4.2 Review

Recent Developments in Recombinant Proteins for Diagnosis of Human Fascioliasis

期刊

ACTA PARASITOLOGICA
卷 66, 期 1, 页码 13-25

出版社

SPRINGER INT PUBL AG
DOI: 10.1007/s11686-020-00280-5

关键词

Human fascioliasis; Recombinant antigens; Expression systems; Purification methods; Serodiagnosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review focuses on the development of serodiagnosis tests for human fascioliasis using candidate recombinant antigens produced by different approaches. It also highlights main factors to improve the accuracy of diagnostic tests, such as the effect of refolding methods on recovering antigens' tertiary structure and using a mixture of recombinant antigens with the highest sensitivity and specificity.
Fascioliasis is an important neglected tropical disease that causes severe injury to the bile ducts and liver. Therefore, a rapid and accurate method for detection ofFasciola hepaticainfection plays a vital role in early treatment. Currently, the diagnosis of fascioliasis is mainly conducted via serological tests using the excretory/secretory (E/S) products, which might cross-react with antigens from other helminth parasitic diseases. Hence, the development of serodiagnosis test using recombinant antigens may contribute to differentiate fascioliasis from other helminth infections. In the past 20 years, many attempts have been made to exert differentF. hepaticarecombinant antigens to obtain a well-established standard assay with high accuracy. In this review, we address recent studies that refer to the development of serodiagnosis tests for diagnosis of human fascioliasis based on the candidate recombinant antigens produced by different approaches. Meanwhile, in the present review, some main factors have been highlighted to improve the accuracy of diagnostic tests such as the effect of refolding methods to recover antigens' tertiary structure as well as applying a mixture of recombinant antigens with the highest sensitivity and specificity to improve the accuracy of diagnostic tests.

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

4.2
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