| Literature DB >> 23469311 |
Natalia Tiberti1, Veerle Lejon, Alexandre Hainard, Bertrand Courtioux, Xavier Robin, Natacha Turck, Krister Kristensson, Enock Matovu, John Charles Enyaru, Dieudonné Mumba Ngoyi, Sanjeev Krishna, Sylvie Bisser, Joseph Mathu Ndung'u, Philippe Büscher, Jean-Charles Sanchez.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Post-therapeutic follow-up is essential to confirm cure and to detect early treatment failures in patients affected by sleeping sickness (HAT). Current methods, based on finding of parasites in blood and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and counting of white blood cells (WBC) in CSF, are imperfect. New markers for treatment outcome evaluation are needed. We hypothesized that alternative CSF markers, able to diagnose the meningo-encephalitic stage of the disease, could also be useful for the evaluation of treatment outcome. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23469311 PMCID: PMC3585011 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002088
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Characteristics at baseline of the verification cohort.
| S1 cured (n = 21) | S2 cured (n = 114) | S2 relapsed | |
|
| |||
| Sex, F (n) | 14 (66.7%) | 28 (24.6%) | 33 (35.3%) |
| Age, years [mean ± SD] | 37.3 [±13] | 34 [±12.4] | 34.3 [±12.4] |
|
| |||
| Trypanosome positive, n | 0 | 104 | 100 |
| WBC/µL (median, range) | 3 | 213 [2–1940] | 267 [8–2064] |
|
| |||
| Absent | 13 | 15 | 13 |
| Present | 8 | 99 | 94 |
|
| |||
| P | 21 | 0 | 0 |
| E | 0 | 42 | 2 |
| M | 0 | 40 | 99 |
| M-E | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| M-N | 0 | 31 | 6 |
| Secondary case, n | 0 | 66 | 9 |
n = 27, probable relapse.
No significant difference between S2 cured and S2 relapsed, Fisher's exact test.
No significant difference between S2 cured and S2 relapsed, Mann-Whitney U test.
Secondary case: patients already treated once for HAT.
P: pentamidine treatment; E: eflornithine treatment; M: melarsoprol treatment; M-E: combination of melarsoprol and eflornithine; M-N: combination of melarsoprol and nifurtimox. More details on treatment regimens are reported in [8].
Performance of the markers on the screening cohort.
| Marker | AUC% (95%CI) | Cut-off | SP% (95%CI) | SE% (95%CI) |
| Neopterin [nmol/L] | 99.1 (97.7–100) | 64.4 | 100 (100–100) | 92.3 (82.1–100) |
| CXCL13 [pg/mL] | 94.0 (88.9–99.2) | 125.5 | 84.6 (71.8–94.9) | 92.3 (82.1–100) |
| ICAM-1 [ng/mL] | 93.2 (87.0–99.4) | 2.1 | 92.3 (82.1–100) | 87.2 (76.9–97.4) |
| CXCL10 [pg/mL] | 90.0 (83.6–98.2) | 2308.4 | 84.6 (71.8–94.9) | 89.7 (79.5–97.4) |
| B2MG [ng/mL] | 89.2 (81.4–97.1) | 2486.5 | 94.9 (87.2–100) | 76.9 (64.1–89.7) |
| MMP-9 [pg/mL] | 88.8 (80.8–96.9) | 814.8 | 84.6 (71.8–94.9) | 87.2 (76.9–97.4) |
| VCAM-1 [ng/mL] | 86.2 (77.4–95) | 38.5 | 94.9 (87.2–100) | 69.2 (53.9–82.1) |
| IgM [µg/mL] | 81.2 (71.6–90.8) | 75.9 | 66.7 (51.3–79.5) | 87.2 (76.9–97.4) |
| WBC (Cells/µL) | 96.9 (93.9–100) | 44.5 | 94.9 (87.2–100) | 89.7 (79.5–97.4) |
Number of patients: 39 S2 relapsed vs. 39 S2 cured.
SP%: specificity %; SE%: sensitivity%; 95%CI: 95% confidence interval.
The reported cut-off corresponds to the best combination of specificity and sensitivity obtained for each marker.
Baseline risk factors for treatment failure in late stage patients.
|
|
|
| |||
| Baseline variable | n/N | RR | p value | RR | p value |
| Sex | |||||
| F | 33/61 | 1 | 1 | ||
| M | 74/160 | 0.85 | 0.28 | 0.88 | 0.31 |
| Age | |||||
| <25 | 27/55 | 1 | 1 | ||
| 25–39 | 43/94 | 0.93 | 0.69 | 1 | 0.99 |
| >40 | 37/72 | 1.05 | 0.80 | 0.91 | 0.54 |
| Treatment | |||||
| E | 2/44 | 1 | |||
| M | 99/139 | 15.67 | <0.0001 | ||
| M-E | 0/1 | 0.00 | <0.0001 | ||
| M-N | 6/37 | 3.57 | 0.11 | ||
| Secondary case | |||||
| No | 98/144 | 1 | 1 | ||
| Yes | 9/77 | 0.17 | <0.0001 | 0.94 | 0.90 |
| Incomplete treatment | |||||
| No | 92/197 | 1 | 1 | ||
| Yes | 15/24 | 1.34 | 0.10 | 1 | 0.96 |
| Parasites in CSF | |||||
| T− | 7/17 | 1 | 1 | ||
| T+ | 100/204 | 1.19 | 0.56 | 1.83 | 0.04 |
| CSF WBC/µL | |||||
| <100 | 17/46 | 1 | 1 | ||
| 100–199 | 26/50 | 1.40 | 0.15 | 1.64 | 0.02 |
| 200–399 | 32/69 | 1.25 | 0.39 | 1.52 | 0.04 |
| ≥400 | 32/56 | 1.54 | 0.05 | 1.32 | 0.18 |
| Neurological signs | |||||
| NS− | 12/27 | 1 | 1 | ||
| NS+ | 95/194 | 1.1 | 0.67 | 1.28 | 0.24 |
| Neopterin [nmol/L] | |||||
| ≤261.6 | 35/96 | 1 | 1 | ||
| >261.6 | 72/125 | 1.58 | 0.003 | 1.75 | <0.0001 |
| CXCL13 [pg/mL] | |||||
| ≤1734.1 | 17/50 | 1 | 1 | ||
| >1734.1 | 90/171 | 1.55 | 0.04 | 1.55 | 0.02 |
TT: treatment; E: eflornithine treatment; M: melarsoprol treatment; M-E: combination of melarsoprol and eflornithine; M-N: combination of melarsoprol and nifurtimox.
n/N: n = number of patients experiencing treatment failure, N = total number of patients.
RR: risk ratio.
T−: absence of parasite in CSF; T+: presence of parasites in CSF.
NS−: absence of neurological sings, NS+: presence of neurological sings.
Age and WBC/µL categories were defined according to Mumba Ngoyi D. et al. [8].
Figure 1Kinetics of neopterin, CXCL13 and WBC during the follow-up.
The variation in concentrations of the three markers in S1 cured patients, S2 cured patients and S2 relapsing patients are represented. Median concentrations at each time point are reported. Bars represent inter-quartile intervals. Numbers on the graphs represent the number of CSF samples assessed at each time point for each category of HAT patients. BT: before treatment; EoT: end of treatment; 3 M, 6 M, 12 M: 3, 6, 12 months after treatment. FU: follow-up.
Performances of neopterin, CXCL13 and WBC in discriminating between S2 cured and S2 relapsed patient.
| Marker, Tx | AUC% | pAUC% | Cut-Off | SP% (95%CI) | SE% (95%CI) | LR+ | LR− | TN | FN |
|
| |||||||||
| 3 M | 90 | 69.3 | 17.3 | 57.5 (48.7–66.4) | 93.3 (88.6–98.1) | 2.2 | 0.12 | 65 | 7 |
| 6 M | 93.9 | 75.8 | 27.9 | 87.4 (81.1–92.8) | 92.2 (84.4–98.4) | 7.3 | 0.09 | 97 | 5 |
| 12 M | 98.4 | 93.3 | 41.4 | 97.3 (93.6–100) | 94.4 (83.3–100) | 35.0 | 0.06 | 107 | 1 |
|
| |||||||||
| 3 M | 86 | 60.4 | 58.9 | 52.2 (42.5–61.1) | 90.5 (84.8–96.2) | 1.9 | 0.18 | 59 | 10 |
| 6 M | 92.4 | 69.7 | 53.2 | 64 (55–73) | 90.6 (82.8–96.9) | 2.5 | 0.15 | 71 | 6 |
| 12 M | 94.7 | 78.3 | 76.7 | 87.3 (80.9–92.7) | 94.4 (83.3–100) | 7.4 | 0.06 | 96 | 1 |
|
| |||||||||
| 3 M | 87.1 | 64.5 | 14.5 | 62.8 (54–71.7) | 90.5 (84.8–96.2) | 2.4 | 0.15 | 71 | 10 |
| 6 M | 93.3 | 71.4 | 11.5 | 81.1 (73.9–88.3) | 90.6 (82.8–96.9) | 4.8 | 0.12 | 90 | 6 |
| 12 M | 94.4 | 70.9 | 9.5 | 92.7 (87.3–97.3) | 94.4 (83.3–100) | 12.9 | 0.06 | 102 | 1 |
3 M, 6 M, 12 M: 3, 6, 12 months after treatment.
Number of patients: 3 M cured n = 113, relapsed m = 105; 6 M cured n = 111, relapsed n = 64; 12 M cured n = 110, relapsed n = 18.
*pAUC was calculated between 90 and 100% of sensitivity.
SP% = specificity%; SE% = sensitivity%.
Cut-off corresponds to the best combination of SP and SE within the pAUC.
LR+: positive likelihood ratio, LR−: negative likelihood ratio.
TN: true negatives, number of cured patients correctly classified.
FN: false negatives, number of relapsing patients wrongly classified as cured.