↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of optical microscopy and quantitative polymerase chain reaction for estimating parasitaemia in patients with kala-azar and modelling infectiousness to the vector Lutzomyia longipalpis

Overview of attention for article published in Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of optical microscopy and quantitative polymerase chain reaction for estimating parasitaemia in patients with kala-azar and modelling infectiousness to the vector Lutzomyia longipalpis
Published in
Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, July 2016
DOI 10.1590/0074-02760160185
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jailthon C Silva, Danielle A Zacarias, Vladimir C Silva, Nuno Rolão, Dorcas L Costa, Carlos HN Costa

Abstract

Currently, the only method for identifying infective hosts with Leishmania infantum to the vector Lutzomyia longipalpis is xenodiagnosis. More recently, quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) has been used to model human reservoir competence by assuming that detection of parasite DNA indicates the presence of viable parasites for infecting vectors. Since this assumption has not been proven, this study aimed to verify this hypothesis. The concentration of amastigotes in the peripheral blood of 30 patients with kala-azar was microscopically verified by leukoconcentration and was compared to qPCR estimates. Parasites were identified in 4.8 mL of peripheral blood from 67% of the patients, at a very low concentration (average 0.3 parasites/mL). However, qPCR showed 93% sensitivity and the estimated parasitaemia was over a thousand times greater, both in blood and plasma, with higher levels in plasma than in blood. Furthermore, the microscopic count of circulating parasites and the qPCR parasitaemia estimates were not mathematically compatible with the published proportions of infected sandflies in xenodiagnostic studies. These findings suggest that qPCR does not measure the concentration of circulating parasites, but rather measures DNA from other sites, and that blood might not be the main source of infection for vectors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Master 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 11 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 16%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 11 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 July 2016.
All research outputs
#22,760,732
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
#1,299
of 1,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#335,123
of 377,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
#18
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,502 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 377,580 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.