Single-Dose Universal Hepatitis A Immunization in Argentina: Low Viral Circulation and High Persistence of Protective Antibodies Up to 4 Years

Fil: Vizzotti, Carla. Ministerio de Salud de la Nación, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires; Argentina.Fil: González, Joaquín V. ANLIS Dr.C.G.Malbrán. Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Infecciosas; Argentina.Fil: Rearte, Analía. Ministerio de Salud de la Nación, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires; Argentina.Fil: Urueña, Analía. Ministerio de Salud de la Nación, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires; Argentina.Fil: Pérez Carrega, María Eugenia. Ministerio de Salud de la Nación, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires; Argentina.Fil: Calli, R. Ministerio de Salud de la Provincia de Tucumán, Programa Ampliado de Inmunizaciones; Argentina.Fil: Gentile, Angela. Hospital de Niños Ricardo Gutiérrez, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires; Argentina.Fil: Uboldi, Andrea. Ministerio de Salud de la Provincia de Santa Fe, Programa Ampliado de Inmunizaciones; Argentina.Fil: Ramonet, Margarita. Hospital Nacional Profesor Dr. Alejandro Posadas, Provincia de Buenos Aires; Argentina.Fil: Cañero-Velasco, M. Hospital de Niños de San Justo, Provincia de Buenos Aires; ArgentinaFil: Diosque, Máximo. Ministerio de Salud de la Nación, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires; Argentina.Single-dose hepatitis A virus (HAV) vaccination was implemented in all Argentinean children aged 12 months in 2005. Between 2005 and 2011, a dramatic decline was observed in HAV infection rates, fulminant hepatitis, and liver transplantation. This study assessed current viral circulation and estimated protective antibody persistence 4 years after vaccination

Epidemiology of American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis and Trypanosoma cruzi Infection in the Northwestern Argentina

Background. Endemic areas of tegumentary leishmaniasis (TL) in Salta, Argentina, present some overlap zones with the geographical distribution of Chagas disease, with mixed infection cases being often detected. Objectives. The purpose of this study was to determine the magnitude of Leishmania sp. infection and potential associated risk factors, the serologic prevalence of T. cruzi, and the presence of T. cruzi-Leishmania sp. mixed infection in a region of the northwest of Argentina. Methods. Crosssectional studies were conducted to detect TL prevalence and T. cruzi seroprevalence. A case-control study was conducted to examine leishmaniasis risk factors. Results. Prevalence of TL was 0.17%, seroprevalence of T. cruzi infection was 9.73%, and mixed infection proportion-within the leishmaniasic patients group-was 16.67%. The risk factors associated with TL transmission were sex, age, exposure to bites at work, staying outdoors more than 10 hours/day, bathing in the river, and living with people who had lesions or were infected during the study. Discussion. The endemic pattern of TL seems to involve exposure of patients to vectors in wild as well as peridomestic environment. Cases of T. cruzi infection are apparently due to migration. Therefore, a careful epidemiological surveillance is necessary due to the contraindication of antimonial administration to chagasic patients

International study to evaluate PCR methods for detection of Trypanosoma cruzi DNA in blood samples from Chagas disease patients

A century after its discovery, Chagas disease, caused by the parasite Trypanosoma cruzi, still represents a major neglected tropical threat. Accurate diagnostics tools as well as surrogate markers of parasitological response to treatment are research priorities in the field. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has been proposed as a sensitive laboratory tool for detection of T. cruzi infection and monitoring of parasitological treatment outcome. However, high variation in accuracy and lack of international quality controls has precluded reliable applications in the clinical practice and comparisons of data among cohorts and geographical regions. In an effort towards harmonization of PCR strategies, 26 expert laboratories from 16 countries evaluated their current PCR procedures against sets of control samples, composed by serial dilutions of T.cruzi DNA from culture stocks belonging to different lineages, human blood spiked with parasite cells and blood samples from Chagas disease patients. A high variability in sensitivities and specificities was found among the 48 reported PCR tests. Out of them, four tests with best performance were selected and further evaluated. This study represents a crucial first step towards device of a standardized operative procedure for T. cruzi PCR.Fil: Schijman, Alejandro G. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular (INGEBI-CONICET). Laboratorio de Biología Molecular de la Enfermedad de Chagas (LabMECh); Argentina.Fil: Bisio, Margarita. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular (INGEBI-CONICET). Laboratorio de Biología Molecular de la Enfermedad de Chagas (LabMECh); Argentina.Fil: Orellana, Liliana. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Instituto de Cálculo; Argentina.Fil: Sued, Mariela. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Instituto de Cálculo; Argentina.Fil: Duffy, Tomás. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular (INGEBI-CONICET). Laboratorio de Biología Molecular de la Enfermedad de Chagas (LabMECh); Argentina.Fil: Mejia Jaramillo, Ana M. Universidad de Antioquia. Grupo Chagas; Colombia.Fil: Cura, Carolina. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular (INGEBI-CONICET). Laboratorio de Biología Molecular de la Enfermedad de Chagas (LabMECh); Argentina.Fil: Auter, Frederic. French Blood Services; Francia.Fil: Veron, Vincent. Universidad de Parasitología. Laboratorio Hospitalario; Guayana Francesa.Fil: Qvarnstrom, Yvonne. Centers for Disease Control. Department of Parasitic Diseases; Estados Unidos.Fil: Deborggraeve, Stijn. Institute of Tropical Medicine; Bélgica.Fil: Hijar, Gisely. Instituto Nacional de Salud; Perú.Fil: Zulantay, Inés. Facultad de Medicina; Chile.Fil: Lucero, Raúl Horacio. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste; Argentina.Fil: Velázquez, Elsa. ANLIS Dr.C.G.Malbrán. Instituto Nacional de Parasitología Dr. Mario Fatala Chaben; Argentina.Fil: Tellez, Tatiana. Universidad Mayor de San Simon. Centro Universitario de Medicina Tropical; Bolivia.Fil: Sanchez Leon, Zunilda. Universidad Nacional de Asunción. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud; Paraguay.Fil: Galvão, Lucia. Faculdade de Farmácia; Brasil.Fil: Nolder, Debbie. Hospital for Tropical Diseases. London School of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene Department of Clinical Parasitology; Reino Unido.Fil: Monje Rumi, María. Universidad Nacional de Salta. Laboratorio de Patología Experimental; Argentina.Fil: Levi, José E. Hospital Sirio Libanês. Blood Bank; Brasil.Fil: Ramirez, Juan D. Universidad de los Andes. Centro de Investigaciones en Microbiología y Parasitología Tropical; Colombia.Fil: Zorrilla, Pilar. Instituto Pasteur; Uruguay.Fil: Flores, María. Instituto de Salud Carlos III. Centro de Mahahonda; España.Fil: Jercic, Maria I. Instituto Nacional De Salud. Sección Parasitología; Chile.Fil: Crisante, Gladys. Universidad de los Andes. Centro de Investigaciones Parasitológicas J.F. Torrealba; Venezuela.Fil: Añez, Néstor. Universidad de los Andes. Centro de Investigaciones Parasitológicas J.F. Torrealba; Venezuela.Fil: De Castro, Ana M. Universidade Federal de Goiás. Instituto de Patologia Tropical e Saúde Pública (IPTSP); Brasil.Fil: Gonzalez, Clara I. Universidad Industrial de Santander. Grupo de Inmunología y Epidemiología Molecular (GIEM); Colombia.Fil: Acosta Viana, Karla. Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán. Departamento de Biomedicina de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Parasitarias Laboratorio de Biología Celular; México.Fil: Yachelini, Pedro. Universidad Católica de Santiago del Estero. Instituto de Biomedicina; Argentina.Fil: Torrico, Faustino. Universidad Mayor de San Simon. Centro Universitario de Medicina Tropical; Bolivia.Fil: Robello, Carlos. Instituto Pasteur; Uruguay.Fil: Diosque, Patricio. Universidad Nacional de Salta. Laboratorio de Patología Experimental; Argentina.Fil: Triana Chavez, Omar. Universidad de Antioquia. Grupo Chagas; Colombia.Fil: Aznar, Christine. Universidad de Parasitología. Laboratorio Hospitalario; Guayana Francesa.Fil: Russomando, Graciela. Universidad Nacional de Asunción. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud; Paraguay.Fil: Büscher, Philippe. Institute of Tropical Medicine; Bélgica.Fil: Assal, Azzedine. French Blood Services; Francia.Fil: Guhl, Felipe. Universidad de los Andes. Centro de Investigaciones en Microbiología y Parasitología Tropical; Colombia.Fil: Sosa Estani, Sergio. ANLIS Dr.C.G.Malbrán. Centro Nacional de Diagnóstico e Investigación en Endemo-Epidemias; Argentina.Fil: DaSilva, Alexandre. Centers for Disease Control. Department of Parasitic Diseases; Estados Unidos.Fil: Britto, Constança. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz/FIOCRUZ. Laboratório de Biologia Molecular e Doenças Endêmicas; Brasil.Fil: Luquetti, Alejandro. Laboratório de Pesquisa de Doença de Chagas; Brasil.Fil: Ladzins, Janis. World Health Organization (WHO). Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR); Suiza

International Study to Evaluate PCR Methods for Detection of Trypanosoma cruzi DNA in Blood Samples from Chagas Disease Patients

A century after its discovery, Chagas disease, caused by the parasite Trypanosoma cruzi, still represents a major neglected tropical threat. Accurate diagnostics tools as well as surrogate markers of parasitological response to treatment are research priorities in the field. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has been proposed as a sensitive laboratory tool for detection of T. cruzi infection and monitoring of parasitological treatment outcome. However, high variation in accuracy and lack of international quality controls has precluded reliable applications in the clinical practice and comparisons of data among cohorts and geographical regions. In an effort towards harmonization of PCR strategies, 26 expert laboratories from 16 countries evaluated their current PCR procedures against sets of control samples, composed by serial dilutions of T.cruzi DNA from culture stocks belonging to different lineages, human blood spiked with parasite cells and blood samples from Chagas disease patients. A high variability in sensitivities and specificities was found among the 48 reported PCR tests. Out of them, four tests with best performance were selected and further evaluated. This study represents a crucial first step towards device of a standardized operative procedure for T. cruzi PCR

Cost-Effectiveness of Chagas Disease Vector Control Strategies in Northwestern Argentina

Despite decreasing rates of prevalence and incidence, Chagas disease remains a serious problem in Latin America, especially for the rural poor. Without vaccines, control and prevention rely mostly on residual spraying of insecticides. Under the aegis of the Southern Cone Initiative, and in agreement with global trends in decentralization of the health systems, in 1992 the Argentinean vector control launched a new vector control program based on community participation. The present study represents the first thorough evaluation of the overall performance of such vector control program and the first comparative assessment of the cost-effectiveness of different vector control strategies in a highly endemic rural area of northwestern Argentina. Supported by results of independent studies, the present work shows that in rural, poor and dispersed areas of the Gran Chaco region, the implementation of a mixed (i.e., vertical attack phase followed by horizontal surveillance) strategy constantly supervised and supported by national or local vector control programs would be the most cost-effective option to interrupt vector-borne transmission of Chagas disease

Tegumentary leishmaniasis and coinfections other than HIV

<div><p>Background</p><p>Tegumentary leishmaniasis (TL) is a disease of skin and/or mucosal tissues caused by <i>Leishmania</i> parasites. TL patients may concurrently carry other pathogens, which may influence the clinical outcome of TL.</p><p>Methodology and principal findings</p><p>This review focuses on the frequency of TL coinfections in human populations, interactions between <i>Leishmania</i> and other pathogens in animal models and human subjects, and implications of TL coinfections for clinical practice. For the purpose of this review, TL is defined as all forms of cutaneous (localised, disseminated, or diffuse) and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection, superinfection with skin bacteria, and skin manifestations of visceral leishmaniasis are not included. We searched MEDLINE and other databases and included 73 records: 21 experimental studies in animals and 52 studies about human subjects (mainly cross-sectional and case studies). Several reports describe the frequency of <i>Trypanosoma cruzi</i> coinfection in TL patients in Argentina (about 41%) and the frequency of helminthiasis in TL patients in Brazil (15% to 88%). Different hypotheses have been explored about mechanisms of interaction between different microorganisms, but no clear answers emerge. Such interactions may involve innate immunity coupled with regulatory networks that affect quality and quantity of acquired immune responses. Diagnostic problems may occur when concurrent infections cause similar lesions (e.g., TL and leprosy), when different pathogens are present in the same lesions (e.g., <i>Leishmania</i> and <i>Sporothrix schenckii</i>), or when similarities between phylogenetically close pathogens affect accuracy of diagnostic tests (e.g., serology for leishmaniasis and Chagas disease). Some coinfections (e.g., helminthiasis) appear to reduce the effectiveness of antileishmanial treatment, and drug combinations may cause cumulative adverse effects.</p><p>Conclusions and significance</p><p>In patients with TL, coinfection is frequent, it can lead to diagnostic errors and delays, and it can influence the effectiveness and safety of treatment. More research is needed to unravel how coinfections interfere with the pathogenesis of TL.</p></div