| Literature DB >> 34670602 |
Niamh Murphy1, M Victoria Cardinal2,3, Tapan Bhattacharyya4, Gustavo F Enriquez2,3, Natalia P Macchiaverna2,3, Alejandra Alvedro2,3, Héctor Freilij5, Pablo Martinez de Salazar6, Israel Molina6, Pascal Mertens7, Quentin Gilleman7, Ricardo E Gürtler2,3, Michael A Miles4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chagas disease remains a significant public health problem in Latin America. There are only two chemotherapy drugs, nifurtimox and benznidazole, and both may have severe side effects. After complete chemotherapy of acute cases, seropositive diagnosis may revert to negative. However, there are no definitive parasitological or serological biomarkers of cure.Entities:
Keywords: Chagas disease; ELISA; IgG; IgG1; Post-treatment; Pre-treatment; Rapid diagnostic test; Serology; Trypanosoma cruzi
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34670602 PMCID: PMC8527601 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-021-05040-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Fig. 1Pilot study supports IgG1 decline post-treatment: ELISA absorbance values are shown for individual participants at 0, 60 and 365 days post-treatment. Each line represents an individual patient. Three of seven show a decline in IgG1
Changes in anti-T. cruzi seroreactivity according to assay and treatment group
| Antigen | Number positive/examined (%) by detection assay | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Protein G: Chagas Sero K-SeT | IgG1 ELISA | IgG ELISA | ||||
| TSSApep-II/V/VI | Lysate | TSSApep-II/V/VIa | Lysate | TSSApep-II/V/VIa | ||
| Group A ( | ||||||
| Positive (pre-treatment) | 54/58 (93.1%) | 46/58 (79.3%)f | 22/53b (41.5%)f | 57/58 (98.3%)g | 41/53b (77.4%)g | |
| Clear decline | 25/54 (46.3%) | 35/46 (76.1%) | 22/22 (100%) | 21/57 (36.8%) | 34/41 (82.9%)e | |
| Seronegativisation | 11/54 (20.4%) | 19/46 (41.3%)h | 15/22 (68.2%)i | 6/57 (10.5%)h | 18/41 (43.9%)i | |
| Remained seronegativec | 4/58 (6.9%) | 12/58 (20.7%) | 30/53d (56.6%) | 1/58 (1.7%) | 12/53d (22.6%) | |
| Group B ( | ||||||
| Positive (pre-treatment) | 11/13 (84.6%) | 11/13 (84.6%) | 7/10b (70.0%) | 13/13 (100%) | 10/10b (100%) | |
| Clear decline | 5/11 (45.5%) | 6/11 (54.5%) | 6/7 (85.7%) | 6/13 (46.2%) | 5/10 (50.0%)e | |
| Seronegativisation | 1/11 (9.1%) | 2/11 (18.2%) | 5/7 (71.4%)j | 1/13 (7.7%) | 2/10 (20.0%)j | |
| Remained seronegativec | 2/13 (15.4%) | 2/13 (15.4%) | 3/10 (30.0%) | 0/13 (0%) | 0/10 (0%) | |
Group A: completed treatment; group B: reported interruption of treatment
aOnly assayed for samples positive by TSSApep-II/V/VI Chagas Sero K-SeT RDT
bTwo RDT-positive samples (one each from group A and group B) were not assayed by TSSApep-II/V/VI-ELISA
cRemained seronegative = negative pre- and post-treatment
dOne sample seroconverted (changed from negative to positive) in this assay
e–jStatistically significant differences between superscript pairs are discussed in the text
Fig. 2IgG1 decline is more discriminative than IgG in paired pre- and post-treatment sera for patients that completed treatment (group A). In each panel (a–d), ELISA absorbance values are shown connected for individual sample pairs, and in the insets as composite box and whisker plots, blue (pre-treatment) and red (post-treatment). a IgG1 with lysate (P < 0.0001 for pre- versus post-treatment); b IgG with lysate (P < 0.0001); c IgG1 with TSSApep-II/V/VI (P < 0.0001); d IgG with TSSApep-II/V/V (P < 0.0001). The dashed line represents each assay cut-off value
Univariate associations with IgG1 and IgG serology
| ELISA antigen | Category | Categories | IgG Pre-treatment | IgG Post-treatment | IgG1 Pre-treatment | IgG1 Post-treatment | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean absorbance value | Mean absorbance value | Mean absorbance value | Mean absorbance value | ||||||||
| Lysate | Ethnic group | Creole | 30 | 1.120 | 0.355 | 0.650 | 0.364 | 0.599 | 0.045* | 0.244 | 0.529 |
| Qom | 28 | 0.950 | 0.541 | 0.980 | 0.307 | ||||||
| Completed treatment | Yes | 58 | 1.038 | 0.540 | 0.597 | 0.209 | 0.783 | 0.079 | 0.274 | 0.013* | |
| No | 13 | 1.159 | 0.778 | 1.180 | 0.589 | ||||||
| Pre-treatment kDNA-PCR result | Positive | 24 | 1.270 | 0.092 | 0.676 | 0.019* | 0.910 | 0.156 | 0.121 | 0.281 | |
| Negative | 10 | 0.854 | 0.315 | 0.557 | 0.267 | ||||||
| TSSApep-II/V/VI | Ethnic group | Creole | 26 | 0.700 | 0.030* | 0.111 | 0.584 | 0.593 | 0.256 | 0.033 | 0.682 |
| Qom | 27 | 0.321 | 0.091 | 0.327 | 0.046 | ||||||
| Completed treatment | Yes | 53 | 0.507 | 0.049* | 0.101 | < 0.0001*** | 0.478 | 0.660 | 0.038 | 0.261 | |
| No | 13 | 0.964 | 0.478 | 0.336 | 0.081 | ||||||
| Pre-treatment kDNA-PCR result | Positive | 21 | 0.738 | 0.640 | 0.105 | 0.996 | 0.591 | 0.194 | 0.0233 | 0.429 | |
| Negative | 9 | 0.592 | 0.105 | 0.172 | 0.012 | ||||||
Unpaired t-test P values are shown
*P ≤ 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
Fig. 3Suggested algorithm for chemotherapy follow-up after an average of 5 years post-treatment. Proposed pathway for incorporating IgG and IgG1 serology to infer chemotherapy outcome