IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0008172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cell-mediated and serology-based tests for Mycobacterium ulcerans disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Michael S Avumegah
  • Nilakshi T Waidyatillake
  • Wojtek P Michalski
  • Daniel P O’Brien
  • Tiffanie M Nelson
  • Eugene Athan

Abstract

Buruli ulcer (BU) is a subcutaneous necrotic infection of the skin caused by Mycobacterium ulcerans. It is the third most common human mycobacterial disease after tuberculosis (TB) and leprosy. The available methods for detection of the bacilli in lesions are microscopic detection, isolation and cultivation of the bacterium, histopathology, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). These methods, although approved by the World Health Organization (WHO), have infrastructural and resource challenges in medical centres and cell-mediated immunity (CMI) and/or serology-based tests have been suggested as easier and more appropriate for accurate assessment of the disease, especially in remote or underdeveloped areas. This study systematically reviewed and conducted a meta-analysis for all research aimed at developing cell-mediated immunity (CMI) and/or serology-based tests for M. ulcerans disease. Information for this review was searched through PubMed and Web of Science databases and identified up to June 2019. References from relevant articles and reports from the WHO Annual Meeting of the Global Buruli Ulcer Initiative were also used. Twelve studies beginning in 1952, that attempted to develop CMI and/or serology-based tests for the disease were identified. These studies addressed issues of specificity and sensitivity in context of antigen composition as well as study heterogeneity and bias. The two main types of antigenic preparations considered were pathogen-derived and recombinant protein preparations. There was slight difference in test performance when M. ulcerans recombinant proteins [positivity: 67.5%; 32.5%] or pathogen-derived [positivity: 76.0%; 24.0%] preparations were used as test antigens among BU patients. However, pathogen-derived preparations were better at differentiating between patients and control groups [odds ratio (OR) of 27.92, 95%CI: 5.05–154.28]. This was followed by tests with the recombinant proteins [OR = 1.23, 95%CI: 0.27–5.62]. Overall, study heterogeneity index, I2 was 92.4% (p = 0.000). It is apparent from this review that standardisation is needed in any future CMI and/or serology-based tests used for M. ulcerans disease.Author summary: Buruli ulcer (BU) is a debilitating skin infection caused by M. ulcerans. It is the third most common mycobacterial disease after tuberculosis and leprosy. BU is mainly restricted to the tropical and subtropical countries of the world, though temperate regions report sporadic cases. Polymerase chain reaction targeting IS2404 is the gold standard for M. ulcerans disease diagnosis and other methods such as histopathology, acid fast staining and microscopy are used for validity checks. The currently approved diagnostic tools lack sensitivity and specificity and there are many resource challenges in underdeveloped regions. Isolation and culture of the bacillus from tissue biopsies is the only method that detects viable cells. However, the long incubation period of the pathogen makes it not ideal and rapid enough for point-of-care diagnosis. Cell-mediated immunity and serology-based methods have been suggested as appropriate tools for accurate and rapid testing for the disease within “at-risk-communities”. This study systematically reviewed and conducted a meta-analysis on all research aimed at developing cell-mediated immunity and/or serology-based tests for M. ulcerans disease.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael S Avumegah & Nilakshi T Waidyatillake & Wojtek P Michalski & Daniel P O’Brien & Tiffanie M Nelson & Eugene Athan, 2020. "Cell-mediated and serology-based tests for Mycobacterium ulcerans disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-15, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0008172
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008172
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0008172
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0008172&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008172?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0008172. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.