PlumX Metrics
Embed PlumX Metrics

Effects of accounting for interval-censored antibody titer decay on seroincidence in a longitudinal cohort study of leptospirosis

American Journal of Epidemiology, ISSN: 1476-6256, Vol: 190, Issue: 5, Page: 893-899
2021
  • 3
    Citations
  • 0
    Usage
  • 31
    Captures
  • 0
    Mentions
  • 0
    Social Media
Metric Options:   Counts1 Year3 Year

Metrics Details

Article Description

Accurate measurements of seroincidence are critical for infections undercounted by reported cases, such as inf luenza, arboviral diseases, and leptospirosis. However, conventional methods of interpreting paired serological samples do not account for antibody titer decay, resulting in underestimated seroincidence rates. To improve interpretation of paired sera, we modeled exponential decay of interval-censored microscopic agglutination test titers using a historical data set of leptospirosis cases traced to a point source exposure in Italy in 1984.We then applied that decay rate to a longitudinal cohort study conducted in a high-transmission setting in Salvador, Brazil (2013-2015). We estimated a decay constant of 0.926 (95% confidence interval: 0.918, 0.934) titer dilutions per month. Accounting for decay in the cohort increased the mean infection rate to 1.21 times the conventionally defined rate over 6-month intervals (range, 1.10-1.36) and 1.82 times that rate over 12-month intervals (range, 1.65-2.07). Improved estimates of infection in longitudinal data have broad epidemiologic implications, including comparing studies with different sampling intervals, improving sample size estimation, and determining risk factors for infection and the role of acquired immunity. Our method of estimating and accounting for titer decay is generalizable to other infections defined using interval-censored serological assays.

Bibliographic Details

Owers Bonner, Katharine A; Cruz, Jaqueline S; Sacramento, Gielson A; de Oliveira, Daiana; Nery, Nivison; Carvalho, Mayara; Costa, Federico; Childs, James E; Ko, Albert I; Diggle, Peter J

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Medicine

Provide Feedback

Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know