Profile of loiasis infection through clinical and laboratory diagnostics: the importance of biomarkers

• Published in: Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene Vol. 117; no. 5; pp. 349 - 357
• Main Authors: Dieki, Roland, Eyang Assengone, E R, Nsi Emvo, E, Akue, J P
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Oxford University Press 02.05.2023
• Subjects: Animals; Biomarkers; Blotting, Western; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay; Immunoglobulin G; Loa - genetics; Loiasis - diagnosis; Microfilariae; Original; adult antigen; diagnosis; qPCR; IgG4 response; loiasis profile; DNA; L. loa adult antigen; L. loa DNA
• ISSN: 0035-9203; 1878-3503
• DOI: 10.1093/trstmh/trac116

ABSTRACT Background Detection of Loa loa microfilariae in peripheral blood is insensitive given only 30% of individuals are microfilaraemic while 70% are amicrofilaraemic with a variety of clinical signs. Biomarkers may improve the diagnosis of loiasis. Methods A total of 545 individuals exposed to L. loa were analysed using clinical data collected through a questionnaire (requesting information on eye worm, Calabar swelling, pruritis) and detection of microfilariae, immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4), DNA and antigens using microscopy, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and Western blot, respectively. Results The results revealed that the rates of detection of L. loa microfilariae in the blood, of DNA by qPCR, of IgG4 by ELISA and of antigen by Western blot were 4.7%, 5.5%, 15.60% and 10.09%, respectively. Conclusions This study showed that clinical signs based on a questionnaire are highly subjective. Therefore it is imperative to use IgG4 and DNA biomarkers as well as antigens detected by Western blot to identify individuals infected with L. loa.