↓ Skip to main content

Development and comparative evaluation of two antigen detection tests for Visceral Leishmaniasis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Development and comparative evaluation of two antigen detection tests for Visceral Leishmaniasis
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12879-015-1125-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aarthy C. Vallur, Yeung L. Tutterrow, Raodoh Mohamath, Sowmya Pattabhi, Asrat Hailu, Asim O. Abdoun, Abdalla E. Ahmed, Maowia Mukhtar, Md Abdus Salam, Meirielly Lima Almeida, Roque P. Almeida, Dinesh Mondal, Audrey Albertini, Hashim Ghalib, Malcolm S. Duthie, Steven G. Reed

Abstract

Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) can be fatal without timely diagnosis and treatment. Treatment efficacies vary due to drug resistance, drug toxicity and co-morbidities. It is important to monitor treatment responsiveness to confirm cure and curtail relapse. Currently, microscopy of spleen, bone marrow or lymph node biopsies is the only definitive method to evaluate cure. A less invasive test for treatment success is a high priority for VL management. In this study, we describe the development of a capture ELISA based on detecting Leishmania donovani antigens in urine samples and comparison with the Leishmania Antigen ELISA, also developed for the same purpose. Both were developed as prototype kits and tested on patient urine samples from Sudan, Ethiopia, Bangladesh and Brazil, along with appropriate control samples from endemic and non-endemic regions. Sensitivity and specificity were assessed based on accurate detection of patients compared to control samples. One- Way ANOVA was used to assess the discrimination capacity of the tests and Cohen's kappa was used to assess their correlation. The Leishmania Antigen Detect™ ELISA demonstrated >90 % sensitivity on VL patient samples from Sudan, Bangladesh and Ethiopia and 88 % on samples from Brazil. The Leishmania Antigen ELISA was comparable in performance except for lower sensitivity on Sudanese samples. Both were highly specific. To confirm utility in monitoring treatment, urine samples were collected from VL patients at days 0, 30 and 180 post- treatment. For the Leishmania Antigen Detect™ ELISA, positivity was high at day 0 at 95 %, falling to 21 % at day 30. At day 180, all samples were negative, corresponding well with clinical cure. A similar trend was also seen for the Leishmania Antigen ELISA albeit; with lower positivity of 91 % at Day 0 and more patients, remaining positive at Days 30 and 180. The Leishmania Antigen Detect™ and the Leishmania Antigen ELISAs are standardized, user- friendly, quantitative and direct tests to detect Leishmania during acute VL as well as to monitor parasite clearance during treatment. They are a clear improvement over existing options. The ELISAs provide a non-invasive method to detect parasite antigens during acute infection and monitor its clearance upon cure, filling an unmet need in VL management. Further refinement of the tests with more samples from endemic regions will define their utility in monitoring treatment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 56 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 21%
Student > Master 11 19%
Unspecified 8 14%
Researcher 8 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 9%
Other 14 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 21%
Unspecified 12 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 9%
Other 10 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 September 2015.
All research outputs
#2,816,142
of 6,395,452 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,456
of 2,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,211
of 200,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#98
of 170 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,395,452 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 53rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,974 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 200,730 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 170 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.