Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose of Review This review seeks to describe the updates in the literature – particularly with regards to the epidemiology and diagnosis of Chagas disease. Additionally, this paper describes updates to the antiparasitic treatment for Chagas disease. Recent Findings With regards to changing epidemiology, autochthonous cases are being found within the USA in addition to Latin America. Additionally, there appears to be more intermixing of discrete typing units—meaning, they are not confined to specific geographic regions. Screening for Chagas disease is recommended in persons who lived in areas with endemic Chagas, persons wtih family member diagnosed with Chagas Disease, persons who have lived in homes of natural material in Latin America, and persons with history of kissing bug bites. Treatment for the parasitic infection remains limited to benznidazole and nifurtimox, and the role of these treatments in Chagas cardiomyopathy has not yet been definitively defined. Finally, indications for and management of heart transplant in the setting of Chagas disease are discussed. Future Research Use of antiparasitics during chronic chagas disease should be further explored. Additionally, future research identifying other markers of infection would be valuable to defining cure from infection.

Nifurtimox is a recommended treatment for Chagas disease, but data from treated children are limited. We investigated the efficacy, safety and tolerability of nifurtimox administered as divisible, dispersible 30 mg and 120 mg tablets in children with Chagas disease. In this blinded, controlled study conducted January 2016–July 2018, 330 patients aged <18 years from 25 medical centres across three South American countries were randomised 2:1 to nifurtimox 10–20 mg/kg/day (aged <12 years) or 8–10 mg/kg/day (aged ≥12 years) for 60 days (n = 219), or for 30 days plus placebo for 30 days (n = 111) (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02625974). The primary outcome was anti- Trypanosoma cruzi serological response (negative seroconversion or seroreduction ≥20% in mean optical density from baseline determined by two conventional enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays) at 12 months in the 60-day treatment group versus historical placebo controls. Nifurtimox for 60 days achieved negative seroconversion (n = 10) and seroreduction (n = 62) in 72 patients (serological response 32.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 26.4%, 39.3%, of all treated patients), confirming superiority relative to the upper 95% CI of 16% for controls. In patients aged <8 months, 10/12 treated for 60 days (83.3%) and 5/7 treated for 30 days (71.4%) achieved negative seroconversion. Overall serological response was lower for 30-day than for 60-day nifurtimox (between-treatment difference 14.0% [95% CI 3.7%, 24.2%]). The frequency of T . cruzi- positive quantitative polymerase chain reactions decreased substantially from baseline levels (60-day regimen 53.4% versus 1.4%; 30-day regimen 51.4% versus 4.5%). Study drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), which were observed in 62 patients (28.3%) treated for 60 days and 29 patients (26.1%) treated for 30 days, were generally mild or moderate and resolved without sequelae; 4.2% of all TEAEs led to nifurtimox discontinuation. Age- and weight-adjusted nifurtimox for 60 days achieved a serological response at 12 months post-treatment that was superior to historical placebo, was well tolerated and had a favourable safety profile in children with Chagas disease. Although, at 1 year serological follow-up, efficacy of the shorter nifurtimox treatment was not comparable to the 60-day treatment regimen for the overall study population, further long-term follow-up of the patients will provide important information about the progress of serological conversion in children treated with nifurtimox, as well as the potential efficacy difference between the two regimens over time.

Abstract Background There are major shortfalls in the identification and screening of at-risk migrant groups. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a new digital tool (IS-MiHealth) integrated into the electronic patient record system of primary care centres in detecting prevalent migrant infections. IS-MiHealth provides targeted recommendations to health professionals for screening multiple infections, including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B and C, active tuberculosis (TB), Chagas disease, strongyloidiasis and schistosomiasis, based on patient characteristics (including variables of country of origin, age and sex). Methods A pragmatic pilot cluster-randomized-controlled trial was deployed from March to December 2018. Eight primary care centres in Catalonia, Spain, were randomly allocated 1:1 to use of the digital tool for screening, or to routine care. The primary outcome was the monthly diagnostic yield of all aggregated infections. Intervention and control sites were compared before and after implementation with respect to their monthly diagnostic yield using regression models. This study is registered on international standard randomised controlled trial number (ISRCTN) (ISRCTN14795012). Results A total of 15 780 migrants registered across the eight centres had at least one visit during the intervention period (March–December 2018), of which 14 598 (92.51%) fulfilled the criteria to be screened for at least one infection. There were 210 (2.57%) individuals from the intervention group with new diagnoses compared with 113 (1.49%) from the control group [odds ratio: 2.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.63–2.64, P < 0.001]. The intervention centres raised their overall monthly diagnosis rate to 5.80 (95% CI 1.23–10.38, P = 0.013) extra diagnoses compared with the control centres. This monthly increase in diagnosis in intervention centres was also observed if we consider all cases together of HIV, hepatitis B and C, and active TB cases [2.72 (95% CI 0.43–5.00); P = 0.02] and was observed as well for the parasitic infections’ group (Chagas disease, strongyloidiasis and schistosomiasis) 2.58 (95% CI 1.60–3.57; P < 0.001). Conclusions The IS-MiHealth increased screening rate and diagnostic yield for key infections in migrants in a population-based primary care setting. Further testing and development of this new tool is warranted in larger trials and in other countries.

Background Either benznidazole (BZN) or nifurtimox (NFX) is recommended as equivalent to treat Trypanosoma cruzi infection. Nonetheless, supportive data from randomised trials is limited to individuals treated with BZN in southern cone countries of Latin America. Methods The goal of this randomised, concealed, blind, parallel-group trial is to inform the trypanocidal efficacy and safety of NFX and its equivalence to BZN among individuals with T. cruzi positive serology (TC+). Eligible individuals are TC+, 20–65 years old, with no apparent symptoms/signs or uncontrolled risk factors for cardiomyopathy and at negligible risk of re-infection. Consenting individuals (adherent to a 10-day placebo run-in phase) receive a 120-day BID blinded treatment with NFX, BZN or matching placebo (2:2:1 ratio). The four active medication arms include (1) a randomly allocated sequence of 60-day, conventional-dose (60CD) regimes (BZN 300 mg/day or NFX 480 mg/day, ratio 1:1), followed or preceded by a 60-day placebo treatment, or (2) 120-day half-dose (120HD) regimes (BZN 150 mg/day or NFX 240 mg/day, ratio 1:1). The primary efficacy outcome is the proportion of participants testing positive at least once for up to three polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays (1 + PCR) 12–18 months after randomisation. A composite safety outcome includes moderate to severe adverse reactions, consistent blood marker abnormalities or treatment abandons. The trial outside Colombia (expected to recruit at least 60% of participants) is pragmatic; it may be open-label and not include all treatment groups, but it must adhere to the randomisation and data administration system and guarantee a blinded efficacy outcome evaluation. Our main comparisons include NFX groups with placebo (for superiority), NFX versus BZN groups and 60CD versus 120HD groups (for non-inferiority) and testing for the agent-dose and group-region interactions. Assuming a 1 + PCR ≥ 75% in the placebo group, up to 25% among BZN-treated and an absolute difference of up to ≥ 25% with NFX to claim its trypanocidal effect, 60–80 participants per group (at least 300 from Colombia) are needed to test our hypotheses (80–90% power; one-sided alpha level 1%). Discussion The EQUITY trial will inform the trypanocidal effect and equivalence of nitroderivative agents NFX and BZN, particularly outside southern cone countries. Its results may challenge current recommendations and inform choices for these agents. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02369978 . Registered on 24 February 2015.

Background Retrospective observational studies suggest that transmission of Trypanosoma cruzi does not occur in treated women when pregnant later in life. The level of parasitemia is a known risk factor for congenital transmission. Benznidazole (BZN) is the drug of choice for preconceptional treatment to reduce parasitic load. The fear of treatment-related side effects limits the implementation of the Argentine guideline recommending BZN 60d/300 mg (or equivalent) treatment of T. cruzi seropositive women during the postpartum period to prevent transmission in a future pregnancy. A short and low dose BZN treatment might reduce major side effects and increase compliance, but its efficacy to reduce T. cruzi parasitic load compared to the standard 60d/300 mg course is not yet established. Clinical trials testing alternative BZN courses among women of reproductive age are urgently needed. Methods and design We are proposing to perform a double-blinded, non-inferiority randomized controlled trial comparing a short low dose 30-day treatment with BZN 150 mg/day (30d/150 mg) vs. BZN 60d/300 mg. We will recruit not previously treated T. cruzi seropositive women with a live birth during the postpartum period in Argentina, randomize them at 6 months postpartum, and follow them up with the following specific aims: Specific aim 1: to measure the effect of BZN 30d/150 mg compared to 60d/300 mg preconceptional treatment on parasitic load measured by the frequency of positive Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) (primary outcome) and by real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR), immediately and 10 months after treatment. Specific aim 2: to measure the frequency of serious adverse events and/or any adverse event leading to treatment interruption. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov . Identifier: NCT03672487 . Registered 14 September 2018

Abstract Aims The SHIFT trial showed that ivabradine reduced heart rate (HR) and the risk of cardiovascular outcomes. Concerns remain over the efficacy and safety of ivabradine on heart failure (HF) due to Chagas disease (ChD). We therefore conducted a post hoc analysis of the SHIFT trial to investigate the effect of ivabradine in these patients. Methods and results SHIFT was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in symptomatic systolic stable HF, HR ≥ 70 b.p.m., and in sinus rhythm. The ChD HF subgroup included 38 patients, 20 on ivabradine, and 18 on placebo. The ChD HF subgroup showed high prevalence of bundle branch right block and, compared with the overall SHIFT population, lower systolic blood pressure; higher use of diuretics, cardiac glycosides, and antialdosterone agents; and lower use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker or target daily dose of beta-blocker. ChD HF presented a poor prognosis (all-cause mortality at 2 years was ~60%). The mean twice-daily dose of ivabradine was 6.26 ± 1.15 mg and placebo 6.43 ± 1.55 mg. Ivabradine reduced HR from 77.9 ± 3.8 to 62.3 ± 10.1 b.p.m. (P = 0.005) and improved functional class (P = 0.02). A trend towards reduction in all-cause death was observed in ivabradine arm vs. placebo (P = 0.07). Ivabradine was not associated with serious bradycardia, atrioventricular block, hypotension, or syncope. Conclusions ChD HF is an advanced form of HF with poor prognosis. Ivabradine was effective in reducing HR in these patients and improving functional class. Although our results are based on a very limited sample and should be interpreted with caution, they suggest that ivabradine may have a favourable benefit–risk profile in ChD HF patients.

Chagas disease is an anthropozoonosis from the American continent that has spread from its original boundaries through migration. It is caused by the protozoan Trypanosoma cruzi, which was identified in the first decade of the 20th century. Once acute infection resolves, patients can develop chronic disease, which in up to 30–40% of cases is characterised by cardiomyopathy, arrhythmias, megaviscera, and, more rarely, polyneuropathy and stroke. Even after more than a century, many challenges remain unresolved, since epidemiological control and diagnostic, therapeutic, and prognostic methods must be improved. In particular, the efficacy and tolerability profile of therapeutic agents is far from ideal. Furthermore, the population affected is older and more complex (eg, immunosuppressed patients and patients with cancer). Nevertheless, in recent years, our knowledge of Chagas disease has expanded, and the international networking needed to change the course of this deadly disease during the 21st century has begun.

The infection of millions of people with the protozoan parasite Trypanosoma cruzi is a public health concern. Treatments for Chagas' disease remain marginally effective. Cardiac and gastrointestinal complications dominate the clinical picture. Chagas’ disease is caused by the protozoan parasite Trypanosoma cruzi , which is transmitted when the infected feces of the triatomine vector are inoculated through a bite site or through an intact mucous membrane of the mammalian host (Figure 1). 2 Vectorborne transmission is limited to areas of North America, Central America, and South America. Both in endemic and in nonendemic areas, other infection routes include transfusion, organ and bone marrow transplantation, and congenital transmission. Outbreaks attributed to contaminated food or drink have been reported in northern South America, where transmission cycles involving wild vector populations and mammalian reservoir hosts are . . .

Chagas disease persists as a global public health problem due to the high morbidity and mortality burden. Despite the possibility of a cure and advances in transmission control, epidemiological transformations, such as urbanisation and globalisation, and the emerging importance of oral and vertical transmission mean that Chagas disease should be considered an emerging disease, with new cases occurring worldwide. Important barriers to diagnosis, treatment, and care remain, resulting in repressed numbers of reported cases, which in turn leads to inadequate public policies. The validation of new diagnostic tools and treatment options is needed, as existing tools pose serious limitations to access to health care. Integrated models of surveillance, with community and intersectional participation, embedded in the concept of One Health, are essential for control. In addition, mitigation strategies for the main social determinants of health, including difficulties imposed by migration, are important to improve access to comprehensive health care in a globalised scenario.

Chagas disease is a chronic, systemic, parasitic infection caused by the protozoan Trypanosoma cruzi, and was discovered in 1909. The disease affects about 8 million people in Latin America, of whom 30–40% either have or will develop cardiomyopathy, digestive megasyndromes, or both. In the past three decades, the control and management of Chagas disease has undergone several improvements. Large-scale vector control programmes and screening of blood donors have reduced disease incidence and prevalence. Although more effective trypanocidal drugs are needed, treatment with benznidazole (or nifurtimox) is reasonably safe and effective, and is now recommended for a widened range of patients. Improved models for risk stratification are available, and certain guided treatments could halt or reverse disease progression. By contrast, some challenges remain: Chagas disease is becoming an emerging health problem in non-endemic areas because of growing population movements; early detection and treatment of asymptomatic individuals are underused; and the potential benefits of novel therapies (eg, implantable cardioverter defibrillators) need assessment in prospective randomised trials.