Abstract
Human cysticercosis is one of the most pathogenic and lethal diseases. It is caused by the accidental ingestion of Taenia solium eggs. All Taenia species lead to cysticercosis in animals; T. solium and Torenia asiatica are responsible for cysticercosis in pigs, while T. saginata causes bovine cysticercosis. Cysticercosis in humans is considered a neglected tropical disease. Diagnosing taeniasis—an infection with the adult parasite—poses challenges. The clinical manifestations of the disease are nonspecific, and no easy method is available to confirm the diagnosis. The diagnosis of cysticercosis is mainly based on imaging techniques, including computed tomography and magnetic resonance. These techniques are valuable and accurate but sometimes limited due to atypical images that are difficult to distinguish from neoplasms. Therefore, sensitive and specific methods, such as immunological tests and molecular methods, are essential to confirm clinical findings and differentiate cysticercosis from other diseases.
Keywords
- Taenia solium
- cysticercosis
- neuroimaging
- immunodiagnosis
- molecular diagnosis
1. Introduction
Taeniasis and cysticercosis (T/C) are zoonotic infections caused by tapeworms of the genus
Neurocysticercosis is currently the most prevalent helminthic infection of the central nervous system (CNS). Although its prevalence is unknown, millions of people are likely infected with this parasite, and many eventually develop clinical symptoms. Most nations in Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and parts of Asia have endemic NCC. However, it is not typical in Northern Europe, the US, Canada, Australia, Japan, or New Zealand—except among immigrant communities [4].
Oncospheres, or spherical eggs, are found in the uterus and range from 29 to 77 μm for
Researchers have been trying to develop diagnostic techniques to detect the presence of parasites within bodily tissues since the early 20th century. Counting white blood cells, specifically eosinophils, was an initial nonspecific test that raised the possibility of infections [9]. Serological tests for circulating antibodies (Abs) were created very quickly. Although unable to distinguish between active and dormant infections, antibody detection proved to be a better attempt at diagnosis, with greater predictive values than the earlier eosinophil counting [10]. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent test (ELISA), introduced in 1971, quickly gained popularity as the preferred method for detecting antibodies; it was the most sensitive method available at the time to process multiple samples simultaneously [11]. Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), developed in 1977 and 1986, respectively, significantly improved the classification of NCC features [12]. These scans made it easier for clinicians to make definitive diagnoses based on the size, type, stage, and location of cysticerci in the patient’s CNS. Neuroimaging is still the reference standard today.
2. Diagnosis
2.1 Clinical diagnosis
Although clinical history alone is insufficient for NCC diagnosis, healthcare professionals should become familiar with some of the nonspecific clinical manifestations, particularly in endemic regions [13]. NCC symptoms vary depending on the location, number, and size of the infecting worm(s), the duration of the infection, the evolutionary stage of the lesions, and the presence or absence of a cephalic budding cysticercus [14].
Patients with symptomatic NCC frequently appear with nonspecific signs that may not allow diagnosis. Seizures are the most prevalent manifestation, accounting for 70% of symptomatic cases, and can happen at any age [15]. Headaches, focal neurologic impairments, intracranial pressure, and cognitive deterioration are other clinical signs of the illness [13]. Focal neurological signs are uncommon and depend on where parasites are located in the nervous system or when a cysticercosis-related stroke occurs. Intracranial hypertension is mainly limited to people with hydrocephalus, cysticercotic encephalitis, and large subarachnoid or ventricular cysts [16].
Health professionals must gather epidemiological information about patients, such as travel history, birthplace, address, and awareness of past or present intestinal tapeworm infection in oneself or household members, in addition to clinical assessments [13, 17]. Based on clinical suspicion, neuroimaging and serological tests will be required to confirm or rule out a diagnosis. The target sites for cysticercosis detection are illustrated in Figure 1.
2.2 Neuroimaging methods
Imaging techniques, such as CT and MRI, are essential because they can reveal the parasite’s presence, number, location, size and stage, and the host’s immune response, which manifests as diffuse or perilesional inflammation and blood-brain barrier dysfunction visible by focal contrast enhancement. Additionally, those techniques might indicate additional related diseases, such as hydrocephalus or a stroke [3, 18].
Both CT and MRI should be performed in patients with suspected NCC. MRI offers better imaging of tiny lesions, particularly those close to the skull and in the posterior fossa and provides more information on parenchymal inflammation or periventricular effusion in hydrocephalus [15, 19]. However, CT is considerably better at detecting calcifications and quantifying lesions and is more available in hospitals in endemic regions [20]. In addition to imaging studies, electroencephalography is useful in diagnosing NCC. It can provide a helpful map and the source of abnormal brain activity consistent with the regional distribution of lesions observed on CT scans [21, 22].
2.3 Laboratory diagnosis
2.3.1 Serologic diagnosis
Immunodiagnostic techniques are essential to support clinical results and help with diagnosis. Two immunological assays are available: antibody detection of past and current infections and antigen detection of recent infections.
Lentil lectin-purified glycoproteins are used in an enzyme-linked immunoelectrotransfer blot format in the serodiagnostic assay for cysticercosis and neurocysticercosis. They are approved by the World Health Organization and the Pan-American Health Organization [24]. Despite this assay’s excellent sensitivity and specificity, antigen purification requires advanced techniques and specialized knowledge. It is not a quantitative assay and is challenging to apply in field research [25]. In addition, multiple types of antigens have been used for the immunodiagnosis of cysticercosis, including low molecular mass antigens, excretory/secretory antigens, crude soluble extract, total saline extract, antigen B, vesicular fluid, membrane and scolex extracts, somatic antigens, recombinant proteins, and synthetic peptides [26].
The major drawback of this approach is the possibility of false positives because antibodies do not always indicate an active infection with viable metacestodes but a resolved infection or exposure to the parasite [27]. Another disadvantage is the possibility of cross-reactivity with other parasitic diseases, such as the one caused by
There has been an increased interest in diagnosing NCC using new alternative antigenic sources because the presence or absence of antibodies cannot distinguish between different stages of the disease. A 2017 study by Nunes et al. used protein purification and gel filtration chromatography to identify potential heterologous antigens in a
Detecting the specific circulating parasitic antigens can confirm the presence of viable parasites and overcome potential limitations. Several antigen detection techniques utilizing polyclonal or monoclonal antibodies have been studied. Two monoclonal antibody-based tests are standardized: B158/B60 Ag-ELISA and HP10. Antigen detection assays can also be used to monitor the efficacy of anthelminthic drugs and differentiate between viable parasites and locate them in the central nervous system [32]. A 2020 study by Kabululu et al. observed that the B158/B60 monoclonal-based sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Ag-ELISA) was more reliable in ruling out
3. Histological study of the parasite from biopsy
Visualization of histopathological characteristics of cysticerci in biopsy material, including the spinal canal, the rostellum with its four suckers, and the double crown of hooks, can confirm NCC diagnosis. In many subarachnoid cysts, the scolex cannot be identified, but the typical three-layered membrane wall often allows the correct identification of the parasite. However, a problem arises when biopsy material comes from calcified or granular cysticerci since the scolex and membranes may not be present in these involution stages of the parasite. In such cases, the presence of the calcareous corpuscles may help identify the lesion’s parasitic (cestode) nature [13].
3.1 Molecular techniques
PCR has been used for the amplification of DNA sequences. Since its creation by Mullis in 1983, PCR has developed into a crucial diagnostic tool. Several molecular assays have been described for the detection and differentiation of parasites, including
The most significant contribution of molecular methods has been in the genotyping of the genus
MicroRNAs (miRNA) have recently been investigated as potential biomarkers. They are single-stranded, short, noncoding, endogenous RNAs with a role in post-transcriptional gene regulation. Although miRNAs have been linked to many parasites, little is known regarding
Finally, neurocysticercosis remains a significant public health concern and financial burden in endemic areas. Numerous neurological symptoms caused by this parasite require expensive diagnostic methods. Despite efforts to create diagnostic techniques, serological analyses combined with neuroimaging currently serve as the primary diagnostic method. Neuroimaging is pricey and cannot detect isolated cysts or extraparenchymal infections. Additionally, the ideal serological biomarker remains elusive. Creating novel, trustworthy, and reasonably priced diagnostic techniques is crucial for the therapeutic management of this underappreciated tropical disease and for determining the actual global health burden it poses.
References
- 1.
Flisser A. State of the art of Taenia solium as compared to Taenia asiatica. The Korean Journal of Parasitology. 2013; 51 :43-49 - 2.
Michelet L, Dauga C. Molecular evidence of host influences on the evolution and spread of human tapeworms. BRV Biological Reviews. 2012; 87 (3):731-741 - 3.
García HH, Del Brutto OH. Imaging findings in neurocysticercosis. Acta Tropica. 2003; 87 (1):71-78. DOI: 10.1016/s0001-706x(03)00057-3 - 4.
Del Brutto OH. Human Neurocysticercosis: An overview. Pathogens. 2022; 11 (10):1212. DOI: 10.3390/pathogens11101212 - 5.
Naquira C. Taenia solium: biological cycle and characteristics. In: Garcia HH, Martinez S, editors. Taenia solium Taeniasis, Cysticercosis. Lima: Editorial Universo; 1999. p. 346 - 6.
Eom KS. What is Asian Taenia? Parasitology International. 2006; 55 (Suppl):137-141 - 7.
Eom KS, Rim H. Morphologic descriptions of Taenia asiatica sp. n. The Korean Journal of Parasitology. 1993; 31 :1-6 - 8.
Abraham A, Schmidt V, Kaminski M, Stelzle D, De Meijere R, Bustos J, et al. Epidemiology and surveillance of human (neuro) cysticercosis in Europe: Is enhanced surveillance required? Tropical Medicine & International Health. 2020; 25 (5):566-578 - 9.
Waterhouse R. Cysticercus cellulosae in the central nervous system: With an account of two cases. QJM: An International Journal of Medicine. 1913; 6 (4):469-485 - 10.
Garcia HH, Gilman RH, Catacora M, Verastegui M, Gonzalez AE, Tsang VC. Serologic evolution of neurocysticercosis patients after antiparasitic therapy. Cysticercosis working Group in Peru. The Journal of Infectious Diseases. 1997; 175 (2):486-489 - 11.
Engvall E, Perlmann P. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Quantitative assay of immunoglobulin G. Immunochemistry. 1971; 8 (9):871-874 - 12.
Chavarria A, Fleury A, Garcia E, Marquez C, Fragoso G, Sciutto E. Relationship between the clinical heterogeneity of neurocysticercosis and the immuneinflammatory profiles. Clinical Immunology. 2005; 116 (3):271-278 - 13.
Del Brutto OH, Nash TE, White AC Jr, Rajshekhar V, Wilkins PP, Singh G, et al. Revised diagnostic criteria for neurocysticercosis. Journal of the Neurological Sciences. 2017; 372 :202-210 - 14.
Garcia HH. Neurocysticercosis. Neurologic Clinics. 2018; 36 (4):851-864. DOI: 10.1016/j.ncl.2018.07.003 - 15.
Del Brutto OH, Santibañez R, Noboa CA, Aguirre R, Díaz E, Alarcón TA. Epilepsy due to neurocysticercosis: Analysis of 203 patients. Neurology. 1992; 42 (2):389-392 - 16.
Del Brutto OH, Del Brutto VJ. Calcified neurocysticercosis among patients with primary headache. Cephalalgia: An International Journal of Headache. 2012; 32 (3):250-254. DOI: 10.1177/0333102411433043 - 17.
Del Brutto OH. Diagnostic criteria for neurocysticercosis, revisited. Pathogens and Global Health. 2012; 106 (5):299-304. DOI: 10.1179/2047773212Y.000000002 - 18.
Dumas JL, Visy JM, Belin C, Gaston A, Goldlust D, Dumas M. Parenchymal neurocysticercosis: Follow-up and staging by MRI. Neuroradiology. 1997; 39 (1):12-18. DOI: 10.1007/s002340050358 - 19.
Carrillo Mezo R, Lara García J, Arroyo M, Fleury A. Relevance of 3D magnetic resonance imaging sequences in diagnosing basal subarachnoid neurocysticercosis. Acta Tropica. 2015; 152 :60-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2015.08.017 - 20.
Nash TE, Del Brutto OH, Butman JA, Corona T, Delgado-Escueta A, Duron RM, et al. Calcific neurocysticercosis and epileptogenesis. Neurology. 2004; 62 (11):1934-1938. DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000129481.12067.06 - 21.
Sharma S, Modi M, Lal V, Prabhakar S, Bhardwaj A, Sehgal R. Reversible dementia as a presenting manifestation of racemose neurocysticercosis. Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology. 2013; 16 (1):88-90. DOI: 10.4103/0972-2327.107706 - 22.
Singh AK, Garg RK, Rizvi I, Malhotra HS, Kumar N, Gupta RK. Clinical and neuroimaging predictors of seizure recurrence in solitary calcified neurocysticercosis: A prospective observational study. Epilepsy Research. 2017; 137 :78-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2017.09.010 - 23.
Raoul F, Li T, Sako Y, Chen X, Long C, Yanagida T, et al. Advances in diagnosis and spatial analysis of cysticercosis and taeniasis. Parasitology. 2013; 140 (13):1578-1588. DOI: 10.1017/S0031182013001303 - 24.
Pan American Health Organization. PAHO/WHO Informal Consultation on the Taeniasis/Cysticercosis Complex. Brasilia, Brazil: Pan American Health Organization; 1995 - 25.
Lee YM, Handali S, Hancock K, Pattabhi S, Kovalenko VA, Levin A, et al. Serologic diagnosis of human Taenia solium cysticercosis by using recombinant and synthetic antigens in QuickELISA™. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 2011; 84 (4):587-593. DOI: 10.4269/ajtmh.2011.10-0079 - 26.
Esquivel-Velázquez M, Ostoa-Saloma P, Morales-Montor J, Hernández-Bello R, Larralde C. Immunodiagnosis of neurocysticercosis: Ways to focus on the challenge. Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology. 2011; 2011 :516042. DOI: 10.1155/2011/516042 - 27.
Garcia HH, Gonzalez AE, Gilman RH, Palacios LG, Jimenez I, Rodriguez S, et al. Transient antibody response in Taenia solium infection in field conditions-a major contributor to high seroprevalence. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 2001; 65 (1):31-32 - 28.
Dekumyoy P, Waikagul J, Vanijanonta S, Thairungroj M, Nakao M, Sako Y, et al. Cysticercosis: IgG-ELISA evaluations of peak1 antigen and< 30 kDa antigen of delipidized extract of Taenia solium metacestodes. Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Medicine and Public Health. 2004; 35 :1-9 - 29.
Mandal J, Singhi PD, Khandelwal N, Malla N. Evaluation of lower molecular mass (20-24 kDa) Taenia solium cysticercus antigen fraction by ELISA and dot blot for the serodiagnosis of neurocysticercosis in children. Parasitology Research. 2008; 102 (5):1097-1101 - 30.
Arruda GC, Da Silva ADT, Quagliato EMAB, Maretti MA, Rossi CL. Evaluation of Taenia solium and Taenia crassiceps cysticercal antigens for the serodiagnosis of neurocysticercosis. Tropical Medicine & International Health. 2005; 10 (10):1005-1012 - 31.
Nunes D, Gonzaga H, Ribeiro V, Cunha-Júnior J, Costa-Cruz J. Usefulness of gel filtration fraction as potential biomarker for neurocysticercosis in serum: Towards a new diagnostic tool. Parasitology. 2017; 144 (4):426-435 - 32.
Gadea NA, Matamoros G, Rueda MM. Recent advances in the diagnosis of Neurocysticercosis. Current Treatment Options in Infectious Diseases. 2018; 10 :410-420. DOI: 10.1007/s40506-018-0173-9 - 33.
Kabululu ML, Johansen MV, Mlangwa JED, et al. Performance of Ag-ELISA in the diagnosis of Taenia solium cysticercosis in naturally infected pigs in Tanzania. Parasites Vectors. 2020;13 :534. DOI: 10.1186/s13071-020-04416-4 - 34.
Tawfeeq HM, Ali SA. Highly sensitive nested polymerase chain reaction to improve the detection of Leishmania species in clinical specimens. Journal of Parasitic Diseases. 2022;46 (3):754-763. doi: 10.1007/s12639-022-01491-5. Epub 2022 May 13. PMID: 36091274; PMCID: PMC9458810 - 35.
Tawfeeq HM, Ali SA. Molecular-based assay for genotyping Leishmania spp. from clinically suspected cutaneous leishmaniasis lesions in the Garmian area, Kurdistan region of Iraq. Parasite Epidemiology and Control. 2022; 17 :e00240 - 36.
Yamasaki H, Nakao M, Sako Y, Nakaya K, Sato MO, Mamuti W, et al. DNA differential diagnosis of human Taeniid Cestodes by base excision sequence scanning Thymine-Base reader analysis with mitochondrial genes. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. 2002; 40 :3818-3821 - 37.
Vega R, Pinero D, Ramanank-andrasana B, Dumas M, Bouteille B, Fleury A, et al. Population genetic structure of Taenia solium from Madagascar and Mexico: Implications for clinical profile diversity and immunological technology. International Journal for Parasitology. 2003; 33 :1479-1485 - 38.
Nunes CM, Lima LGF, Manoel CS, Pereira RN, Nakano MM, Garcia JF. Taenia saginata: Polymerase chain reaction for taeniasis diagnosis in human fecal samples. Experimental Parasitology. 2003; 104 :67-69 - 39.
McManus DP. Molecular discrimination of taeniid cestodes. Parasitology International. 2006; 55 :S31-S37 - 40.
Almeida CR, Ojopi EP, Nunes CM, Machado LR, Takayanagui OM, Livramento JA, et al. Taenia solium DNA is present in the cerebrospinal fluid of neurocysticercosis patients and can be used for diagnosis. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 2006; 256 (5):307-310 - 41.
Hernández M, Gonzalez LM, Fleury A, Saenz B, Parkhouse RME, Harrison LJS, et al. Neurocysticercosis: Detection of Taenia solium DNA in human cerebrospinal fluid using a semi-nested PCR based on HDP2. Annals of Tropical Medicine & Parasitology. 2008; 102 (4):317-323 - 42.
Gutierrez-Loli R, Orrego MA, Sevillano-Quispe OG, Herrera-Arrasco L, Guerra-Giraldez C. MicroRNAs in Taenia solium neurocysticercosis: Insights as promising agents in host-parasite interaction and their potential as biomarkers. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2017;8 :1905