Meta-analysis of tick-borne and other pathogens: Co-infection or co-detection? That is the question

IF 1.7 Q3 PARASITOLOGY Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-05 DOI:10.1016/j.crpvbd.2024.100219
Stefania Porcelli, Pierre Lucien Deshuillers, Sara Moutailler, Anne-Claire Lagrée
{"title":"Meta-analysis of tick-borne and other pathogens: Co-infection or co-detection? That is the question","authors":"Stefania Porcelli,&nbsp;Pierre Lucien Deshuillers,&nbsp;Sara Moutailler,&nbsp;Anne-Claire Lagrée","doi":"10.1016/j.crpvbd.2024.100219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This literature-based review aims to distinguish studies describing co-infection with tick-borne pathogens from those describing co-detection or co-exposure scenarios. The review analyzed 426 papers and identified only 20 with direct evidence of co-infection in humans and animals, highlighting the need for accurate terminology and proposing definitions for co-infection, co-exposure and co-detection. Current diagnostic methods - including serology and molecular techniques - have limitations in accurately identifying real co-infections, often leading to misinterpretation. The review highlights the importance of developing laboratory models to better understand tick-borne pathogen interactions, and advocates improved diagnostic strategies for tick screening by testing their RNA for co-infections. Moreover, the establishment of additional animal models for pathogen co-infection will help develop our understanding of selection pressures for various traits of tick-borne pathogens (such as virulence and transmissibility) over time. This comprehensive analysis provides insights into the complexity of tick-borne pathogen co-infections and calls for precise diagnostic terms to improve the clarity and effectiveness of future research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":94311,"journal":{"name":"Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100219"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667114X24000505","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PARASITOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This literature-based review aims to distinguish studies describing co-infection with tick-borne pathogens from those describing co-detection or co-exposure scenarios. The review analyzed 426 papers and identified only 20 with direct evidence of co-infection in humans and animals, highlighting the need for accurate terminology and proposing definitions for co-infection, co-exposure and co-detection. Current diagnostic methods - including serology and molecular techniques - have limitations in accurately identifying real co-infections, often leading to misinterpretation. The review highlights the importance of developing laboratory models to better understand tick-borne pathogen interactions, and advocates improved diagnostic strategies for tick screening by testing their RNA for co-infections. Moreover, the establishment of additional animal models for pathogen co-infection will help develop our understanding of selection pressures for various traits of tick-borne pathogens (such as virulence and transmissibility) over time. This comprehensive analysis provides insights into the complexity of tick-borne pathogen co-infections and calls for precise diagnostic terms to improve the clarity and effectiveness of future research.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
蜱传病原体和其他病原体的元分析:共同感染还是共同检测?这是一个问题
本文献综述旨在将描述蜱媒病原体共同感染的研究与描述共同检测或共同暴露情况的研究区分开来。该综述分析了 426 篇论文,仅发现 20 篇有人类和动物共同感染的直接证据,强调了准确术语的必要性,并提出了共同感染、共同暴露和共同检测的定义。目前的诊断方法--包括血清学和分子技术--在准确识别真正的合并感染方面存在局限性,常常导致误解。综述强调了开发实验室模型以更好地了解蜱传病原体相互作用的重要性,并提倡通过检测蜱的 RNA 来改进蜱筛查的诊断策略。此外,建立更多的病原体共感染动物模型将有助于我们了解蜱传病原体的各种特性(如毒性和传播性)随时间变化而产生的选择压力。这项综合分析使我们深入了解了蜱媒病原体合并感染的复杂性,并呼吁使用精确的诊断术语来提高未来研究的清晰度和有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Susceptibility of Anopheles stephensi SDA500 strain to common insecticides and efficacy of glazed tile bioassay for resistance characterization Effectiveness of eprinomectin, albendazole and their combination therapy against strongyle nematode in dairy goats: A clinical field study using nemabiome-integrated approach in Thailand Repeated biannual cross-sectional surveys in primary schools set baseline seasonal and spatial surveillance for malaria and schistosomiasis in the Shire Valley Transformation Programme (SVTP), Malawi Long-term persistence of Schistosoma mansoni hotspots in western Kenya despite ongoing mass drug administration Assessing whole-host homogenisation as a new tool for parasite detection and identification
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1