more than 10%, while data from a village-based study in India suggest that as many as 20% of VL patients, disproportionately poor and female, died before their disease was recognized. [43], [44], [45] In South Sudan, one community-based longitudinal study demonstrated a case-fatality rate of 20% in a settled village in peacetime; in areas of conflict, famine or population displacement mortality rates are much higher. [22], [46] A recent study from South Sudan estimated that 91% of all kala-azar deaths went unrecognized. [47] Using an overall case-fatality rate of 10% and assuming that virtually all deaths are from VL, we reach a tentative estimate of 20,000 to 40,000 leishmaniasis deaths per year, in line with previous WHO estimates. [10]

Discussion

The data presented here and in the accompanying Annex (see ‘Leishmaniasis Country Profiles Text S1–S101’) represent the first update of the empirical database for leishmaniasis since 1991. [48], [49] We are acutely cognizant of the uncertainties inherent in the data, and for that reason, have presented rough ranges rather than single estimates for each outcome. We deliberately used conservative assumptions for the underreporting rates and resultant multipliers; true leishmaniasis incidence rates may be substantially higher. Due to the lack of data, we made no estimates for post-kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis, mucocutaneous leishmaniasis, and other less frequent forms of leishmaniasis. Our mortality estimate contains even more uncertainty than the incidence estimate, because studies affirm that a large proportion of kala-azar deaths occur outside of health facilities and the cause likely never recognized, precluding the possibility of accurate passive reporting. [43], [45], [47]. The limitations of these data are obvious: surveillance and vital records reporting in the countries most affected by leishmaniasis are incomplete, and we have very sparse data on which to base correction factors for underreporting. The figures in this report should not be considered precise and should be interpreted with caution. Nevertheless, these data include a more comprehensive review of leishmaniasis incidence than any previous publication, and represent a major improvement in the evidence base for one of the most neglected diseases. [50] Better surveillance systems are urgently needed, in particular in disease foci targeted for more intensive control or elimination. [4], [51] Many key measures of progress, such as validation of trends seen in surveillance data and accurate case-fatality rates, can only be obtained through the active collection of community-based data. [4], [52] We hope the data presented here will allow a more nuanced interpretation of published disease burden estimates, and the uncertainties in these data will spur activities to improve the evidence base for leishmaniasis and other neglected diseases. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Afghanistan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Albania. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Algeria. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Argentina. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Armenia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Azerbijan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Bangladesh. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Belize. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Bhutan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Bolivia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Bosnia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Brazil. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Bulgaria. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Burkina Faso. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Cameroon. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Central African Republic. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Chad. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, China. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Colombia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Costa Rica. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Cote d’Ivoire. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Croatia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Cyprus. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Democratic Republic of the Congo. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Djibouti. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Dominican Republic. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Ecuador. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Egypt. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles El Salvador. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Eritrea. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Ethiopia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, France. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, French Guyana. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Gambia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Georgia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Ghana. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Greece. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Guatemala. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Guinea Bissau. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Guinea. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Guyana. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Honduras. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, India. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Iran. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Iraq. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Israel. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Italy. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Jordan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Kazakhstan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Kenya. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Kuwait. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Kyrgyzstan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Lebanon. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Libya. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Malawi. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Mali. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Malta. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Mauritania. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Mexico. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Monaco. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Mongolia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Montenegro. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Morocco. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Namibia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Nepal. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Nicaragua. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Niger. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Nigeria. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Oman. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Pakistan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Panama. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Paraguay. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Peru. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Portugal. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Romania. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Saudi Arabia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Senegal. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Slovenia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Somalia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, South Africa. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, South Sudan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Spain. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Sri Lanka. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Sudan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Surinam. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Syrian Arab Republic. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Taiwan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Tajikistan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Thailand. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Tunisia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Turkey. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Turkmenistan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Uganda. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Ukraine. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, United States of America. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Uzbekistan. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Venezuela. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, West Bank and Gaza Strip. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Yemen. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. Leishmaniasis Country Profiles, Zambia. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file.
  38 in total

Review 1.  Assessing the burden of sexual and reproductive ill-health: questions regarding the use of disability-adjusted life years.

Authors:  C AbouZahr; J P Vaughan
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 9.408

2.  Unseen Kala-azar deaths in south Sudan (1999-2002).

Authors:  Simon M Collin; Paul G Coleman; Koert Ritmeijer; Robert N Davidson
Journal:  Trop Med Int Health       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.622

3.  Estimation of under-reporting of visceral leishmaniasis cases in Bihar, India.

Authors:  Vijay P Singh; Alok Ranjan; Roshan K Topno; Rakesh B Verma; Niyamat A Siddique; Vidya N Ravidas; Narendra Kumar; Krishna Pandey; Pradeep Das
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.345

4.  Cutaneous leishmaniasis in red kangaroos: isolation and characterisation of the causative organisms.

Authors:  K Rose; J Curtis; T Baldwin; A Mathis; B Kumar; A Sakthianandeswaren; T Spurck; J Low Choy; E Handman
Journal:  Int J Parasitol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 3.981

Review 5.  Lower trypanosomatids in HIV/AIDS patients.

Authors:  C Chicharro; J Alvar
Journal:  Ann Trop Med Parasitol       Date:  2003-10

6.  Estimation of population at risk of infection and number of cases of Leishmaniasis.

Authors:  R W Ashford; P Desjeux; P Deraadt
Journal:  Parasitol Today       Date:  1992-03

7.  Conflict and kala-azar: determinants of adverse outcomes of kala-azar among patients in southern Sudan.

Authors:  Simon Collin; Robert Davidson; Koert Ritmeijer; Kees Keus; Yosef Melaku; Sammy Kipngetich; Clive Davies
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2004-02-12       Impact factor: 9.079

8.  Risk factors for kala-azar in Bangladesh.

Authors:  Caryn Bern; Allen W Hightower; Rajib Chowdhury; Mustakim Ali; Josef Amann; Yukiko Wagatsuma; Rashidul Haque; Katie Kurkjian; Louise E Vaz; Moarrita Begum; Tangin Akter; Catherine B Cetre-Sossah; Indu B Ahluwalia; Ellen Dotson; W Evan Secor; Robert F Breiman; James H Maguire
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 6.883

9.  History of Kala-Azar in India.

Authors:  P C Sen Gupta
Journal:  Ind Med Gaz       Date:  1947-05

Review 10.  Complexities of assessing the disease burden attributable to leishmaniasis.

Authors:  Caryn Bern; James H Maguire; Jorge Alvar
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2008-10-29
View more
  1764 in total

1.  Cationic liposomal sodium stibogluconate (SSG), a potent therapeutic tool for treatment of infection by SSG-sensitive and -resistant Leishmania donovani.

Authors:  Roma Sinha; Jayeeta Roychoudhury; Partha Palit; Nahid Ali
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2014-11-03       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  In silico work flow for scaffold hopping in Leishmania.

Authors:  Barnali Waugh; Ambarnil Ghosh; Dhananjay Bhattacharyya; Nanda Ghoshal; Rahul Banerjee
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2014-11-17

3.  Identification of Leishmania by Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization-Time of Flight (MALDI-TOF) Mass Spectrometry Using a Free Web-Based Application and a Dedicated Mass-Spectral Library.

Authors:  Laurence Lachaud; Anna Fernández-Arévalo; Anne-Cécile Normand; Patrick Lami; Cécile Nabet; Jean Luc Donnadieu; Martine Piarroux; Farid Djenad; Carole Cassagne; Christophe Ravel; Silvia Tebar; Teresa Llovet; Denis Blanchet; Magalie Demar; Zoubir Harrat; Karim Aoun; Patrick Bastien; Carmen Muñoz; Montserrat Gállego; Renaud Piarroux
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 4.  Chemotherapeutics of visceral leishmaniasis: present and future developments.

Authors:  Shyam Sundar; Anup Singh
Journal:  Parasitology       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 3.234

5.  Mucosal leishmaniasis: A Retrospective Study of 327 Cases from an Endemic Area of Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis.

Authors:  Carolina Cincurá; Clara Mônica F de Lima; Paulo R L Machado; Jamary Oliveira-Filho; Marshall J Glesby; Marcus M Lessa; Edgar M Carvalho
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 2.345

6.  Asymptomatic Leishmania infection: a new challenge for Leishmania control.

Authors:  Om Prakash Singh; Epco Hasker; David Sacks; Marleen Boelaert; Shyam Sundar
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2014-02-27       Impact factor: 9.079

7.  Deletion of ubiquitin fold modifier protein Ufm1 processing peptidase Ufsp in L. donovani abolishes Ufm1 processing and alters pathogenesis.

Authors:  Sreenivas Gannavaram; Sonya Davey; Ines Lakhal-Naouar; Robert Duncan; Hira L Nakhasi
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2014-02-20

8.  The new pyrazolyltetrazole derivative MSN20 is effective via oral delivery against cutaneous leishmaniasis.

Authors:  Viviane Dos Santos Faiões; Maurício Silva Dos Santos; Alice Maria Rolim Bernardino; Edézio Ferreira Cunha-Júnior; Marilene Marcuzzo do Canto Cavalheiro; Eduardo Caio Torres-Santos
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2014-08-04       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Recovery of antigen-specific T cell responses from dogs infected with Leishmania (L.) infantum by use of vaccine associated TLR-agonist adjuvant.

Authors:  Robert G Schaut; Tara L Grinnage-Pulley; Kevin J Esch; Angela J Toepp; Malcolm S Duthie; Randall F Howard; Steven G Reed; Christine A Petersen
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 3.641

Review 10.  Pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines in cutaneous leishmaniasis: a review.

Authors:  Nahid Maspi; Amir Abdoli; Fathemeh Ghaffarifar
Journal:  Pathog Glob Health       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 2.894

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.