BackgroundStrongyloidiasis is frequently under diagnosed since many infections remain asymptomatic and conventional diagnostic tests based on parasitological examination are not sufficiently sensitive. Serology is useful but is still only available in reference laboratories. The need for improved diagnostic tests in terms of sensitivity and specificity is clear, particularly in immunocompromised patients or candidates to immunosuppressive treatments. This review aims to evaluate both conventional and novel techniques for the diagnosis of strongyloidiasis as well as available cure markers for this parasitic infection.Methodology/Principal FindingsThe search strategy was based on the data-base sources MEDLINE, Cochrane Library Register for systematic review, EmBase, Global Health and LILACS and was limited in the search string to articles published from 1960 to August 2012 and to English, Spanish, French, Portuguese and German languages. Case reports, case series and animal studies were excluded. 2003 potentially relevant citations were selected for retrieval, of which 1649 were selected for review of the abstract. 143 were eligible for final inclusion.ConclusionsSensitivity of microscopic-based techniques is not good enough, particularly in chronic infections. Furthermore, techniques such as Baermann or agar plate culture are cumbersome and time-consuming and several specimens should be collected on different days to improve the detection rate. Serology is a useful tool but it might overestimate the prevalence of disease due to cross-reactivity with other nematode infections and its difficulty distinguishing recent from past (and cured) infections. To evaluate treatment efficacy is still a major concern because direct parasitological methods might overestimate it and the serology has not yet been well evaluated; even if there is a decline in antibody titres after treatment, it is slow and it needs to be done at 6 to 12 months after treatment which can cause a substantial loss to follow-up in a clinical trial.

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.

No abstract

Strongyloidiasis is a common neglected tropical disease in tropical and sub-tropical climatic zones. At the worldwide level, there is high uncertainty about the strongyloidiasis burden. This uncertainty represents an important knowledge gap since it affects the planning of interventions to reduce the burden of strongyloidiasis in endemic countries. This study aimed to estimate the global strongyloidiasis prevalence. A literature review was performed to obtain prevalence data from endemic countries at a worldwide level from 1990 to 2016. For each study, the true population prevalence was calculated by accounting for the specificity and the sensitivity of testing and age of tested individuals. Prediction of strongyloidiasis prevalence for each country was performed using a spatiotemporal statistical modeling approach. The country prevalence obtained from the model was used to estimate the number of infected people per country. We estimate the global prevalence of strongyloidiasis in 2017 to be 8.1% (95% CI: 4.2–12.4%), corresponding to 613.9 (95% CI: 313.1–910.1) million people infected. The South-East Asia, African, and Western Pacific Regions accounted for 76.1% of the global infections. Our results could be used to identify those countries in which strongyloidiasis prevalence is highest and where mass drug administration (MDA) should be deployed for its prevention and control.

Strongyloides stercoralis differs from the other soil-transmitted helminths because it puts infected subjects at risk of a fatal syndrome (in cases of immunosuppression for medical conditions, immunosuppressant therapies, or both). Chronic strongyloidiasis is often a non-severe condition, or is sometimes even asymptomatic, but diagnosis and effective therapy are essential in order to eradicate the infection and the life-long risk involved. Therefore, diagnostic methods need to be highly sensitive. Stool microscopy and the Kato-Katz technique are commonly used in prevalence studies, but they are inadequate for S. stercoralis detection. This is probably the main reason why the global prevalence has long been underestimated. Concentration methods, the Baermann technique and Koga agar plate culture have better, but still unsatisfactory, sensitivity. Serological tests have demonstrated higher sensitivity; although some authors have concerns about their specificity, it is possible to define cut-off values over which infection is almost certain. In particular, the luciferase immunoprecipitation system technique combined with a recombinant antigen (NIE) demonstrated a specificity of almost 100%. ELISA coproantigen detection has also shown promising results, but still needs full evaluation. Molecular diagnostic methods are currently available in a few referral centres as in-house techniques. In this review, on the basis of the performance of the different diagnostic methods, we outline diagnostic strategies that could be proposed for different purposes, such as: prevalence studies in endemic areas; individual diagnosis and screening; and monitoring of cure in clinical care and clinical trials.

Although antibody levels progressively decrease following SARS-CoV-2 infection, the immune memory persists for months. Thus, individuals who naturally contracted SARS-CoV-2 are expected to develop a more rapid and sustained response to COVID-19 vaccines than naïve individuals. In this study, we analyzed the dynamics of the antibody response to the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in six healthcare workers who contracted SARS-CoV-2 in March 2020, in comparison to nine control subjects without a previous infection. The vaccine was well tolerated by both groups, with no significant difference in the frequency of vaccine-associated side effects, with the exception of local pain, which was more common in previously infected subjects. Overall, the titers of neutralizing antibodies were markedly higher in response to the vaccine than after natural infection. In all subjects with pre-existing immunity, a rapid increase in anti-spike receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG antibodies and neutralizing antibody titers was observed one week after the first dose, which seemed to act as a booster. Notably, in previously infected individuals, neutralizing antibody titers 7 days after the first vaccine dose were not significantly different from those observed in naïve subjects 7 days after the second vaccine dose. These results suggest that, in previously infected people, a single dose of the vaccine might be sufficient to induce an effective response.

Background Ivermectin is a key anthelmintic for the control of neglected tropical diseases. The main indications for population-level control with ivermectin through mass drug administration are onchocerciasis and lymphatic filariasis; however, there is interest in using higher, fixed-dose regimens for the control of scabies, soil-transmitted helminths and malaria. Safety data for these higher-dose regimens are needed. Methods A systematic literature review and meta-analysis on the safety and doses of ivermectin was conducted. Eligible studies reported patient-level data and, for the meta-analysis, clinical trials reporting data on doses ≥200 and ≥400 μg/kg were included. Incidence ratios were used to compare adverse events by severity and organ system affected. Results The systematic search identified six studies for inclusion, revealing no differences in the number of individuals experiencing adverse events. A descriptive analysis of these clinical trials for a variety of indications showed no difference in the severity of the adverse events between standard (up to 400 μg/kg) and higher doses of ivermectin. Organ system involvement only showed an increase in ocular events in the higher-dose group in one trial for the treatment of onchocerciasis, all of them transient and mild to moderate in intensity. Conclusions Although within this review the safety of high-dose ivermectin appears to be comparable to standard doses, there are not enough data to support a recommendation for its use in higher-than-approved doses. Ocular adverse events, despite being transient, are of concern in onchocerciasis patients. These data can inform programme managers and guide operational research activities as new approaches for the use of ivermectin are evaluated.