Cited by 9Parasitic Diseases Research and TreatmentHelminth infection and controlResearch on Leishmaniasis Studies

Utility of adult antigens of Dirofilaria immitis for the early detection of dirofilariosis and for the evaluation of chemoprophylactic treatment in experimentally infected cats

Prieto, G., Simón, F., Genchi, C., McCall, J.W., Venco, L.·1999·Veterinary Parasitology

Abstract

Early detection of feline dirofilariosis was achieved by ELISA testing using adult somatic (SA) and excretory/secretory (E/S) antigens. Sera from experimentally infected cats showed significantly higher IgG levels at 2 months post-infection (p.i.) when compared to sera obtained prior to infection. This difference was apparent at all serum dilutions (1:100 to 1:800) in ELISA(SA) and at all dilutions except 1:800 when tested with ELISA(E/S). Changes in specific anti-SA and anti-E/S IgG levels were found in infected cats treated with the macrolid parasiticide. ELISA(E/S) was able to detect a significant decrease in IgG levels in ivermectin treated cats at 3 months post-treatment (p.t.), compared to infected, untreated controls. However, testing with ELISA(SA) showed a significant decrease in antibody levels in treated cats only at 4 months after treatment. Sera from untreated cats recognized previously identified specific markers for feline dirofilariosis on SA (22, 26, 30 and 40 kDa) and on E/S (22 and 25 kDa) in Western blot analysis. Sera from treated cats, on the other hand, gave only weak bands or none at all, indicating a decrease in antibody concentration. These results suggest that serologic testing with ELISA is useful in the early detection of Dirofilaria immitis infection and, together with Western blot analysis, can assist in the evaluation of response to chemoprophylactic treatment of feline dirofilariosis, two aspects of prime importance in the prevention of this disease in cats.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0304-4017(99)00116-8

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Immune response in feline cardiopulmonary dirofilariasis is generally strong after approximately 2 m.p.i., enabling early detection of single-worm infections.

    “The immune response in feline cardiopulmonary dirofilariasis is generally strong after approximately 2 m.p.i., thereby enabling the early detection of single-worm infections (346,348).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prieto, G., Simón, F., Genchi, C., McCall, J. W., & Venco, L.
Affiliations
  • Universidad de Salamanca (ES)
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • University of Georgia (US)
Venue
Veterinary Parasitology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-09
Volume
86
Issue
1
Pages
5-13
ISSN
0304-4017 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1996815763
Cited by
9
References
16
Citations by year
2022: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Veterinary Parasitology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Parasitic Diseases Research and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Helminth infection and control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Research on Leishmaniasis Studies
Keywords
Dirofilaria immitis, excretory-secretory antigens, serological diagnosis, early infection detection, chemoprophylaxis, ivermectin, IgG antibody response, cats
MeSH terms
Animals, Anthelmintics, Antibodies, Helminth, Antigens, Helminth, Cat Diseases, Cats, Dirofilaria immitis, Dirofilariasis, Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay, Female, Heart, Ivermectin, Lung, Male, Blotting, Western

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review