| Literature DB >> 31194852 |
Tooran Nayeri Chegeni1,2,3, Mehdi Sharif1,2, Shahabeddin Sarvi1,2, Mahmood Moosazadeh4, Mahbobeh Montazeri1,2, Sargis A Aghayan5, Nader Jafari Balalami6, Shirzad Gholami1,2, Zahra Hosseininejad1,2, Reza Saberi1,2, Davood Anvari1,2, Shaban Gohardehi1, Ahmad Daryani1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii) is an obligate intracellular opportunistic parasite that is the causative agent of toxoplasmosis. This parasite accounts for mental disorders; however, the relationship between T. gondii infection and depressive disorder is unclear. Regarding this, the present systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the scientific evidence regarding the potential association between major depression disorder (MDD) and Toxoplasma infection.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31194852 PMCID: PMC6564815 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218524
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1The PRISMA flow diagram of the search strategy, study selection, and data management procedure of T. gondii infection and depression.
Fig 2Forest plot diagram of studies showing IgG seropositivity rates of T. gondii.
Perpendicular discontinuous line indicates the odds ratio index. The perpendicular continuous line represents the null hypothesis. The horizontal lines illustrate 95% CI for ORs. A study that its confidence interval (horizontal line) interrupts the vertical continuous line (line null hypothesis), the odd ratio of this study is not statistically significant.
Fig 3A bias assessment plot from Egger.
Fig 4Sensitivity analysis for assessing the effect of each primary study on the total estimates.
Fig 5Forest plot diagram of cross-sectional studies showing IgG seropositivity rates of T. gondii.
Fig 6Forest plot diagram of case-control studies showing IgG seropositivity rates of T. gondii.
Characteristics of the included studies for T. gondii infection in depressed patients and controls.
| No | First author | Publication year | Place of study | Type of study | Method | Test | Results | Age (years ± SD) | Sex (N) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Conejero-Goldberg et al. [ | 2003 | USA | Case control | Nested-PCR | - | Not significant | P: 39.9 | — |
| 2 | Thomas et al. [ | 2004 | United Kingdom | Cross sectional | Eiken latex agglutination test, Dye test, IgM ELISA, IFA | IgG and IgM | Not significant | P: <70 | — |
| 3 | Alvarado-Esquivel et al. [ | 2006 | Mexico | Case control | ELISA | IgG and IgM | Not significant | P: 43.7±13.8 | C: (F:55, M:125) |
| 4 | Cetinkaya et al. [ | 2007 | Turkey | Case control | ELISA | IgG and IgM | Not significant | P: 37.4 ± 01 | P: (F:24, M:26) |
| 5 | Hinze-Selch et al. [ | 2007 | Germany | Case control | Toxo-Spot IF | IgG | Significant | P: 46.0 ±15.5 | — |
| 6 | Hamidinejat et al.[ | 2010 | Iran | Case control | ELISA | IgG and IgM | Not significant | P: 18–58 | — |
| 7 | Xiao et al.[ | 2010 | China | Case control | ELISA | IgG | Not significant | P: 15–65 | — |
| 8 | Groër et al.[ | 2011 | Austria | Cross sectional | ELISA | IgG | Significant | P: 18–45 | F:414 |
| 9 | Pearce et al. [ | 2012 | USA | Cross sectional | EIA | IgG | Significant | P: 15–39 | |
| 10 | El-Sayed et al. [ | 2012 | Egypt | Case control | ELISA | IgG | Not significant | P: 37 ± 11 | P: (F:11, M:19) |
| 11 | Gale et al.[ | 2014 | USA | Cross sectional | ELISA | IgG | Not significant | 29.7 ± 0.4 | — |
| 12 | Markovitz et al.[ | 2015 | USA | Cross sectional | ELISA | IgG | Not significant | P: ≥18 | C: (F:217, M:139) |
| 13 | Al-Hussainy et al. [ | 2015 | Saudi Arabia | Cross-sectional | ELISA | IgG and IgM | Not significant | P: ≥15 | P: (F:21, M:18) |
| 14 | Cong et al. [ | 2015 | China | Case control | ELISA | IgG and IgM | Not significant | P: 16–91 | C: (F:238, M:207) |
| 15 | Wilking et al. [ | 2016 | Germany | Cross sectional | ELFA | IgG | Not significant | P: 18–79 | — |
| 16 | El-Aal et al. [ | 2016 | Egypt | Case control | ELISA | IgG | Not significant | P: 2–46 | P: (F:73, M:45) |
| 17 | Shiadeh et al. [ | 2016 | Iran | Case control | ELISA | IgG | Not significant | P: 28.9 ± 5.6 | F:116 |
| 18 | Alvarado-Esquivel et al. [ | 2016a | Mexico | Case control | ELISA | IgG and IgM | Not significant | P: 38.65 ± 12.93 | P: (F:64, M:25) |
| 19 | Alvarado-Esquivel et al. [ | 2016b | Mexico | Case control | EIA | IgG and IgM | Significant | P: 39.43 ± 14.05 | P: (F:42, M:23) |
| 20 | Gale et al.[ | 2016 | USA | Cross sectional | EIA | IgG | Not significant | P: 20–80 | — |
| 21 | Sugden et al. [ | 2016 | New Zealand | Cross sectional | EIA | IgG | Not significant | P: 38 | — |
| 22 | Zaki et al. [ | 2016 | Saudi Arabia | Case control | ELISA | IgG and IgM | Not significant | P: 35.3±9.1 | C: (F:94, M:68) |
| 23 | Flegr and Escudero [ | 2016 | Czech Republic | Cross sectional | CFT and ELISA | IgG and IgM | Not significant | P: M: 34.0±10.5, | P: (F:41, M:6) |
| 24 | Alvarado-Esquivel et al. [ | 2017a | Mexico | Case control | ELISA and PCR | IgG and IgM | Not significant | P: 69.08±11.39 | C: (F:105, M:90) |
| 25 | Suvisaari et al. [ | 2017 | Finland | Cross sectional | ELISA | IgG | Not significant | P: ≥30 | — |
| 26 | Massa et al. [ | 2017 | USA | Cross sectional | ELISA | IgG | Significant | P: 44.02±11.89 | — |
| 27 | Abdollahian et al. [ | 2017 | Iran | Case control | ELISA | IgG and IgM | Significant | P: 35±11.61 | C: (F:180, M:170) |
| 28 | Flegr and Horáček [ | 2017 | Czech Republic | Cross sectional | CFT and ELISA | IgG and IgM | Not significant | M: 35.6±12.4 | — |
| 29 | Alvarado-Esquivel et al.[ | 2017b | Mexico | Case control | EIA and ELFA | IgG and IgM | Not significant | P: 23.40 ± 8.36 | F:200 |
| 30 | Yolken et al. [ | 2017 | USA | Case control | ELISA | IgG | Not significant | P: 37.8 | P: (F:40, M:24) |
ELISA: Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, IFA: Indirect immunofluorescence assay, CFT: Complement fixation test, EIA: Enzyme immunoassay, Nested-PCR: Nested-polymerase chain reaction, IgG: Immunoglobulin G, IgM: Immunoglobulin M, P: Pateint, C: Control, F: Female, M: Male, N: Number
Characteristics of the included studies for T. gondii serological analysis in depressed patients and controls.
| No | First author | N | Case: MDD+ (n) | Control: MDD- (n) | MDD+ & T+ (n, %) | MDD- & T+ (n, %) | OR (95% CI) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Conejero-Goldberg et al. [ | 29 | 3 | 26 | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 7.57 (0.13–445.73) | — |
| 2 | Thomas et al. [ | 18 | 18 | — | 7 (38.9%) | — | 0.81 (0.29–2.3) | — |
| 3 | Alvarado-Esquivel et al. [ | 183 | 3 | 180 | 1 (33.33%) | 16 (8.9%) | 5.13 (0.44–59.67) | |
| 4 | Cetinkaya et al. [ | 100 | 50 | 50 | 12 (24%) | 11 (22%) | 1.12 (0.44–2.84) | — |
| 5 | Hinze-Selch et al. [ | 679 | 465 | 214 | 221 (47.5%) | 55 (25.70%) | 2.62 (1.83–3.74) | — |
| 6 | Hamidinejat et al.[ | 94 | 46 | 48 | 15 (32.6%) | 14 (29.2%) | 1.18 (0.49–2.82) | — |
| 7 | Xiao et al. [ | 2663 | 29 | 2634 | 4 (13.8%) | 329 (12.5%) | 1.12 (0.39–3.24) | — |
| 8 | Groër et al. [ | 414 | 414 | — | 44 (10.63%) | — | — | — |
| 9 | Pearce et al. [ | 515 | 515 | — | 65 (12.62%) | — | 0.73 (0.56–0.95) | |
| 10 | El-Sayed et al. [ | 50 | 30 | 20 | 12 (40%) | 6 (30%) | 1.56 (0.47–5.18) | — |
| 11 | Gale et al. [ | 129 | 129 | — | — | — | 0.48 (0.19–1.26) | — |
| 12 | Markovitz et al. [ | 76 | 76 | — | — | — | 1.09 (0.57–2.10) | — |
| 13 | Al-Hussainy et al. [ | 94 | 39 | 55 | 10 (25.64%) | 8 (14.55%) | 2.03 (0.72–5.72) | |
| 14 | Cong et al. [ | 484 | 39 | 445 | 3 (7.7%) | 55 (12.36%) | 0.59 (0·18–1.98) | — |
| 15 | Wilking et al. [ | 6515 | 768 | 5,747 | 409 (53.25%) | 3161 (55%) | 0.93 (0·8–1.08) | …. |
| 16 | El-Aal et al. [ | 178 | 118 | 60 | 24 (20.3%) | 7 (11.7%) | 1.93 (0.78–4.79) | — |
| 17 | Shiadeh et al. [ | 360 | 116 | 244 | 69 (59.5%) | 125 (51.23%) | 1.4 (0.89–2.19) | |
| 18 | Alvarado-Esquivel et al. [ | 363 | 7 | 356 | 0 (0%) | 22 (6.2%) | 0.99 (0.05–17.91) | — |
| 19 | Alvarado-Esquivel et al. [ | 325 | 65 | 260 | 15 (23.1%) | 18 (6.9%) | 4.03 (1.91–8.54) | |
| 20 | Gale et al.[ | 1001 | 1001 | — | — | — | 0.83 (0.64, 1.06) | — |
| 21 | Sugden et al. [ | 127 | 127 | — | 35 (27.56) | — | 1.01 (0.66–1.54) | — |
| 22 | Zaki et al. [ | 168 | 6 | 162 | 2 (33.3%) | 24 (14.8%) | 2.88 (0.66–16.58) | |
| 23 | Flegr and Escudero [ | 1256 | 47 | 1209 | 8 (17.02%) | 285 (23.57%) | 0.67 (0.31–1.44) | |
| 24 | Alvarado-Esquivel et al. [ | 230 | 35 | 195 | 6 (17.1%) | 21 (10.8%) | 1.71 (0.64–4.61) | |
| 25 | Suvisaari et al. [ | 5917 | 288 | 5629 | 70 (20.35%) | 1331 (19.67%) | 1.04 (0.8–1.37) | |
| 26 | Massa et al. [ | 153 | 153 | — | — | — | 0.23 (0.087–0.613) | — |
| 27 | Abdollahian et al. [ | 385 | 35 | 350 | 18 (51.43%) | 120 (34.28%) | 2.03 (1.01–4.08) | — |
| 28 | Flegr and Horáček [ | 78 | 78 | — | — | — | 1.38 (0.84–2.25) | |
| 29 | Alvarado-Esquivel et al. [ | 400 | 200 | 200 | 9 (4.5%) | 12 (6.0%) | 0.74 (0.3–1.79) | |
| 30 | Yolken et al.[ | 635 | 64 | 571 | 5 (7.8%) | 35 (6.1%) | 1.3 (0.49–3.44) | — |
N and n: Number, CI: Confidence interval; MDD+: Individuals with depression; MDD-: Individuals without depression; MDD+ & T+: Individuals with depression and Toxoplasma positive; MDD- & T+: Individuals without depression and Toxoplasma positive; OR: Odds ratio