From centuries ago, human hydatidosis is considered a prevalent parasitic zoonosis with common asymptomatic characteristics of the early infection and/or long after CE establishment, which renders difficult diagnosis (
1,
11); however, its identification and management have been considerably improved during last decades by the advent of sophisticated laboratory diagnostics, including serological and imaging techniques, which are primary detection methods (
4). Notwithstanding, the cystic stage of
E. granulosus handles various mechanisms, consisting of antigenic variation, antigenic mimicry, immunologic diversion, immunologic subversion, and immune indifference for escaping from the host defense (
15), a level of immune response of Th2 type and IgG1, IgG4, and IgE isotypes is usually elicited by hydatid cysts (
11,
16) that is principally dependent on the host species, immune status, infected organ, and the involved genotypes and/or haplotypes of the parasite (
16). The accurate recognition of such responses are substantially critical for parasite clearance as well as developing immunodiagnostic kits and efficacious vaccines (
11,
16). Serodiagnosis of CE using a potent antigenic source i.e. hydatid cyst fluid provides early chemotherapy, more effective treatment, and post-operation follow-up (
12). For this aim, multiple serologic tests, including Casoni, latex agglutination, indirect hemagglutination, complement fixation, enzyme immunoassay, immunoelectrophoresis, western blot, and ELISA assays have been developed in order to accurately detect the hydatid cyst-specific antibodies or antigens (
17,
18). Owing to the possible cross-reactions with other relatively-closed helminth parasites such as
E. multilocularis,
Taenia hydatigena, and
Taenia ovis, the quality and efficacy of CE serodiagnosis in suspected cases are still controversial (
12). Herein, we have evaluated the comparative sensitivity and specificity of a designed in-house ELISA using native Ag B and a commercial ELISA kit to detect anti-hydatidosis IgG among surgically-confirmed cases, heterologous and control groups in Ahvaz, southwest of Iran.
Altogether, sera rom 50 hydatid cyst patients, 20 healthy individuals and 20 fellows with non-CE diseases were employed in our investigation. Considering surgical intervention as the gold standard, the sensitivity of native Ag B ELISA and the commercial kit was 100% and 44%, respectively. Among other examined fellows, a subject out of the heterologous group infected with giardiasis and one out of the control group were reported to be positive with native assay; as a consequence of the highest sensitivity of this test, both cases should be monitored using imaging techniques to confirm or reject the contingency of hydatidosis. Our findings on the sensitivity of native ELISA was consistent and higher than similar studies having a range of 40 - 81 patients with hydatid cyst (the case group) and 85-89% sensitivity (
19-
21). Some investigations documented a sensitivity range of 84% to 96%, especially because of type of antigen, antigenic source, and purification method (
20,
22,
23).
Despite the commercial kit is the gold standard, all heterologous and control individuals were negative by such kit; however, a healthy person and a heterologous individual with giardiasis were positive using native Ag B ELISA test. Accordingly, sensitivity and specificity for IgG assessment by in-house test was 97% and 95%, respectively. Other investigations also reported 95-98% specificity rates (
19,
24). Cross-reactions are of utmost importance in specificity appraisal of a particular assay. For hydatid cyst immunodiagnostics developments, sera from cysticercosis, schistosomiasis, onchocerciasis and sarcoidosis patients are frequently used for cross-reaction assessments. Thereby, lack of such infections in the area and/or inaccessibility to sera of such patients would entail the higher specificity of designed in-house assays.
In the current study, most infected cases were between the ages of 21 and 40 that is consistent with findings of similar studies. Haniloo et al. documented the most cases of infection in the age range of 10 and 40, while hydatid cyst was less detected among over 50 individuals (
25). Furthermore, Aflaki and colleagues discovered most hydatidosis patients between the ages of 20 - 30 and 30 - 40 (
26). On the one hand, these age ranges are probably most exposed to infection sources; on the other hand, the chronic nature of CE and its long-lasting incubation period make it more prominent in such ages. Nevertheless, CE establishment likely occurs in the childhood, as the seroprevalence of hydatidosis in the first two decades of lifetime is remarkable analogous to middle Ages. Children and younger adults in endemic regions are readily infected with hydatidosis, due to the low hygiene practices and contact to infective canids (
27,
28). Additionally, hydatid cyst seroprevalence noticeably is decreased in individuals with over 50 ages, which possibly occurs owing to the lower exposure to sources of infective eggs, cyst inactivation and/or self-cure. The current investigation showed a 3:2 ratio for female and male fellows, respectively, suggesting more contact of females to egg-shedding dogs or egg-contaminated vegetables. In Aflaki et al. study, also, females were 1.5 fold more infected to echinococcal cysts than in females because of close contact to dogs (
26). However, Rafiei and Craig study using ELISA on 4,569 individuals found no statistically significant difference between two genders regarding hydatidosis (
29).