An investigation of the disparity in estimates of microfilaraemia and antigenaemia in lymphatic filariasis surveys

Jorge Cano, Paula Moraga, Birgit Nikolay, Maria P. Rebollo, Patricia N. Okorie, Emmanuel Davies, Sammy M. Njenga, Moses J. Bockarie, Simon J. Brooker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background
The diagnosis of lymphatic filariasis (LF) is based typically on either microfilaraemia as assessed by microscopy or filarial antigenaemia using an immuno-chromatographic test. While it is known that estimates of antigenaemia are generally higher than estimates of microfilaraemia, the extent of the difference is not known.

Methods
This paper presents the results of an extensive literature search for surveys that estimated both microfilaraemia and antigenaemia in order to better understand the disparity between the two measures.

Results and Conclusions
In some settings there was a very large disparity, up to 40–70%, between estimates of microfilaraemia and antigenaemia. Regression analysis was unable to identify any predictable relationship between the two measures. The implications of findings for risk mapping and surveillance of LF are discussed.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)529–531
Number of pages3
JournalTransactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
Volume109
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 21 Jun 2015

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'An investigation of the disparity in estimates of microfilaraemia and antigenaemia in lymphatic filariasis surveys'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this