Skip to main content
. 2022 Feb 14;9:832430. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.832430

Table 1.

Studies reporting the prevalence of S. stercoralis and HTLV-1 that met the selection criteria.

References Country Number of participants H+SS+ n (%) H+SS- n (%) H-SS+ n (%) H-SS- n (%) Diagnosis of HTLV-1 Diagnosis of SS
Einsiedel et al. (18) Australia 72 6 (8.3) 22 (30.6) 4 (5.6) 40 (55.6) EIA, PA, WB, PCR Serology
Robinson et al. (23) Jamaica 207 14 (6.8) 9 (4.3) 48 (23.2) 136 (65.7) ELISA, WB Serology
10 4 7 41 ELISA, WB Stool
Chieffi et al. (19) São Paulo, Brazil 152 11 (7.2) 80 (52.6) 1 (0.7) 60 (39.5) ELISA, WB Stool
Einsiedel et al. (19)* Australia 950 111 (9.9) 237 (26.5) 158 (13.9) 444 (49.6) PA, EIA, IFA, WB Serology
Chaturvedi et al. (24) Jamaica 288 17 (5.9) 117 (40.6) 18 (6.3) 136 (47.2) EIA, WB, PCR Serology
Furtado et al. (22) Pará, Brazil 100** 6 (6.0) 36 (36.0) 3 (3.0) 55 (55.0) ELISA, PCR Stool
Courouble et al. (20) Guadeloupe, French West Indies 238 37 (15.5) 82 (5.5) 13 (5.5) 106 (44.5) EIA, WB Serology

H, Human T-cell lymphotropic Virus Type 1; SS, Strongyloides stercoralis. + and – present positive and negative results. ELISA, Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; WB, Western blot; PA, Particle agglutination; EIA, Enzyme immunoassay; IFA, Immunofluorescence assay; PCR, Polymerase chain reaction; NR, Not reported.

*

Patients with borderline Strongyloids serology were not included.

**

Patients infected with HTLV-2 and their relatives, were included in the group not infected by HTLV-1.