Immune response-eliciting exposure to Campylobacter vastly exceeds the incidence of clinically overt campylobacteriosis but is associated with similar risk factors: A nationwide serosurvey in the Netherlands - 15/08/18
, Peter Teunis a, Ingrid Friesema a, Eelco Franz a, Wim Ang c, Wilfrid van Pelt a, Lapo Mughini-Gras a, dHighlights |
• | Campylobacter seroincidence was 1.6 per person-year and seroprevalence was 68%. |
• | This is ∼285 times higher than the incidence of clinical cases. |
• | Risk factors for exposure were similar to those for clinical cases. |
• | Exposure to Campylobacter was higher in adults, but clinical cases peak in children. |
• | These methods provide a precise, easy to interpret way to analyze serological data. |
Summary |
Background |
We aimed to estimate population-level exposure to Campylobacter and associated risk factors, using three approaches for serological data analysis.
Methods |
Nationwide, population-based serosurvey in the Netherlands (Feb 2006–Jun 2007). Anti-Campylobacter IgG, IgM and IgA were measured using ELISA, and analysed via: a) seroincidence estimation, using reference values of antibody peak levels and decay rates over-time after Campylobacter exposure; b) two normal distributions of true positives/negatives fitted to the IgG distribution to derive seroprevalence and individual probability of being positive/negative; and c) IgG levels. Risk factors were analysed using multiple linear regressions.
Results |
From 1559 respondents, seroincidence was estimated at 1.61 infections/person-year (95%CI:1.58–1.64) and seroprevalence at 68.1% (65.4–70.9). The three approaches identified similar risk factors, although seroincidence had higher power and results were interpretable as risk: seroincidence was higher in females [exp(b) = 1.07(1.04–1.11)], older ages [vs. 15–34 years; for < 5, 5–14, 35–54 and 55–70 years: 0.60(0.58–0.63), 0.74(0.71–0.78), 1.08(1.03–1.13) and 1.08(1.01–1.16), respectively], non-Dutch background [Moroccan/Turkish: 1.25(1.14–1.37); Caribbean: 1.14(1.03–1.25)], low socioeconomic status [1.05(1.01–1.10)], traveling outside Europe [1.05(1.01–1.09)], and eating undercooked meat [1.04(1.01–1.08)].
Conclusion |
Campylobacter exposure is much higher than clinical infection rates, but risk factors are similar to those previously described.Seroincidence is a powerful measure to study Campylobacter epidemiology, and is preferred over other methods.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Campylobacter, Surveys and questionnaires, Serology, Incidence, Prevalence, Risk factors
Plan
Vol 77 - N° 3
P. 171-177 - septembre 2018 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Burkholderia cepacia complex infections: More complex than the bacterium name suggest
- Maroun M. Sfeir
- Elective distribution of resistance to beta-lactams among Enterobacter cloacae genetic clusters
- Simon Garinet, Vincent Fihman, Hervé Jacquier, Stéphane Corvec, Alban Le Monnier, Thomas Guillard, Vincent Cattoir, Jean-Ralph Zahar, Paul-Louis Woerther, Etienne Carbonnelle, Alain Wargnier, Solen Kernéis, Philippe C Morand, GMC ?
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?