| Literature DB >> 32411424 |
Amarir Fatima1,2, Balahbib Abdelaali1,3, Paul L A M Corstjens4, Sadak Abderrahim3, Adlaoui El Bachir1, Rhajaoui Mohamed1.
Abstract
Clinical cases of Moroccan residents have been recorded since 2004, indicating successful interruption of transmission of S. haematobium infection at national level. The first national survey initiated in 2009 for Schistosomiasis haematobium among children born after 2004, applied diagnostic test was the HAMA-EITB, based on the Western blot technology, and molecular malacological diagnostic tools clearly confirm transmission stop. In 2015, a recent, small survey utilizing an HAI, ELISA tests and an ultrasensitive antigen test, FTCUP CAA, in a group of individual with a past history of infection. However, obviously follow-up surveys to prevent reemergency and for certification of the schistosomiasis elimination require vigilant diagnosis strategies. Here we discuss diagnosis story line in the national laboratory and challenges based on the available tools in relation to their clinical parameters (sensitivity/specificity; Sn/Sp), practicability and associated costs. When transmission stop has been achieved, survey cost and speed are likely to benefit from cost effective pooling strategies and ultrasensitive assays indicating active infection in all potential risk groups. Similarly molecular pooling strategies to monitor infections in the snail vectors.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32411424 PMCID: PMC7212323 DOI: 10.1155/2020/9705358
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Parasitol Res ISSN: 2090-0023
Considered diagnostic tests for Schistosomiasis haematobium in the Moroccan survey.
| Diagnostic | Test | Field | Cost/test (USD) | Evaluation | Sensitivity/specificity | Note | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical test | Hem test1 |
|
| Iraq, Ghana, Sudan, Tanzania, Nigeria, Sub Saharan Africa | 79%/98% | Morbidity test | [ |
|
| |||||||
| Antibodies detection | HAMA EITB2 | _ | >5 | Morocco USA | 95%/100% | High cost and not field-friendly | [ |
| EITB/WB 23kDa3 | _ | 8, 8 | Egypt and Morocco | 50/91% | High cost and not field-friendly | [ | |
| ELISA-SEA4 (soluble eggs antigen) |
| 8, 8 | Ghana | 98.5%/83%/93% | High cost | [ | |
| Need laboratory | |||||||
| HAI5(whole adult worm antigen) |
| 2.5 | Germany, Chile and Netherlands | 92%/94.7% | Acceptable | [ | |
| DDIA6 |
| 1 | China | -- | Need evaluation in | [ | |
| RDT SmCTF7 |
|
| Ivory Coast | 66.7%/34.4% | Not acceptable | [ | |
|
| |||||||
| Antigen detection | Filtration | _ |
| Africa, Iran, Iraq | Need laboratory | [ | |
| RDT filtration |
|
| USA, Kenya | 79%/95% | Field friendly and cost effectiveness, but not hygienic in large number of samples | [ | |
| POC CCA8 |
|
| Cameroun, Ivory Coast Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda | 36%/78% | Not sensitive in | [ | |
| Zanzibar | 99% | [ | |||||
| PCR9 | _ | 8 | Brazil | 100% | High cost | [ | |
1. Urine hemedipstick, 2. Heamatobium microsomal antigen enzyme Immunotransfert Blot, 3. 23 kDa Western blot, 4. Soluble eggs antigen enzyme linked
immunosorbent assay, 5. Hemmaglutination indirect, 6. Dipstick dye immunoassay, 7. Schistosoma mansoni cercarial transformation fluid, 8. Point of care/circulating cathodic Antigen, 9. Polymerase chain reaction.
Considered tests for malacological diagnosis of S. haematobium infection.
| Test | Prepatent infection detection | Sensitivity | Discrimination between | Field friendly (large survey) | Cost USD | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Light test | No | 1 Miracidium | No | No | 0 | [ |
| Dissection | Yes | 1 Sporocyste | No | No | 0 | [ |
| Hemolymph test | Yes (after 2 weeks) | Seropositivite | No | No | 5 | [ |
| DraI PCR | Yes | 1 pg/ | No | Yes | 7 | [ |
| Sh110SmSl PCR | Yes | 1 pg/ | Yes but | No | 7 | [ |
| DraI et Sh110SmSl PCR | Yes | 1 pg/ | Yes (amplify | Yes | 14 | [ |
| PCR 77/73 | Yes | 1pg/ | Yes (amplify | Yes | 7 | [ |
| CoxI PCR | 0.8ng/ | 8 | [ |
Figure 1Approach of parasite survey in post elimination phase of Schistosomiasis haematobium in Morocco.