Literature DB >> 28056025

Development of Diagnostics for Chagas Disease: Where Should We Put Our Limited Resources?

Albert Picado1, Andrea Angheben2, Andrea Marchiol3, Belkisyolé Alarcón de Noya4, Laurence Flevaud5, Maria Jesus Pinazo6, Montserrat Gállego6,7, Sheba Meymandi8, Silvia Moriana9.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28056025      PMCID: PMC5221646          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005148

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis        ISSN: 1935-2727


× No keyword cloud information.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), one of the milestones set by the London Declaration for Chagas disease—the interruption of Chagas disease transmission through blood transfusion in Latin America—was achieved in most countries (20 out of 21) in 2015 [1]. This is a crucial step towards reaching the goal of controlling Chagas disease by 2020. However, many challenges remain: less than 1% of the 6 to 7 million people infected with Trypanosoma cruzi are treated, and new infections still occur [2]. Twenty to thirty percent of chronic Chagas disease patients will develop cardiac and/or gastrointestinal complications [3]. The WHO recommends treating T. cruzi-infected patients. Antiparasitic treatments are highly effective in patients in the acute phase and reduce the risk of disease progression in patients in the indeterminate stage of the disease (patients chronically infected with T. cruzi but without evidence of cardiac or gastrointestinal disease) [4,5]. Because T. cruzi can be transmitted by a variety of routes [6] (i.e., vectorial transmission when T. cruzi parasites, which are released when the infected blood-sucking triatomine bugs defecate, enter the body via the skin break caused by the bug’s bite or via other mucosa [e.g., oral transmission through contaminated food]; congenital infection; blood transfusion; and cell, blood, or tissue transplantation) and because the majority of people with chronic infection have never been tested and are not aware of their status, the development of new tools to diagnose Chagas disease is a priority. This is true in endemic countries as well as in regions where infected people have migrated in recent years (e.g., Europe, Asia, and North America). Despite concerted efforts to use available tools to diagnose Chagas disease in different patient groups and epidemiological and clinical settings in Latin American countries over the last four decades, and in nonendemic countries since the early 2000s, a large number of patients are diagnosed late or not at all. While the reasons for these diagnostic trends are diverse and vary across countries and patient groups, one of the main limitations is the lack of reliable diagnostic tests adapted to the needs of patients and health systems. The resources to develop new diagnostic tools for Chagas disease are scarce, so it is important to allocate them to diagnostic needs that are not adequately covered by existing tools. Agreeing on diagnostic priorities will help to ensure that efforts and resources are directed to the development of tests that increase access to diagnosis and contribute to disease control. In recent years, the WHO, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), and Chagas disease experts have initiated this important process by identifying a range of diagnostic needs [7-11] (summarised in Table 1). The next step is for the Chagas disease community, including professionals with different backgrounds, expertise, and geographical locations, to rank these diagnostic needs.
Table 1

Diagnostic needs for Chagas disease.

Diagnostic needDefinition
Point-of-care* (PoC) test for Chagas disease patients in the acute phasePoC test to identify acute T. cruzi infection (e.g., vector, oral transmission in the general population, reactivation in immunosuppressed patients).
PoC test for Chagas disease patients in the chronic phasePoC test to identify chronic T. cruzi infection in the general population (including pregnant women).
Test to screen blood and organ donors/donationsTest to screen for T. cruzi infection in blood and organ donors/donations.
PoC test for congenital Chagas diseasePoC test to detect T. cruzi in newborns (as a result of congenital transmission of Chagas Disease).
Test for early assessment of treatment responseTest to assess efficacy of antiparasitic treatment soon after completion of treatment in the chronic phase.
Progression test: Test to identify patients with a high risk of developing Chagas disease complicationsTest to identify, among T. cruzi infected patients, individuals with a high risk of developing neurologic, cardiac, or intestinal complications.
Test for early assessment of heart damage in Chagas disease patientsTest to identify, among T. cruzi infected patients, those with early cardiac damage.
Test for early assessment of digestive damage in Chagas disease patientsTest to identify, among T. cruzi infected patients, those with early digestive damage.
Test for screening of drug resistance to benznidazole and/or nifurtimoxTest to determine if T. cruzi is resistant to the available drugs (benznidazole/nifurtimox).

*A point-of-care (PoC) test is a test performed and interpreted where health care is provided, close to or near the patient.

*A point-of-care (PoC) test is a test performed and interpreted where health care is provided, close to or near the patient. To facilitate this ranking of diagnostic needs, we invited 155 Chagas disease experts to identify the three main diagnostic priorities for Chagas disease from Table 1. The experts were selected from among lead authors of Chagas disease scientific papers, physicians managing Chagas disease patients, and representatives of institutions involved in Chagas disease management (i.e., ministries of health, nongovernmental organizations [NGOs], private-public partnerships [PPP], the WHO/PAHO, and industry). Eighty-six of the experts (55%) were from Latin American countries; the other 69 (45%) were from nonendemic countries. Details on the 155 experts invited to participate are provided in S1 Table. The experts were asked to take into account the following: (1) existing diagnostic tools and (2) the expected clinical and epidemiological scenario of Chagas disease in the next five years. The survey was conducted in English, Spanish, and Portuguese in May and June of 2016 using Google Forms. For each expert, 3 points, 2 points, and 1 points were given to the first-, second-, and third-most-important priorities, respectively. A final score, calculated for each diagnostic need, was used to rank them. The results of the survey are presented here, pooled as well as by subgroup. Sixty-two experts (40%) completed the survey; the respondents were equally distributed (n = 31) between Latin American and non-Latin American countries. The majority worked in research (n = 22) and hospitals or NGOs (n = 16), but respondents also included representatives of health ministries and the WHO/PAHO (n = 9) and patient associations (n = 1), among others (see S1 Table for details). The response rate was higher among experts from non-Latin American countries (45%) compared to Latin American experts (36%). As detailed in Table 2, four diagnostic needs obtained similar scores: (1) a test for early assessment of treatment response (score 83); (2) a point-of-care (PoC) test for congenital Chagas disease (score 76); (3) a progression test to identify patients with a high risk of developing Chagas disease complications (score 73); and (4) a PoC test for Chagas disease patients in the chronic phase (score 67). The different subgroups (e.g., Latin American versus non-Latin American experts, different areas of expertise) consistently identified the same four diagnostic priorities for Chagas disease.
Table 2

Ranking diagnostic needs for Chagas disease (June 2016).

Diagnostic needTotalLatin AmericaNon-Latin AmericaResearchersHospitals/NGOsMoH—WHO/PAHO1
Number of respondents62313122169
Rank (score)Rank (score)Rank (score)Rank (score)Rank (score)Rank (score)
Test for early assessment of treatment response1 (83)3 (35)1 (48)2 (25)1 (26)2 (14)
PoC2 test for congenital Chagas disease2 (76)1 (38)3 (38)3 (24)4 (16)1 (15)
Progression test: test to identify patients with a high risk of developing Chagas disease complications3 (73)4 (29)2 (44)1 (29)2 (24)4 (5)
PoC test for Chagas disease patients in the chronic phase4 (67)2 (36)4 (31)4 (18)3 (19)3 (12)

1MoH, Ministry of Health; WHO, World Health Organization; PAHO, Pan American Health Organization;

2PoC, Point of care

1MoH, Ministry of Health; WHO, World Health Organization; PAHO, Pan American Health Organization; 2PoC, Point of care Experts from Latin America ranked the PoC test for congenital Chagas disease (score 38) as their top priority, whilst those from non-Latin American countries ranked the test for early assessment of treatment response (score 48) in first place. Researchers identified the progression test as the first priority, unlike respondents working in hospitals, NGOs, health ministries, and the WHO/PAHO, for whom the test to assess treatment response was the first priority. The rest of the diagnostic needs listed had lower scores (ranging from 1 to 28), and there were no major differences between subgroups, with one exception: the score for the PoC test for Chagas disease patients in the acute phase received a relatively high score from participants in Latin America (score 26) compared to non-Latin American experts (score 2). The complete dataset, including the scores for all diagnostic needs, is provided as supplementary material (S1 and S2 Tables). According to respondents, the diagnostic tools currently available meet the requirements of some diagnostic needs, e.g., screening blood and organ donors or diagnosing Chagas disease patients in the acute phase. However, new diagnostic tools should be developed to assess treatment response, diagnose congenital Chagas disease, identify individuals at risk of developing Chagas disease-related complications, and diagnose T. cruzi infected individuals in the chronic phase. The development of those tools should be guided by detailed Target Product Profiles (TPPs) developed and endorsed by the WHO and the Chagas disease community. The current TPPs for Chagas disease diagnostics [8,12] should be reviewed and expanded to ensure they cover the priorities identified in this survey. The results of this survey and the revised TPPs should guide research groups and attract public and private funders interested in developing diagnostic tools for Chagas disease with the highest public health impact. Defining the diagnostic needs and priorities for Chagas disease should be a dynamic process that is open to the whole Chagas disease community. To maximise input, the form used to collect the data presented in this paper will remain available at http://goo.gl/forms/66jt8cLxShAyXbm33 for six months from the date of publication.

Individual ranking of the nine diagnostic needs for Chagas disease conducted by 62 experts.

For each expert, 3 points, 2 points, and 1 point were given to the first, second, and third priorities, respectively. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file.

Ranking and scores for all diagnostic needs for Chagas Disease.

(DOCX) Click here for additional data file.
  8 in total

Review 1.  Chagas' Disease.

Authors:  Caryn Bern
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  Chronic phase of Chagas disease: why should it be treated? A comprehensive review.

Authors:  José Rodrigues Coura; José Borges-Pereira
Journal:  Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.743

3.  Diagnosis of Chagas disease: what has been achieved? What remains to be done with regard to diagnosis and follow up studies?

Authors:  Yara M Gomes; Virginia M B Lorena; Alejandro O Luquetti
Journal:  Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.743

4.  Research priorities for Chagas disease, human African trypanosomiasis and leishmaniasis.

Authors: 
Journal:  World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser       Date:  2012

5.  International meeting: new diagnostic tests are urgently needed to treat patients with Chagas disease.

Authors: 
Journal:  Rev Soc Bras Med Trop       Date:  2008 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.581

Review 6.  Biological markers for evaluating therapeutic efficacy in Chagas disease, a systematic review.

Authors:  Maria-Jesús Pinazo; M Carmen Thomas; Jacqueline Bua; Alina Perrone; Alejandro-Gabriel Schijman; Rodolfo-Jorge Viotti; Janine-M Ramsey; Isabela Ribeiro; Sergio Sosa-Estani; Manuel-Carlos López; Joaquim Gascon
Journal:  Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 5.091

7.  Target Product Profile (TPP) for Chagas Disease Point-of-Care Diagnosis and Assessment of Response to Treatment.

Authors:  Analía I Porrás; Zaida E Yadon; Jaime Altcheh; Constança Britto; Gabriela C Chaves; Laurence Flevaud; Olindo Assis Martins-Filho; Isabela Ribeiro; Alejandro G Schijman; Maria Aparecida Shikanai-Yasuda; Sergio Sosa-Estani; Eric Stobbaerts; Fabio Zicker
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2015-06-04

Review 8.  New, improved treatments for Chagas disease: from the R&D pipeline to the patients.

Authors:  Isabela Ribeiro; Ann-Marie Sevcsik; Fabiana Alves; Graciela Diap; Robert Don; Michael O Harhay; Shing Chang; Bernard Pecoul
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2009-07-07
  8 in total
  10 in total

1.  Multi-criteria decision analysis approach for strategy scale-up with application to Chagas disease management in Bolivia.

Authors:  Maria-Jesus Pinazo; Ainize Cidoncha; Gurram Gopal; Silvia Moriana; Ruth Saravia; Faustino Torrico; Joaquim Gascon
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2021-03-26

2.  Introducing automation to the molecular diagnosis of Trypanosoma cruzi infection: A comparative study of sample treatments, DNA extraction methods and real-time PCR assays.

Authors:  Alba Abras; Cristina Ballart; Teresa Llovet; Carme Roig; Cristina Gutiérrez; Silvia Tebar; Pere Berenguer; María-Jesús Pinazo; Elizabeth Posada; Joaquim Gascón; Alejandro G Schijman; Montserrat Gállego; Carmen Muñoz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-17       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  An ImmunoSignature test distinguishes Trypanosoma cruzi, hepatitis B, hepatitis C and West Nile virus seropositivity among asymptomatic blood donors.

Authors:  Michael Rowe; Jonathan Melnick; Robert Gerwien; Joseph B Legutki; Jessica Pfeilsticker; Theodore M Tarasow; Kathryn F Sykes
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2017-09-05

4.  Continuing evidence of Chagas disease along the Texas-Mexico border.

Authors:  Melissa S Nolan; David Aguilar; Eric L Brown; Sarah M Gunter; Shannon E Ronca; Craig L Hanis; Kristy O Murray
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2018-11-14

5.  Target product profile for a test for the early assessment of treatment efficacy in Chagas disease patients: An expert consensus.

Authors:  Julio Alonso-Padilla; Marcelo Abril; Belkisyolé Alarcón de Noya; Igor C Almeida; Andrea Angheben; Tania Araujo Jorge; Eric Chatelain; Monica Esteva; Joaquim Gascón; Mario J Grijalva; Felipe Guhl; Alejandro Marcel Hasslocher-Moreno; Manuel Carlos López; Alejandro Luquetti; Oscar Noya; María Jesús Pinazo; Janine M Ramsey; Isabela Ribeiro; Andres Mariano Ruiz; Alejandro G Schijman; Sergio Sosa-Estani; M Carmen Thomas; Faustino Torrico; Maan Zrein; Albert Picado
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2020-04-23

6.  Analytical sensitivity and specificity of a loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) kit prototype for detection of Trypanosoma cruzi DNA in human blood samples.

Authors:  Susana A Besuschio; Mónica Llano Murcia; Alejandro F Benatar; Severine Monnerat; Israel Cruz; Albert Picado; María de Los Ángeles Curto; Yutaka Kubota; Diana P Wehrendt; Paula Pavia; Yasuyoshi Mori; Concepción Puerta; Joseph M Ndung'u; Alejandro G Schijman
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2017-07-20

7.  The burden of congenital Chagas disease and implementation of molecular diagnostic tools in Latin America.

Authors:  Albert Picado; Israel Cruz; Maël Redard-Jacot; Alejandro G Schijman; Faustino Torrico; Sergio Sosa-Estani; Zachary Katz; Joseph Mathu Ndung'u
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2018-10-11

8.  A four-step process for building sustainable access to diagnosis and treatment of Chagas disease.

Authors:  Carolina Batista; Colin J Forsyth; Rafael Herazo; Marina Pereira Certo; Andrea Marchiol
Journal:  Rev Panam Salud Publica       Date:  2019-09-20

Review 9.  Implications of asymptomatic infection for the natural history of selected parasitic tropical diseases.

Authors:  Jorge Alvar; Fabiana Alves; Bruno Bucheton; Louise Burrows; Philippe Büscher; Eugenia Carrillo; Ingrid Felger; Marc P Hübner; Javier Moreno; Maria-Jesus Pinazo; Isabela Ribeiro; Sergio Sosa-Estani; Sabine Specht; Antoine Tarral; Nathalie Strub Wourgaft; Graeme Bilbe
Journal:  Semin Immunopathol       Date:  2020-03-18       Impact factor: 9.623

10.  Chagas Disease in Pregnant Women from Endemic Regions Attending the Hospital General de Mexico, Mexico City.

Authors:  Indira Chakravarti; Monica Miranda-Schaeubinger; Adriana Ruiz-Remigio; Carlos Briones-Garduño; Edith A Fernández-Figueroa; Concepción Celeste Villanueva-Cabello; Alejandra Borge-Villareal; Yadira Bejar-Ramírez; Alejandro Pérez-González; César Rivera-Benitez; Eyal Oren; Heidi E Brown; Ingeborg Becker; Robert H Gilman
Journal:  Trop Med Infect Dis       Date:  2022-01-11
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.