| Literature DB >> 26752630 |
Beatriz Galatas1,2, Sowath Ly1, Veasna Duong1, Kathy Baisley2, Kunthy Nguon1, Siam Chan1, Rekol Huy3, Sovann Ly3, Sopheak Sorn1, Leakhann Som3, Philippe Buchy1, Arnaud Tarantola1.
Abstract
The East/Central/South African genotype of Chikungunya virus with the E1-A226V mutation emerged in 2011 in Cambodia and spread in 2012. An outbreak of 190 cases was documented in Trapeang Roka, a rural village. We surveyed 425 village residents within 3-4 weeks after the outbreak, and determined the sensitivity and specificity of case definitions and factors associated with infection by CHIKV. Self-reported clinical presentation consisted mostly of fever, rash and arthralgia. The presence of all three clinical signs or symptoms was identified as the most sensitive (67%) and specific (84%) self-reported diagnostic clinical indicator compared to biological confirmation by MAC-ELISA or RT-PCR used as a reference. Having an indoor occupation was associated with lower odds of infection compared with people who remained at home (adjOR 0.32, 95%CI 0.12-0.82). In contrast with findings from outbreaks in other settings, persons aged above 40 years were less at risk of CHIKV infection, likely reflecting immune protection acquired when Chikungunya circulated in Cambodia before the Khmer Rouge regime in 1975. In view of the very particular history of Cambodia, our epidemiological data from Trapeang Roka are the first to support the persistence of CHIKV antibodies over a period of 40 years.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26752630 PMCID: PMC4713465 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004281
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Self-reported clinical signs of CHIKV E1-A226V infection, and their diagnostic sensitivity/specificity and predictive values, Trapeang Roka, 2012.
| Self-reported clinical signs | CHIKV IgM+ (%) | CHKIV IgM—(%) | Total | p-value from χ2 Test | Se | Sp | PPV | NPV | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fever only | Present | 12 (6) | 26 (11) | 38 (9) | 0.09 | 6.4% | 89.0% | 31.6% | 54.5% |
| Absent | 176 (94) | 211 (89) | 387 (91) | ||||||
| Arthralgia only | Present | 8 (4) | 25 (11) | 33 (8) | 0.01 | 4.3% | 89.5% | 24.2% | 54.1% |
| Absent | 180 (96) | 212 (89) | 392 (92) | ||||||
| Rash only | Present | 3 (2) | 3 (1) | 6 (1) | 0.79 | 1.6% | 98.7% | 50.0% | 55.8% |
| Absent | 185 (98) | 234 (99) | 419 (99) | ||||||
| Fever and Rash | Present | 4 (2) | 5 (2) | 9 (2) | 0.99 | 2.1% | 97.9% | 44.4% | 55.8% |
| Absent | 184 (98) | 232 (98) | 416 (98) | ||||||
| Fever and Arthralgia | Present | 19 (10) | 31 (13) | 50 (12) | 0.35 | 10.1% | 86.9% | 38.0% | 54.9% |
| Absent | 169 (90) | 206 (87) | 375 (88) | ||||||
| Rash and Arthralgia | Present | 6 (3) | 7 (3) | 13 (3) | 0.88 | 3.2% | 97.0% | 46.2% | 55.8% |
| Absent | 182 (97) | 230 (97) | 412 (97) | ||||||
| ALL | Present | 126 (67) | 37 (16) | 163 (38) | <0.001 | 67.0% | 84.4% | 77.3% | 76.3% |
| Absent | 62 (33) | 200 (84) | 262 (62) | ||||||
| Total | 188 | 237 | 425 |
*Se: sensitivity; Sp: Specificity; PPV: positive predictive value; NPV: negative predictive value.
Fig 1Association curve between age and risk of CHIKV infection in univariate analysis and after multivariate analysis, using random effects logistic regression to account for correlation within households, Trapeang Roka, Cambodia, 2012.
The association of selected risk factors to CHIKV infection (after adjusting for age, sex, occupation and healthcard), Trapeang Roka, Cambodia, 2012.
| Risk Factors | Total | CHIKV Positive | Crude OR | LRT-p-value | Adjusted OR | LRT p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (column %) | (row %) | (95% CI) | (95% CI) | |||
| Total (N = 425) | 425 | 190 (45) | ||||
| Age | ||||||
| <1 | 10 (2) | 4 (40) | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||
| 1–5 | 39 (9) | 15 (38) | ||||
| 6–20 | 153 (36) | 83 (54) | ||||
| 21–40 | 126 (30) | 60 (48) | ||||
| 41–60 | 67 (16) | 25 (37) | ||||
| 61+ | 30 (7) | 3 (10) | ||||
| Sex | ||||||
| Females | 236 (56) | 91 (39) | 1 | 0.01 | 1 | 0.09 |
| Males | 189 (44) | 99 (52) | 1.95 (1.2–3.2) | 1.61 (0.93–2.77) | ||
| Education | ||||||
| None | 118 (28) | 38 (32) | 1 | 0.05 | 1 | 0.53 |
| Primary | 230 (54) | 112 (49) | 2.09 (1.1–3.9) | 1.53 (0.67–3.48) | ||
| Secondary or higher | 77 (18) | 40 (53) | 2.03 (0.9–4.5) | 1.17 (0.42–3.27) | ||
| Occupation | ||||||
| Stay at home | 134 (32) | 58 (43) | 1 | 0.09 | 1 | 0.07 |
| Student | 89 (21) | 52 (58) | 1.82 (0.9–3.8) | 1.00 (0.45–2.22) | ||
| Outdoor activities | 111 (26) | 41 (37) | 0.72 (0.4–1.4) | 0.46 (0.18–1.19) | ||
| Indoor activities | 91 (21) | 39 (43) | 0.81 (0.4–1.7) | 0.32 (0.12–0.84) | ||
| Owning a Healthcard2 | ||||||
| No | 408 (96) | 189 (46) | 1 | 0.02 | 1 | 0.04 |
| Yes | 15 (4) | 1 (7) | 0.04 (0.02–0.8) | 0.05 (0.00–1.07) | ||
§ OR adjusted for age, sex and occupation and healthcard, from random effects logistic regression to account for correlation within household.
1Best fitting fractional polynomial model for age: p1 = (age/10)0.5; p2 = (age/10)3 2Healthcard: a nominative card issued by the authorities to the poorest segment of the population to benefit from free healthcare