Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T01:17:53.814Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dipstick dot ELISA for the detection of Taenia coproantigens in humans

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

J. C. Allan ,
F. Mencos ,
J. Garcia-Noval ,
E. Sarti ,
A. Flisser ,
Y. Wang ,
D. Liu  and
P. S. Craig
J. C. Allan
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT, UK
F. Mencos
Affiliation:
Centro de Investigaciones de Ciencias de la Salud, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala, Ciudad de Guatemala, Guatemala C.A.
J. Garcia-Noval
Affiliation:
Centro de Investigaciones de Ciencias de la Salud, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala, Ciudad de Guatemala, Guatemala C.A.
E. Sarti
Affiliation:
Direccion General de Epidemiologia, Secretaria de Salud, Francisco de P. Miranda 177, Col. Lomas de Plateros. C.P. 01480, Mexico D.F., Mexico
A. Flisser
Affiliation:
Instituto de Investigaciones Biomedicas, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, 04510 Mexico D.F., Mexico
Y. Wang
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health, Min County, Gansu, Peoples Republic of China
D. Liu
Affiliation:
Department of Parasitology, Lanzhou Medical College, Lanzhou, Gansu, Peoples Republic of China
P. S. Craig
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A dipstick dot ELISA for detection of Taenia-specific coproantigens was developed. The test was based on a sandwich ELISA using antibodies raised against adult Taenia solium. Antibodies were adsorbed to nitrocellulose paper previously adhered to acetate plastic to form dipsticks. Once blocked with 5% skimmed milk and dried the antibody-coated dipsticks were stable for several weeks at room temperature. Both micro and dot ELISA formats were genus specific although the dot ELISA was less sensitive than the micro ELISA based on the same antiserum. During field studies, in which the majority of samples were tested in rural villages soon after collection, 3728 samples were tested. All samples were also examined by microscopy using formol ether concentration and individuals questioned to determine whether they were aware of being infected. After the initial diagnostic work individuals were treated with taeniacidal drugs for worm recovery. Use of the coproantigen test significantly increased the number of cases diagnosed. Of the 41 cases diagnosed by the three diagnostic techniques combined 31 were detected by the dipstick assay making it the most sensitive technique employed. The specificity of the dipstick assay was 99·9% with a positive predictive value of 88·%. The combined diagnostic approach did not, however, diagnose all cases. The coproantigen test was fast and easy to use. Further improvements may make the dipstick test suitable for wide-scale use in field studies and diagnostic laboratories.

Keywords

immunodiagnosiscoproantigenTaeniadot ELISA
Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 107 , Issue 1 , July 1993 , pp. 79 - 85
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allan, J. C. & Craig, P. S. (1989). Coproantigens in gut tapeworm infections; Hymenolepis diminuta in rats. Parasitology Research 76, 68–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allan, J. C., Avila, G., Garcia Novai, J., Flisser, A. & Craig, P. S. (1990). Immunodiagnosis of taeniasis by coproantigen detection. Parasitology 101, 473–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allan, J. C., Garcia Dominguez, C., Craig, P. S., Rogan, M. T., Lowe, B. S. & Flisser, A. (1991). Sexual development of Taenia solium in hamsters. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 85, 573–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allan, J. C., Craig, P. S., Garcia Noval, J., Mencos, F., Liu, D., Wang, Y., Wen, H., Zhou, P., Stringer, R., Rogan, M. & Zeyhle, E. (1992). Coproantigen detection for the immunodiagnosis of echinococcosis and taeniasis in dogs and humans. Parasitology 104, 347–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bursey, C. C., McKenzie, J. A. & Burt, M. D. B. (1980). Polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis in differentiation of Taenia (Cestoda) by total protein. International Journal for Parasitology 10, 167–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cruz, M., Davis, A., Dixon, H., Pawlowski, Z. S. & Proano, j. (1989). Operational studies on the control of Taenia solium taeniasis/cysticercosis in Ecuador. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 67, 401–7.Google ScholarPubMed
Deplazes, P., Gottstein, B., Stingelin, Y. & Eckert, J. (1990). Detection of Taenia hydatigena coproantigens by ELISA in dogs. Veterinary Parasitology 36, 91–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deplazes, P., Eckert, J., Pawlowski, Z. S., Machowska, L. & Gottstein, B. (1991). An enzyme linked immunosorbent assay for diagnostic detection of Taenia saginata copro-antigens in humans. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 85, 391–;6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diaz-Camacho, S., Candil Ruiz, A., Beltran, M. U. & Willms, K. (1990). Serology as an indicator of Taenia solium tapeworm infections in a rural community in Mexico. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 84, 563–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diaz-Camacho, S., Candil Ruiz, A., Suate Peraza, V., Zazueta Ramos, M. L., Felix Medina, M., Lozano, R. & Willms, K. (1991). Epidemiologic study and control of Taenia solium infections with praziquantel in a rural village of Mexico. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 45, 522–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flentje, V. B. & Padelt, H. (1981). Wert einer serologischen Diagnostik der Taenia saginata Infestation des Menschen. Angewandte Parasitologie 22, 65–8.Google Scholar
Flisser, A., Reid, A., Garcia Zepeda, E. & McManus, D. P. (1988). Specific detection of Taenia saginata eggs by DNA hybridization. Lancet ii, 1429–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gemmell, M., Matyas, Z., Pawlowski, Z. & Soulsby, E. J. L. (1983). Guidelines for Surveillance Prevention and Control of Taeniasis/Cysticercosis. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
Gottstein, B., Deplazes, P., Tanner, I. & Skaggs, J. S. (1991). Diagnostic identification of Taenia saginata with the polymerase chain reaction. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 85, 248–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, A., Latham, M. C., Crompton, D. W. T. & Stephenson, L. S. (1981). Taenia saginata (Cestoda) in Western Kenya: the reliability of faecal examinations in diagnosis. Parasitology 83, 91–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrison, L. J. S., Delgado, J. & Parkhouse, R. M. E. (1990). Differential diagnosis of Taenia saginata and Taenia solium with DNA probes. Parasitology 100, 459–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le Riche, P. D. & Sewell, M. M. H. (1978). Differentiation of taeniid cestodes by enzyme electophoresis. International Journal for Parasitology 8, 479–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machnicka-Roguska, B. & Zwierz, C. (1970). Intradermal test with antigenic fractions in Taenia saginata infection. Acta Parasitologia Polonica 18, 293–9.Google Scholar
Maass, M., Delgado, F. & Knobloch, J. (1991). Detection of Taenia solium antigens in merthiolate-formalin preserved stool samples. Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 42, 112–14.Google ScholarPubMed
Monisov, A. A. (1966). On the problem of perfecting the method of questioning the population on Taeniarynchus infection. Medinskaya Parazitologia Parazitarnye Bolezni 35, 492–4.Google Scholar
Pappas, M. G. (1988). Recent applications of the Dot-ELISA in immunoparasitology. Veterinary Parasitology 29, 105–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramsdell, S. G. (1927). A note on the skin reaction in Taenia infestation. Journal of Parasitology 14, 102–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, L. S. (1948). An ether sedimentation technique for routine stool examinations. Bulletin of the United States Army Medical Department 8, 326.Google ScholarPubMed
Sarti, E. J., Schantz, P. M., Lara-Aguilera, R., Gomez Dandoy, H. & Flisser, A. (1988). Taenia solium taeniasis and cysticercosis in a Mexican village. Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 39, 194–8.Google Scholar
Schantz, P. M. & Sarti, E. (1989). Diagnostic methods and epidemilogical surveillance of Taenia solium infection. Acta Leidensia 57, 153–63.Google Scholar
Vinayak, V. K., Dutt, P. & Puri, M. (1991). An immunoenzymatic dot ELISA for the detection of Giardia lamblia antigen in stool eluates of clinical cases of giardiasis. Journal of Immunological Methods 137, 245–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Viscidi, R., Laughon, B. E., Hanvanich, M., Bartlett, J. G. & Yolken, R. H. (1984). Improved enzyme immunoassays for the detection of antigens in fecal specimens. Investigation and correction of interfering factors. Journal of Immunological Methods 67, 129–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, M. B. & Nakane, P. K. (1978). Recent development in the periodate method of conjugating horseradish peroxidase (HRPO) to antibodies. In Immunofluorescence and Related Staining Techniques (ed. Knapp, W., Holubar, K. & Wicks, G.) pp. 215Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar