ArticleClinical and translational science2026
Evaluation of a Novel Peptide-Based ELISA for the Serological Diagnosis of Trypanosoma cruzi Infection.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chagas disease is a neglected tropical disease endemic in most of the Americas, caused by Trypanosoma cruzi. New serological tests with improved performance are urgently needed for accurate diagnosis of T. cruzi infections. We evaluated here the performance of a novel peptide ELISA based on highly conserved parasite antigens, using a large panel of well characterized samples (N = 308) from Mexico, where serological discordance is particularly high. Comparison of peptide ELISA with various serological and molecular assays indicated that it outperformed an FDA-approved commercial ELISA in terms of sensitivity (47.5% vs. 28.3% compared with PCR), while a high specificity was maintained (80.3%-91.2% compared with PCR or serology plus PCR). Improved sensitivity was due to the reactivity of samples previously characterized as serodiscordants. Nonetheless, test performance remains limited for stand-alone use but may complement current tests. Further optimizing antigen composition to include additional highly conserved antigens may allow reaching optimum levels of test performance to simplify serological diagnosis of T. cruzi infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.