Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:27:40.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Epidemiology of canine leishmaniasis: prevalence, incidence and basic reproduction number calculated from a cross-sectional serological survey on the island of Gozo, Malta

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

C. Dye ,
R. Killick-Kendrick ,
M. M. Vitutia ,
R. Walton ,
M. Killick-Kendrick ,
A. E. Harith ,
M. W. Guy ,
M.-C. Cañavate  and
G. Hasibeder
C. Dye
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Parasitology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC 1E 7HT, UK
R. Killick-Kendrick
Affiliation:
Imperial College at Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 7PY, UK Medical Research Council External Staff.
M. M. Vitutia
Affiliation:
Servicio de Parasitologia, CNMVIS, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, 28220 Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain
R. Walton
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA
M. Killick-Kendrick
Affiliation:
Imperial College at Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 7PY, UK
A. E. Harith
Affiliation:
Prince Leopold Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nationalestraat 155, B-2000 Antwerp, Belgium
M. W. Guy
Affiliation:
Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool L3 5QA, UK
M.-C. Cañavate
Affiliation:
Servicio de Parasitologia, CNMVIS, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, 28220 Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain
G. Hasibeder
Affiliation:
Abteilung für Mathematische Biologie, Technische Universität Wien, Wiedner Hauptstrasse 8/118, A-1040 Wien, Austria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Assessment of the resilience of canine leishmaniasis to control or, more ambitiously, the effort needed to eradicate infection, requires an estimate of the basic case reproduction number (R0). This paper applies the theoretical results of Hasibeder, Dye & Carpenter (1992) to data from a cross-sectional survey on the Maltese island of Gozo in which dogs of known age, sex and occupation (pet, guard etc) were subjected to three different serological tests for the presence of specific antibody (IFAT, DAT and ELISA). Difficulties in interpreting these test results, and hence of determining the proportion of dogs infected, present the main obstacle to estimating R0: estimates are critically dependent on the choice of threshold separating seropositives from seronegatives. The data do, however, allow a robust comparative analysis of risk which shows that the force of infection experienced by working dogs is about three times higher than that of pet dogs, a degree of non-homogeneous contact which actually has little effect on estimates of R0. We suggest a cautious point estimate of R0 ≃ 11, and comment briefly on its significance for leishmaniasis control.

Keywords

canine leishmaniasisepidemiologyMaltabasic reproduction numbersandfliesserology.
Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 105 , Issue 1 , August 1992 , pp. 35 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abranches, P., Silva-Pereira, M. C. D., Conceiçao-Silva, F. M., Santos-Gomes, & Janz, J. G. (1991). Canine leishmaniasis: pathological and ecological factors influencing transmission of infection. journal of Parasitology 77, 557–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aitkin, M., Anderson, D., Francis, B. & Hinde, J. (1989). Statistical Modelling in GLIM. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. M. & May, R. M. (1991). Infectious Diseases of Humans: Dynamics and Control. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badaró, R., Jones, T. C., Carvalho, E. M., Sampaio, D., Reed, S. G., Barral, A., Teixeira, R. & Johnson, W. D. Jr. (1986 a). New perspectives on a subclinical form of visceral leishmaniasis. Journal of Infectious Diseases 154, 1003–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Badaró, R., Jones, T. C., Lorenço, R., Cerf, B. J., Sampaio, D., Carvalho, E. M., Rocha, H., Teixeira, R. & Johnson, W. D. Jr. (1986 b). A prospective study of visceral leishmaniasis in an endemic area of Brazil. Journal of Infectious Diseases 154, 639–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bray, R. S. (1985). Immunodiagnosis of leishmaniasis. In Leishmaniasis (ed. Chang, K. P. & Bray, R. S.), pp. 177–182. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Gradoni, L., Maroli, M., Gramiccia, M. & Mancianti, F. (1987). Leishmania infantum infection rates in Phlebotomus perniciosus fed on naturally infected dogs under antimonial treatment. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 1, 339–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harith, A. E., Slappendel, R. J., Reiter, I., Van Knapen, F., De Korte, P., Huigen, E. & Kolk, A. H. J. (1989). Application of a direct agglutination test for detection of specific anti-Leishmania antibodies in the canine reservoir. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 27, 2252–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hasibeder, G. & Dye, C. (1988). Population dynamics of mosquito-borne disease: persistence in a completely heterogeneous environment. Theoretical Population Biology 33, 31–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hasibeder, G., Dye, C. & Carpenter, J. (1992). Mathematical modelling and theory for estimating the basic reproduction number of canine leishmaniasis. Parasitology 105, 43–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lanotte, G., Rioux, J.-A., Perieres, J. & Vollhardt, Y. (1979). Ecologic des leishmanioses dans le sud de la France. 10. Les formes évolutives de la leishmaniose viscérale canine. Elaboration d'une typologie bioclinique à finalité épidémiologique. Annales de Parasitologie Humaine et Comparée 54, 277–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Léger, N., Marchais, R., Madulo-Leblond, G., Pesson, B., Kristensen, A., Ferté, H., Killick-Kendrick, R. & Killick-Kendrick, M. (1991). Les phlébotomes impliqués dans la transmission des leishmanioses dans l'île de Gozo (Malte). Annales de Parasitologie Humaine et Comparée 66, 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nokes, D. J., Wright, J., Morgan-Capner, P. & Anderson, R. M. (1990). Serological study of the epidemiology of mumps virus infection in north-west England. Epidemiology and Infection 105, 175–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rioux, J.-A., Lanotte, G., Croset, H. & Dedet, J. P. (1972). Ecologic des leishmanioses dans le sud de la France. 5. Pouvoir infestant comparé des diverses formes de leishmaniose canine vis-à-vis de Phlebotomus ariasi Tonnoir, 1921. Annales de Parasitologie Humaine et Comparée 47, 413–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vidor, E., Dereure, J., Pratlong, F., Dubreuil, N., Bissuel, G., Moreau, Y. & Rioux, J.-A. (1991). Le chancre d'inoculation dans le leishmaniose canine à Leishmania infantum. Etude d'une cohort en région cévenole. Pratique Médicale et Chirugicale de l'Animal de Compagnie 26, 133–7.Google Scholar
Voller, A., Bidwell, D. E. & Bartlett, A. (1979). The Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA). Guernsey: Dynatech Europe.Google Scholar