BackgroundStrongyloidiasis is commonly a clinically unapparent, chronic infection, but immuno suppressed subjects can develop fatal disease. We carried out a review of literature on hyperinfection syndrome (HS) and disseminated strongyloidiasis (DS), in order to describe the most challenging aspects of severe strongyloidiasis.MethodsWe conducted a structured search using PubMed to collect case reports and short case series on HS/DS published from 1991 to 2011. We restricted search to papers in English, Spanish, Italian and French. Case reports were classified as HS/DS according to given definitions.ResultsRecords screened were 821, and 311 were excluded through titles and abstract evaluation. Of 510 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 213 were included in qualitative analysis. As some of them were short case series, eventually the number of cases analyzed was 244.Steroids represented the main trigger predisposing to HS and DS (67% cases): they were mostly administered to treat underlying conditions (e.g. lymphomas, rheumatic diseases). However, sometimes steroids were empirically prescribed to treat signs and symptoms caused by unsuspected/unrecognized strongyloidiasis. Diagnosis was obtained by microscopy examination in 100% cases, while serology was done in a few cases (6.5%). Only in 3/29 cases of solid organ/bone marrow transplantation there is mention of pre-transplant serological screening. Therapeutic regimens were different in terms of drugs selection and combination, administration route and duration. Similar fatality rate was observed between patients with DS (68.5%) and HS (60%).ConclusionsProper screening (which must include serology) is mandatory in high - risk patients, for instance candidates to immunosuppressive medications, currently or previously living in endemic countries. In some cases, presumptive treatment might be justified. Ivermectin is the gold standard for treatment, although the optimal dosage is not clearly defined in case of HS/DS.

BackgroundThe diagnosis of Strongyloides stercoralis (S. stercoralis) infection is hampered by the suboptimal sensitivity of fecal-based tests. Serological methods are believed to be more sensitive, although assessing their accuracy is difficult because of the lack of sensitivity of a fecal-based reference (“gold”) standard.MethodsThe sensitivity and specificity of 5 serologic tests for S. stercoralis (in-house IFAT, NIE-ELISA and NIE-LIPS and the commercially available Bordier-ELISA and IVD-ELISA) were assessed on 399 cryopreserved serum samples. Accuracy was measured using fecal results as the primary reference standard, but also using a composite reference standard (based on a combination of tests).ResultsAccording to the latter standard, the most sensitive test was IFAT, with 94.6% sensitivity (91.2–96.9), followed by IVD-ELISA (92.3%, 87.7–96.9). The most specific test was NIE-LIPS, with specificity 99.6% (98.9–100), followed by IVD-ELISA (97.4%, 95.5–99.3). NIE-LIPS did not cross-react with any of the specimens from subjects with other parasitic infections. NIE-LIPS and the two commercial ELISAs approach 100% specificity at a cut off level that maintains ≥70% sensitivity.ConclusionsNIE-LIPS is the most accurate serologic test for the diagnosis of S. stercoralis infection. IFAT and each of the ELISA tests are sufficiently accurate, above a given cut off, for diagnosis, prevalence studies and inclusion in clinical trials.

BackgroundTraditional faecal-based methods have poor sensitivity for the detection of S. stercoralis, therefore are inadequate for post-treatment evaluation of infected patients who should be carefully monitored to exclude the persistence of the infection. In a previous study, we demonstrated high accuracy of five serology tests for the screening and diagnosis of strongyloidiasis. Aim of this study is to evaluate the performance of the same five tests for the follow up of patients infected with S. stercoralis.MethodsRetrospective study on anonymized, cryo-preserved samples available at the Centre for Tropical Diseases (Negrar, Verona, Italy). Samples were collected before and from 3 to 12 months after treatment. The samples were tested with two commercially-available ELISA tests (IVD, Bordier), two techniques based on a recombinant antigen (NIE-ELISA and NIE-LIPS) and one in-house IFAT. The results of each test were evaluated both in relation to the results of fecal examination and to those of a composite reference standard (classifying as positive a sample with positive stools and/or at least three positive serology tests). The associations between the independent variables age and time and the dependent variable value of serological test (for all five tests), were analyzed by linear mixed-effects regression model.ResultsA high proportion of samples demonstrated for each test a seroreversion or a relevant decline (optical density/relative light units halved or decrease of at least two titers for IFAT) at follow up, results confirmed by the linear mixed effects model that showed a trend to seroreversion over time for all tests. In particular, IVD-ELISA (almost 90% samples demonstrated relevant decline) and IFAT (almost 87%) had the best performance. Considering only samples with a complete negativization, NIE-ELISA showed the best performance (72.5% seroreversion).ConclusionsSerology is useful for the follow up of patients infected with S. stercoralis and determining test of cure.

No abstract

BackgroundStrongyloides stercoralis infection is a neglected tropical disease which can lead to severe symptoms and even death in immunosuppressed people. Unfortunately, its diagnosis is hampered by the lack of a gold standard, as the sensitivity of traditional parasitological tests (including microscopic examination of stool samples and coproculture) is low. Hence, alternative diagnostic methods, such as molecular biology techniques (mostly polymerase chain reaction, PCR) have been implemented. However, there are discrepancies in the reported accuracy of PCR.MethodologyA systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted in order to evaluate the accuracy of PCR for the diagnosis of S. stercoralis infection. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (record: CRD42016054298). Fourteen studies, 12 of which evaluating real-time PCR, were included in the analysis. The specificity of the techniques resulted high (ranging from 93 to 95%, according to the reference test(s) used). When all molecular techniques were compared to parasitological methods, the sensitivity of PCR was assessed at 71.8% (95% CI 52.2–85.5), that decreased to 61.8% (95% CI 42.0–78.4) when serology was added among the reference tests. Similarly, sensitivity of real-time PCR resulted 64.4% (95% CI 46.2–77.7) when compared to parasitological methods only, 56.5% (95% CI 39.2–72.4) including serology.ConclusionsPCR might not be suitable for screening purpose, whereas it might have a role as a confirmatory test.

BackgroundSchistosomiasis is a neglected infection affecting millions of people, mostly living in sub-Saharan Africa. Morbidity and mortality due to chronic infection are relevant, although schistosomiasis is often clinically silent. Different diagnostic tests have been implemented in order to improve screening and diagnosis, that traditionally rely on parasitological tests with low sensitivity. Aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of different tests for the screening of schistosomiasis in African migrants, in a non endemic setting.Methodology/Principal findingsA retrospective study was conducted on 373 patients screened at the Centre for Tropical Diseases (CTD) in Negrar, Verona, Italy. Biological samples were tested with: stool/urine microscopy, Circulating Cathodic Antigen (CCA) dipstick test, ELISA, Western blot, immune-chromatographic test (ICT). Test accuracy and predictive values of the immunological tests were assessed primarily on the basis of the results of microscopy (primary reference standard): ICT and WB resulted the test with highest sensitivity (94% and 92%, respectively), with a high NPV (98%). CCA showed the highest specificity (93%), but low sensitivity (48%). The analysis was conducted also using a composite reference standard, CRS (patients classified as infected in case of positive microscopy and/or at least 2 concordant positive immunological tests) and Latent Class Analysis (LCA). The latter two models demonstrated excellent agreement (Cohen’s kappa: 0.92) for the classification of the results. In fact, they both confirmed ICT as the test with the highest sensitivity (96%) and NPV (97%), moreover PPV was reasonably good (78% and 72% according to CRS and LCA, respectively). ELISA resulted the most specific immunological test (over 99%). The ICT appears to be a suitable screening test, even when used alone.ConclusionsThe rapid test ICT was the most sensitive test, with the potential of being used as a single screening test for African migrants.

Strongyloides stercoralis is rarely recognized as a major public health issue, probably because its burden is largely underestimated. We reviewed the literature (both PubMed and 'grey' literature) about the prevalence of strongyloidiasis in Latin America, an area of presumable high endemicity. There were finally 88 papers involved in the analysis, covering the period between 1981 and 2011. Studies were heterogeneous in several aspects, such as the populations screened and the diagnostic methods used. Most of the studies relied on direct coproparasitological examination, which has low sensitivity for the detection of S. stercoralis larvae. The following countries presented areas of high prevalence (>20%): Argentina, Ecuador, Venezuela, Peru and Brazil. Globally, for most of the included countries it was not possible to define reliable data because of paucity and/or inadequacy of studies. S. stercoralis requires specific diagnostic methods for its detection; therefore, surveys should be specifically designed in order to avoid underestimation of the infection.

Strongyloidiasis is extremely more frequent in immigrants than in travellers. Clinical presentations do not differ significantly between the two groups, and the most frequent picture is a chronic infection characterized by intermittent, mild, non-specific symptoms. Acute presentation is rare but it has been reported in travellers. Screening of asymptomatic subjects is not generally recommended, while a presumptive treatment with ivermectin might be justified for all travellers and immigrant patients presenting unexplained eosinophilia and/or compatible symptoms, even in case of negative test results. In fact, delayed diagnosis and treatment has life-threatening consequences in patients with conditions predisposing to development of hyperinfection and dissemination.