Evaluation of two Taenia solium cysticercal antigenic preparations (vesicular fluid and a glycoprotein fraction with affinity for lentil lectin) for the immunodiagnosis of neurocysticercosis by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of two antigenic preparations (vesicular fluid - VF and a glycoprotein fraction, LLa-Gp fraction, purified from a whole parasite extract by lentil lectin affinity chromatography) from Taenia solium cysticerci for the immunodiagnosis of neurocysticercosis. METHOD: Fifty-six cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples (22 from patients with neurocysticercosis and 34 from patients with other neurological disorders) and 57 serum samples (22 from patients with neurocysticercosis, 18 from patients with other infections and 17 from presumably healthy persons) were assayed for anticysticercal IgG antibodies with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). RESULTS: The VF ELISA showed 100% sensitivity and specificity in CSF and serum samples, whereas the sensitivity and specificity of the LLa-Gp ELISA were, respectively, 90.9% and 97.1%, with the CSF samples and 95.5% and 100% with serum samples. There was no significant difference in the sensitivity and specificity of the two antigenic preparations used to screen CSF and serum samples. CONCLUSION: Considering the complexity and high cost of obtaining the LLa-Gp fraction, VF could be more suitable for screening specific antibodies by ELISA in CSF and serum samples from patients with neurocysticercosis

Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in stable cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin would be more effective than aspirin alone for secondary cardiovascular prevention. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=−4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events