4.6 Article

Cloning, Expression and Evaluation of Thioredoxin Peroxidase-1 Antigen for the Serological Diagnosis of Schistosoma mekongi Human Infection

期刊

DIAGNOSTICS
卷 12, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12123077

关键词

Schistosoma mekongi; Schistosoma japonicum; recombinant antigen; ELISA

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  2. [19KK0173]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study developed a serological assay with high sensitivity and specificity to replace the traditional Kato-Katz stool microscopy for the detection of active human S. mekongi infection.
Schistosoma mekongi, a blood fluke that causes Asian zoonotic schistosomiasis, is distributed in communities along the Mekong River in Cambodia and Lao People's Democratic Republic. Decades of employing numerous control measures including mass drug administration using praziquantel have resulted in a decline in the prevalence of schistosomiasis mekongi. This, however, led to a decrease in sensitivity of Kato-Katz stool microscopy considered as the gold standard in diagnosis. In order to develop a serological assay with high sensitivity and specificity which can replace Kato-Katz, recombinant S. mekongi thioredoxin peroxidase-1 protein (rSmekTPx-1) was expressed and produced. Diagnostic performance of the rSmekTPx-1 antigen through ELISA for detecting human schistosomiasis was compared with that of recombinant protein of S. japonicum TPx-1 (rSjTPx-1) using serum samples collected from endemic foci in Cambodia. The sensitivity and specificity of rSmekTPx-1 in ELISA were 89.3% and 93.3%, respectively, while those of rSjTPx-1 were 71.4% and 66.7%, respectively. In addition, a higher Kappa value of 0.82 calculated between rSmekTPx-1 antigen ELISA and Kato-Katz confirmed better agreement than between rSjTPx-1 antigen ELISA and Kato-Katz (Kappa value 0.38). These results suggest that ELISA with rSmekTPx-1 antigen can be a potential diagnostic method for detecting active human S. mekongi infection.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据