Trends in Parasitology
Volume 23, Issue 2, February 2007, Pages 78-82
Journal home page for Trends in Parasitology

Review
Diagnostic tools for filariasis elimination programs

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pt.2006.12.001Get rights and content

The ambitious and exciting Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis (GPELF) is largely based on a strategy of mass drug administration (MDA) of repeated rounds of antifilarial medications to endemic populations around the world. Diagnostic tools are important to GPELF because they affect decisions regarding where to distribute MDA, how to measure its effects, how to define targets and endpoints for stopping MDA, and how to monitor populations for possible resurgence of filariasis transmission following suspension of MDA. This article reviews available diagnostic tests for filariasis and their potential use as tools for different phases of filariasis elimination programs.

Section snippets

Filariasis elimination and diagnostic tools

Lymphatic filariasis (LF) is caused by the nematode parasites Wuchereria bancrofti, Brugia malayi and Brugia timori and is transmitted by mosquitoes. It is an important cause of physical and social disability that affects over 100 million people in 83 countries in the developing world. Traditional LF control programs were based largely on selective treatment of infected individuals detected by mass screening of blood smears (collected at night) for microfilariae (Mf). Advances in treatment and

Phase 1: mapping and planning PELFs

The first phase of a PELF requires a sensitive, specific and convenient method for detecting LF endemicity that can be used to map endemic areas for inclusion in the program. Overdiagnosis that misclassifies nonendemic areas can greatly increase program expenses and decrease chances for success. Underdiagnosis and exclusion of endemic areas is also not acceptable.

There are several viable diagnostic options for Phase 1 (Box 1). These include: Mf testing, filarial-antigen tests, antibody

Phase 2: monitoring progress during a PELF

Interim assessments are essential to demonstrate progress, to identify problems that can be solved while funding is still available and for securing resources needed to complete a program. Requirements for tools for this purpose are somewhat different from those used for mapping endemicity. Consider Mf testing: microfilaremia prevalence rates and community Mf loads typically decrease within months after initiation of MDA programs. Although this is a positive change and evidence of good MDA

Phase 3: endpoints for PELFs

More information is needed on how to use antigen, antibody and MX tests to inform decisions on when it is safe to discontinue MDA because there is no consensus on this issue at this time. The authors favor an evidence-based approach to this question rather than adoption of arbitrary targets. We do not agree with current WHO guidelines that fail implementation units (requiring additional rounds of MDA) if one in 3000 children born after the initiation of MDA has a positive antigen test [5]. We

Phase 4: post-MDA surveillance and early detection of resurgence

We favor the use of antibody testing and MX as surveillance tools for early detection of resurgent transmission. Large samples are needed to show statistically significant increases in these measures when baseline rates post-cessation of MDA are low. There is no consensus at this time on how these or other tests should be used for post-MDA surveillance. Research is required to provide data on this important question. Surveillance studies in Egypt will repeat assessments in sentinel sites every

Advanced data analysis and modeling

Two recent articles have reviewed the potential value of mathematical modeling as a tool for PELFs 27, 28. Research projects and PELFs around the world are generating reams of data from specific villages, regions and countries. Mathematical analysis and modeling efforts should be expanded to identify patterns in the data so that the field can move from the specific to the general. W. Stolk (personal communication) has commented on this situation as follows: ‘While field studies are useful,

Concluding remarks

GPELF is one of the most ambitious and exciting intervention programs for a neglected tropical disease to date. This review has emphasized how recent advances have increased diagnostic options for filariasis and that different diagnostic tools might be needed for management of different phases of PELFs. More work is needed to fill important gaps in our knowledge regarding the optimal use of these tools (Box 2).

Disclosure statement

The ICT antigen test mentioned in this article uses reagents licensed from Barnes-Jewish Hospital, an affiliation of G. J. Weil. All royalties from sales of this test are donated to the Barnes-Jewish Hospital Foundation, a registered not-for-profit organization (http://www.barnesjewish.org/groups/default.asp?NavID= 1600).

Acknowledgements

This article is based on a working paper presented at the Sixth Meeting of the Technical Advisory Group on the Global Elimination of Lymphatic Filariasis, World Health Organization, Geneva, September 2005. The authors’ filariasis research is supported in part by NIH grant AI 065715.

References (39)

  • A.E. Muck

    Influence of infection with non-filarial helminths on the specificity of serological assays for antifilarial immunoglobulin G4

    Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg.

    (2003)
  • E.A. Ottesen

    Strategies and tools for the control/elimination of lymphatic filariasis

    Bull. World Health Organ.

    (1997)
  • World Health Organization

    Global Programme to Elimination Lymphatic Filariasis

    Wkly. Epidemiol. Rec.

    (2006)
  • World Health Organization (2005) Monitoring and Epidemiological Assessment of the Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic...
  • G.J. Weil et al.

    Identification and partial characterization of a parasite antigen in sera from humans infected with Wuchereria bancrofti

    J. Immunol.

    (1987)
  • G.J. Weil

    Parasite antigenemia without microfilaremia in bancroftian filariasis

    Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg.

    (1996)
  • S.J. More et al.

    A highly sensitive monoclonal antibody-based ELISA for the detection of circulating antigen in bancroftian filariasis

    Trop. Med. Parasitol.

    (1990)
  • G.J. Weil

    A monoclonal antibody-based enzyme immunoassay for detecting parasite antigenemia in bancroftian filariasis

    J. Infect. Dis.

    (1987)
  • J.O. Gyapong

    The use of spatial analysis in mapping the distribution of bancroftian filariasis in four West African countries

    Ann. Trop. Med. Parasitol.

    (2002)
  • Cited by (197)

    • The Filariases

      2023, Manson's Tropical Diseases, Fourth Edition
    • Clinical, serological and DNA testing in Bengo Province, Angola further reveals low filarial endemicity and opportunities for disease elimination

      2020, Parasite Epidemiology and Control
      Citation Excerpt :

      To overcome the limitations of conventional microscopic diagnosis for filarial species identification, serological and molecular diagnosis methods have been used as alternatives with varying levels of success (World Health Organization, 2012a; Molyneux et al., 2016). In 2014, the main alternative method to serodiagnosis of loiasis was laboratory-based polymerase chain reaction (PCR), for onchocerciasis the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Ov16 ELISA) and for LF the rapid diagnostic immunochromatographic test (ICT) and laboratory-based PCR (Weil and Ramzy, 2007; Kelly-Hope et al., 2018a). Of note, these alternative methods are yet to be used in conjunction with one another and none have not been used so far in Angola.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text