In Brazil, the notification of congenital (CS) and syphilis in pregnant women (SiP) is compulsory. Notification data provided by the Ministry of Health in combination with the mapping of vulnerable geographic areas is essential to forecasting possible outbreaks and more effectively combating infection through monitoring. We aim to evaluate the spatiotemporal distribution and epidemiological aspects of reported cases of CS and SiP in Brazil. A retrospective ecological study was carried out using secondary surveillance data obtained from the Brazilian National Notifiable Diseases Information System (SINAN) database, considering all reported cases of CS and SiP between 2001 to 2017. Epidemiological characteristics and time trends were analyzed using joinpoint regression models and spatial distribution, considering microregions or states/macroregions as units of analysis. A total of 188,630 (359/100,000 birth lives) CS and 235,895 of SiP (6.3/100,000 inhabitants) were reported during the period studied. In general, the epidemiologic profile of Brazil indicates most reported CS cases occurred in "mixed-race" newborns who were diagnosed within seven days of birth and whose mothers had received prenatal care, but the epidemiologic profile varies by Brazilian macroregion. Regarding SiP, most cases were among women who self-reported ‘mixed-race’, were aged 20–39 years, had up to eight years of formal education and were diagnosed with primary or latent syphilis. Approximately 549 (98.4%) and 558 (100%) microregions reported at least one case of CS and SiP, respectively. From 2012 to 2016, CS cases increased significantly in almost all Brazilian states, most notably in the South, Southeast, and Central-West macroregions, from 2001–2017 and the relative risk (RR) of SiP increased around 400% (RR: 1,00 to 445,50). Considering the epidemiological scenario of the infection in Brazil, it is necessary to enhance preventive, control and eradication measures.

Background: Chagas disease (CD) serological screening at blood banks is usually performed by a single highly sensitive serological assay, with chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs) being the method of choice. CLIAs employ recombinant, fusion peptides and/or chimeric antigens that selectively capture anti‐Trypanosoma cruzi antibodies. However, despite high sensitivity, the ability of these tests to identify CD‐positive cases should be evaluated against T. cruzi strains circulating in specific locales. Herein, we used a latent class analysis (LCA) approach employing an array of four chimeric antigens to assess the diagnostic performance of the Liaison XL Murex Chagas CLIA for the detection of anti‐T. cruzi IgG in serum samples.Study Design and Methods: The study included a panel of 5014 serum samples collected from volunteer blood donors at the Hematology and Hemotherapy Foundation of the State of Bahia, submitted to anti‐T. cruzi antibody detection using Liaison Chagas CLIA and LCA as a reference test in the absence of a gold standard.Results: LCA classified 4993 samples as negative, while positivity for T. cruzi antibodies was predicted in 21 samples. Compared with LCA, CLIA demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 76.2% and 99.5%, respectively, providing an overall accuracy of 99.4%.Discussion: In blood banks lacking a de facto highly sensitive screening immunoassay, the low sensitivity offered by Liaison Chagas CLIA renders it unsuitable for standalone use in serological screening procedures for CD. Moreover, blood banks are encouraged to carefully assess the ability of diagnostic methods to identify local T. cruzi strains in circulation.

Background: Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) are generally the chosen test for Chagas disease (CD) diagnosis; however, its performance depends on the antigen preparation adsorbed to the solid phase, which may lead to false-positive results and cross-reactions. The use of chimeric recombinant antigens can overcome this limitation. Four chimeric antigens from Trypanosoma cruzi (IBMP-8.1, IBMP-8.2, IBMP-8.3 and IBMP-8.4) were developed and evaluated in phase I, II and III studies using indirect ELISA as diagnostic platform. However, peroxidase-labeled secondary anti-human IgG antibody, which is employed in indirect ELISAs, limits its use for the detection of species-specific and class-specific antibodies. To overcome this limitation, peroxidase-labeled antigens can be utilized, diagnosing both acute or chronic infection, in a species and immunoglobulin class-independent manner, through the use of a double-antigen sandwich ELISA (DAgS-ELISA). We aimed to evaluate and validate the diagnostic performance of the chimeric antigens IBMP-8.1, IBMP-8.2, IBMP-8.3 and IBMP-8.4 in the DAgS-ELISA platform. Methodology/Principal findings: DAgS-ELISA was optimized by checkerboard titration. In phase I study, 207 positive and 205 negative samples were evaluated. Cross-reactivity to other infections was also assessed using 68 samples. The selected conditions for the tests utilized 25 ng of antigen per well and the conjugate diluted at 1:2,000 for all molecules. In the phase I study, the areas under the curve of IBMP-8.1, IBMP-8.2, IBMP-8.3 and IBMP-8.4 were 98.7%, 99.5%, 98.6% and 98.8%, respectively. Among the positive samples, IBMP-8.1 antigen classified 53 (25.6%) as false negative, IBMP-8.2, 27 (13%), IBMP-8.3, 24 (11.6%) and IBMP-8.4, 43 (20.8%), giving sensitivities of 74.4%, 87%, 88.4% and 79.2%, respectively. The only antigen that did not reach 100% specificity was IBMP-8.3, with 96.6%. IBMP-8.3 was also the only molecule to show cross-reactivity with HTLV. Conclusions/Significance: DAgS-ELISA is a promising tool for immunodiagnosis, and despite the high AUC values, the performance of this assay was different from the values obtained by our group when using these antigens in the indirect ELISA, for this reason, improvements are being considered to increase the sensitivity of the DAgS-ELISA.

: There are a variety of nontreponemal test (NTT) and treponemal test (TT) kits for the serologic diagnosis of syphilis. Because of the complexity of the infection (multiple clinical stages) and the different antigens used in these kits, a systematic evaluation of the accuracy of the currently available commercial tests is warranted. Our objective was to evaluate the performance of commercially available tests for the diagnosis of syphilis infection. In this study, we analyzed one NTT (Venereal Disease Research Laboratory [VDRL] test, Wiener Laboratories, Rosario, Argentina) and two TTs (fluorescent treponemal antibody absorption [FTA-ABS] test, Euroimmun, Lübeck, Germany, and syphilis recombinant ELISA v. 4.0 test [ELISA], Wiener Laboratories, Rosario, Argentina) using a panel of 187 samples, including serum samples from 31 individuals with primary syphilis, 77 with secondary syphilis, and 79 with latent syphilis. An additional 192 samples from uninfected individuals and 323 serum samples from individuals with other diseases were included. The sensitivities of the VDRL, ELISA, and FTA-ABS tests were 97.9%, 100%, and 96.3%, respectively. The VDRL and ELISA tests showed a specificity of 100%, and the FTA-ABS test showed a specificity of 99.5%. Accuracy was 98.9% for the VDRL test, 100% for the ELISA, and 97.9% for the FTA-ABS test. For primary, secondary, and latent syphilis, the ELISA achieved a diagnostic performance of 100%, whereas the sensitivity for the VDRL and FTA-ABS tests ranged from 96.8% to 98.7% and 93.7% to 98.7%, respectively. No difference was observed when the tests were used as traditional or reverse algorithms. In general, all three tests are able to discriminate positive and negative samples for syphilis, regardless of the diagnostic algorithm.

This study evaluated the performance of recombinant receptor binding domain (RBD) protein-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (RBD-ELISAs) for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgM antibodies. In this study, 705 sera from SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals and 315 sera from healthy individuals were analyzed. The RBD-ELISA IgG exhibited high specificity (99.1%) and moderate sensitivity (48.0%), with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 73.5%. RBD-ELISA IgM demonstrated specificity at 94.6% and sensitivity at 51.1%, with an accuracy of 72.8%. Both assays displayed improved performance when analyzing samples collected 15-21 days post-symptom onset, achieving sensitivity and accuracy exceeding 88% and 90%, respectively. Combining RBD-ELISA IgG and IgM in parallel analysis enhanced sensitivity to 98.6% and accuracy to 96.2%. Comparing these RBD-ELISAs with commercially available tests, the study found overlapping sensitivity and similar specificity values. Notably, the combined RBD-ELISA IgG and IgM showed superior performance. Cross-reactivity analysis revealed low false-positive rates (4.4% for IgG, 3.7% for IgM), primarily with viral infections. This research underscores the potential of RBD-based ELISAs for COVID-19 diagnosis, especially when assessing samples collected 15-21 days post-symptom onset and utilizing a parallel testing approach. The RBD protein's immunogenicity and specificity make it a valuable tool for serodiagnosis, offering an alternative to polymerase chain reaction-based methods, particularly in resource-limited settings.

COVID-19 laboratory diagnosis primarily relies on molecular tests, highly sensitive during early infection stages with high viral loads. As the disease progresses, sensitivity decreases, requiring antibody detection. Since the beginning of the pandemic, serological tests have been developed and made available in Brazil, but their diagnostic performance varies. This study evaluated the IBMP ELISA IgA/IgM/IgG COVID-19 kit performance in detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. A total of 90 samples, including 64 from COVID-19 patients and 26 pre-pandemic donors, were assessed based on time post symptom onset (0–7, 8–14, and 15–21 days). The kit showed 61% sensitivity, 100% specificity, and 72% accuracy overall. Sensitivity varied with time, being 25%, 57%, and 96% for 0–7, 8–14, and 15–21 days, respectively. Similar variations were noted in other commercial tests. The Gold ELISA COVID-19 (IgG/IgM) had sensitivities of 31%, 71%, and 100%, while the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 NCP ELISA (IgG) and Anti-SARS-CoV-2 NCP ELISA (IgM) showed varying sensitivities. The IBMP ELISA kit displayed high diagnostic capability, especially as the disease progressed, complementing COVID-19 diagnosis. Reproducibility assessment revealed minimal systematic and analytical errors. In conclusion, the IBMP ELISA IgA/IgM/IgG COVID-19 kit is a robust tool for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, increasing in efficacy over the disease course, and minimizing false negatives in RT-PCR COVID-19 diagnosis.