Next Article in Journal
Impact of COVID-19 on Tuberculosis Case Detection and Treatment Outcomes in Sierra Leone
Previous Article in Journal
A Cluster of Dengue Cases in Travelers: A Clinical Series from Thailand
Previous Article in Special Issue
An Unsupervised Algorithm for Host Identification in Flaviviruses
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Onchocerciasis Fingerprints in the Geriatric Population: Does Host Immunity Play a Role?

by
Cabirou Mounchili Shintouo
1,2,3,
Robert Adamu Shey
3,
Tony Mets
1,2,
Luc Vanhamme
4,
Jacob Souopgui
4,†,
Stephen Mbigha Ghogomu
3,† and
Rose Njemini
1,2,*,†
1
Frailty in Ageing Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, B-1090 Brussels, Belgium
2
Department of Gerontology, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, B-1090 Brussels, Belgium
3
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Science, University of Buea, Buea P.O. Box 63, Cameroon
4
Department of Molecular Biology, Institute of Biology and Molecular Medicine, IBMM, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Gosselies Campus, 126040 Gosselies, Belgium
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors are last authors on this work.
Trop. Med. Infect. Dis. 2021, 6(3), 153; https://doi.org/10.3390/tropicalmed6030153
Submission received: 16 July 2021 / Revised: 16 August 2021 / Accepted: 18 August 2021 / Published: 19 August 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Viral-Host Metabolic Interactions)

Abstract

:
One of the most debilitating consequences of aging is the progressive decline in immune function, known as immunosenescence. This phenomenon is characterized by a shift in T-cell phenotypes, with a manifest decrease of naive T-cells—dealing with newly encountered antigens—and a concomitant accumulation of senescent and regulatory T-cells, leading to a greater risk of morbidity and mortality in older subjects. Additionally, with aging, several studies have unequivocally revealed an increase in the prevalence of onchocerciasis infection. Most lymphatic complications, skin and eye lesions due to onchocerciasis are more frequent among the elderly population. While the reasons for increased susceptibility to onchocerciasis with age are likely to be multi-factorial, age-associated immune dysfunction could play a key role in the onset and progression of the disease. On the other hand, there is a growing consensus that infection with onchocerciasis may evoke deleterious effects on the host’s immunity and exacerbate immune dysfunction. Indeed, Onchocerca volvulus has been reported to counteract the immune responses of the host through molecular mimicry by impairing T-cell activation and interfering with the processing of antigens. Moreover, reports indicate impaired cellular and humoral immune responses even to non-parasite antigens in onchocerciasis patients. This diminished protective response may intensify the immunosenescence outcomes, with a consequent vulnerability of those affected to additional diseases. Taken together, this review is aimed at contributing to a better understanding of the immunological and potential pathological mechanisms of onchocerciasis in the older population.

1. Introduction

The elderly population, particularly the group over 85 years, is growing very rapidly. By 2050, for the first time in human history, the elderly are expected to comprise more than one-fifth of the world’s population [1]. Even more alarming is the case of some developing countries, where the older population is increasing three times faster than the global average [2]. These demographic transformations result in an increased incidence of aging-related diseases, with many consequences, including costs for households, strains on public finances, decreasing economic growth, and increasing hospitalization. Notwithstanding, unlike in most developed countries where there is provision to take care of the elderly population, in many developing countries, the populations are aging without any safeguard measures being taken to support the older population [3]. As a result, the incidence of chronic infectious conditions—commonly encountered in older people in developing countries—has increased and is expected to rise steeply in the coming years.
Human onchocerciasis is one of the most prevalent infectious diseases occurring in developing countries [4]. It is a vector-borne parasitic neglected tropical disease caused by infection with the filarial worm Onchocerca volvulus (O. volvulus) [5]. The disease is transmitted by black flies (Simulium) that acquire microfilariae (larval stage 1) during a blood meal from infected humans. Within 10 to 12 days, the microfilariae mature into infective larvae (larval stage 3) and can be transmitted to humans during a subsequent blood meal, where they develop into adult worms after several months. The adult worms live in subcutaneous tissues in humans for about 15 years, with adult female worms releasing close to 1600 microfilariae daily [6,7]. Worldwide, about 20.9 million people are reported to be infected with the parasite—of which 99% live in Africa—with 14.6 million having skin disease and 1.15 million suffering from irreversible unilateral or bilateral visual loss [8]. Ivermectin is the only drug approved for mass treatment of onchocerciasis. Ivermectin enhances immune function and induces immunological processes that reduce microfilariae density [9]. This dramatic reduction of microfilariae after therapy is marked by a gradual increase in the number of circulating CD4 + T-cells, which double within 1 month after treatment and return to the pretreatment baseline level by 14 months after treatment [10]. However, the drug is not able to kill the adult worms; thus, treatment needs to be repeated for the lifespan of the adult worm, and, in some endemic regions, the disease is still persistent after many years of treatment [11].
Several studies have unequivocally revealed an increase in the prevalence of onchocerciasis infection among older people, aged 50 years and above, living in endemic regions [12,13,14,15]. Most lymphatic complications, skin and eye lesions due to onchocerciasis are more frequent among the elderly population. While the reasons for increased susceptibility to onchocerciasis with age are likely to be multi-factorial, age-associated immune dysfunction could play a key role in the onset and progression of the disease [16,17].

2. Immunological Features of Ageing

Ageing is accompanied by a progressive decline in immune function, referred to as immunosenescence [18,19]. At the cell level, T-cell sub-populations show major changes, resulting in a shift towards a less functional status, with a corresponding decrease in the number of naive T-cells (able to react to new challenges) and an accumulation of terminally differentiated T-cells (only reacting to one specific antigen) and senescent cells [20]. On the other hand, the thymus gland atrophies with age, leading to a significant decline in the thymic output of naïve T-cells [21,22,23]. These changes are key contributors to the process of aging and are associated with a greater risk of morbidity and mortality in older people [18]. Indeed, clinical reports indicate that the ability to mount primary immune responses against novel antigens reduces significantly with age [24], leading to a decrease in response to vaccines by elderly individuals [25,26,27] and an increase in their susceptibility to diseases [28,29,30,31]. This situation is further complicated by the aging-related accumulation of senescent T-cells that secrete pro-inflammatory substances and matrix-degrading enzymes [19,32,33], favorable for the development of diseases [34]. Age-related changes in eosinophil functional activity were observed upon the examination of eosinophil degranulation of eosinophil-derived neurotoxins when stimulated with interleukin (IL)-5. A significant decrease in the eosinophils from elderly individuals in comparison to younger individuals was observed [35]. Additionally, complement analysis revealed that an increase in age is associated with the enhanced functional activity of classical and alternative complement pathways. Also, terminal pathway components (C5, C8, and C9) increased with age, and this may be a mechanism to compensate for the low clearance of pathogens and apoptotic cells due to lower cellular immunity [36]. Furthermore, aging is associated with an increased in the function of regulatory T-cells that is aimed at fooling the immune system by producing anti-inflammatory cytokines [21]. Therefore, and more generally, immunosenescence has been associated with the increased vulnerability of older subjects to inflammation-related conditions [18].

Immunosenescence, Inflammaging, and Immune-Risk Profile in the Elderly

Inflammaging [37,38] and immune risk profile (IRP) [39] are two recent concepts regarding immunosenescence that are increasingly being recognized to be, at least in part, the cause of increased susceptibility to morbidity and mortality in older subjects. Inflammaging refers to a chronic, low-grade, but above baseline, systemic inflammation (occurring in the absence of acute infection) that is established during physiological aging [40]. It is associated with increased plasma levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor α, IL-1, and IL-6, acute phase reactants such as C reactive proteins, and soluble cytokine receptors such as the TGF-β receptor family and IL-17 receptor [41,42]. This phenomenon can be caused by a number of separate yet interconnected processes, which include: (1) an age-related buildup of senescent cells that have developed a secretory pro-inflammatory character, such as senescent innate immune cells; (2) an age-related buildup of misplaced self-molecules, such as cytoplasmic or cell-free nucleic acids, which can elicit innate immune responses by interacting with a variety of pattern recognition receptors; (3) a deficiency in central tolerance that causes self-tissue damage-induced inflammation by producing an increase in the release of self-reactive T-lymphocytes; (4) a change in the composition of the gut microbiota, which might influence inflammation based on immune system activity and lifestyle [43]. Despite its core physiological purpose as a defense mechanism against viruses or foreign substances, inflammation can be harmful to one’s health if it is sustained and protracted [44]. Accordingly, studies have shown that a heightened inflammatory state may play a central role in the pathogenesis of diseases, including Alzheimer’s disease [45], Parkinson’s disease, acute multiple sclerosis, atherosclerosis, age-related macular degeneration [46], diabetes mellitus [47], osteoporosis [48], and cancer [49,50].
On the other hand, IRP is characterized by a shift in T-cell sub-population types, manifested by an inverted CD4 +/CD8 + T-cell ratio, lower numbers, and proportions of naïve T-cells, with a concomitant increase of highly differentiated memory and senescent T-cells. In a Swedish longitudinal study involving persons older than 85 years, the best predictors of survival were reported to be the absence of inverted CD4/CD8 T-cell ratios and low counts of highly differentiated cells [51]. Additionally, IRP is strongly associated with seropositivity to chronic viral infections, particularly cytomegalovirus (CMV), probably due to the chronic antigenic load that CMV delivers to T-cells [52,53]. Indeed, age-related increases in memory CD8 + T-cells are paralleled by an increase in the proportion of CMV epitope-specific T-cells. Khan et al. [54] observed that individual CMV epitope-specific CD8 + T-cells could represent up to 23% of the total CD8+ T-cells in older adults with CMV infection. CMV-specific T-cells are highly differentiated cells marked by the lack of expression of the costimulatory receptors CD27 and CD28 [55]. CD28 expression is necessary for full cellular activation and proliferation upon T-cell stimulation, and loss of CD28 expression has a major impact on T-cell function [56]. Moreover, T-cells lacking CD28 may lead to inflammaging by producing large amounts of cytokines after stimulation [57]. In this light, the clonal expansion of CMV-specific CD8 + T-cells can exacerbate human T-cell immunosenescence and, thereby, modulate the responsiveness to diseases [58].

3. Immunological Responsiveness to Onchocerciasis

The protective immune response of individuals against O. volvulus is dependent on, amongst others, type 2 immune responses mediated by IgE and eosinophils [59,60,61]. Eosinophils have been reported to be involved in the destruction of microfilariae through an antibody-dependent mechanism [62]. The antibodies involved in this process are proposed to be of the IgG isotype [62,63], with IgG3 and IgG4 playing a protective and suppressive role, respectively [64]. These antibodies can induce efficient antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity reactions against O. volvulus larval stage 3 when combined with Th1 and/or Th2 cytokines [65,66]. Another mechanism by which eosinophils could destroy O. volvulus constituents, particularly larval stage 3, is through complement activation [67]. However, microfilariae avoid complement attack by inducing the cleavage of the complement 3 molecule into its inactive form [68]. Moreover, once established, the host’s immune system is unable to get rid of adult worms as they are capable of modulating the immune system in a way that is beneficial to their survival [69]. Indeed, O. volvulus has been reported to counteract the immune responses of the host through molecular mimicry [70,71] by impairing T-cell activation [72] and interfering with the processing of antigens [73]. In this light, there is growing evidence for the involvement of antigen specific regulatory T-cells (Tr1/Th3)—that produce anti-inflammatory cytokines, including IL-10 and transforming growth factor-β [74]—in the evasion of host immune responses by O. volvulus. Steel et al. [75] observed that the microfilariae release proteins that cause strong upregulation of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4, which bind to CD80 on antigen-presenting cells and generate IL-10. IL-10 suppresses the Th1-immune response, thereby promoting chronic onchocerciasis [76,77].
On the other hand, higher frequencies of memory CD4 + T-cells were observed in onchocerciasis individuals with a corresponding upregulation of Th2-related (IL-4, STAT6, and IL-13) and Th17-related (IL-17, IL-1b, IL-6, and IL-22) genes [78]. Noteworthy, when peripheral blood mononuclear cells from onchocerciasis patients were stimulated with an O. volvulus antigen, they produced significantly less interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) and IL-5 compared to healthy controls [79]. IFN-γ is one of the Th1 cytokines that are reported to be involved in cellular responses to Onchocerca antigens; it is an aid in protection against onchocerciasis [80]. Likewise, IL-5 has been shown to have a protective role in BALB/cBYJ mice when vaccinated against O. volvulus infective third-stage larvae [59]. Moreover, the lifespan of microfilariae is between 12–18 months [81], and their death usually results in severe inflammation, which is responsible for most of the disease’s symptoms [82,83]. This diminished protective response, in conjunction with a heightened liberation of pro-inflammatory cytokines [84,85], may foster chronic low-grade inflammation with a consequence vulnerability of those affected to additional diseases and poor vaccine responses. In this perspective, reports indicate impaired cellular and humoral immune responses even to non-parasite antigens in onchocerciasis patients [86,87]. Poor immunogenicity of the tetanus vaccine was observed in onchocerciasis patients [86,87,88]. Cooper et al. [86] demonstrated that concurrent infection with O. volvulus can reduce the immune response to an unrelated antigen—such as the tetanus toxoid—by a mechanism that is suggested to involve IL-10. Furthermore, the efficacy of BCG and rubella vaccinations were significantly lower in children infected with onchocerciasis [89], thereby reflecting the clinical severity of the disease.

4. Immunological Markers of Onchocerciasis

The Ov16 test is the only serological test that is used for the assessment of human onchocerciasis. However, it has a moderate sensitivity of 60–80% [90]. Therefore, biomarkers that can reliably identify patients with onchocerciasis are urgently needed to ensure effective disease management [91]. The host response to different O. volvulus antigens represents opportunities to measure immunological markers that have diagnostic or prognostic potential, although they may have to be interpreted in the context of the protein that is being investigated. For example, Lagatie et al. [92], upon identification of three immunodominant motifs scattered over the O. volvulus proteome, revealed that linear epitopes from these motifs have an atypical isotype profile that is dominated by IgG1, IgG3, IgE, and IgM. This isotype profile contradicts sharply with the response against other O. volvulus antigens (e.g., Ov-11, Ov-16, Ov-27, Ov-29, Ov-33) or crude extracts of O. volvulus, which are characterized by significantly higher levels of IgG4 antibodies [64,93,94].

5. Clinical Spectrum of Onchocerciasis and Ageing

O. volvulus infection has been reported in all age groups, from children younger than 10 years to adults over 50 years of age. Although not always consistent, reports have generally revealed an increase in the prevalence of onchocerciasis with increasing age (see Table 1) [12,13,14,15,95,96,97,98,99,100], and the duration of stay in an onchocerciasis-endemic community is thought to be one of the main predictors of onchocercal infection [13]. This may be ascribed to the fact that the rate of larval stage 3 infecting the human host is greater than the rate of death of the adult worms [13,15,95,96,98,101]. Hence, there is a continuous buildup of infection since the adult worms can stay for several years in the human host. In this light, Dana et al. [13] reported that individuals who lived in an onchocerciasis-endemic community for over 60 years were at almost 6 times higher risk of O. volvulus infection than individuals who had stayed in the community for less than 10 years. In addition, Dozie et al. [15] reported that the increase in the prevalence of the disease with advancing age may be due to the cumulative nature of infection of the parasite acquired early in life. Notwithstanding, the elderly population may be the most infected group because aging itself is accompanied by immune dysfunction. With aging, although there is a normal antibody response to recall antigens, the ability to manufacture high-affinity antibodies that can protect elderly individuals from infection wanes. Older persons not only create lower titers of antibodies, but they also create antibodies that demonstrate diminished functionalities (e.g., neutralizing and opsonizing activities) in comparison to those produced by younger persons [102,103]. This age-associated immune dysfunction contributes to the decline of protective responses by aged individuals against infections, with a consequent increased susceptibility to diseases [104,105,106].

5.1. Onchocerciasis and Susceptibility of Older Persons to Diseases

As mentioned above, infection with O. volvulus affects the host’s resistance to other diseases, resulting in a reduced life expectancy of the host [74,107,108]. If exposed to HIV, onchocerciasis patients have a greater likelihood of becoming HIV-positive than non-onchocerciasis individuals [109]. Additionally, a report has revealed that glaucoma patients have a higher prevalence of onchocerciasis compared to individuals that are not affected by glaucoma [110]. Furthermore, onchocerciasis patients are more susceptible to epilepsy [111,112]. The more pronounced susceptibility to diseases observed in onchocerciasis infected geriatric persons could be due to the cumulative effect of immunosuppression as a result of Onchocerca infection and age-related immunosenescence.

5.2. Lymphatic Complications Due to Onchocerciasis in the Elderly Population

O. volvulus obstructs lymph nodes and promotes microfilariae penetration, leading to lymphadenitis. In the preliminary stage, there is atrophy of germinal centers and sinus histiocytosis and, later, the replacement of lymphoid tissue by fibro-adipose tissue, which has a perivascular pattern in the later stages [113]. Lymphatic complications as a result of onchocerciasis are more distributed among the older population than the younger population [12,15,95,100,114] (see Table 2). Furthermore, some of the lymphatic complications predispose onchocerciasis elderly patients to other forms of lymphatic complications. For example, the development of hanging groin predisposes the individual to hernia [115].

5.3. Onchocercal Skin Lesions among the Elderly Population

Onchocercal skin lesions (OSLs) have been reported to increase with a corresponding increase with age [117,118] (see Table 3). OSLs are associated with negative psychosocial, physical, and economic burdens. Hence, they seriously affect the quality of life, causing the stigmatization of the affected persons and a decrease in human development [119,120]. There is a spectrum of immune responses to infection, whereby some patients show minimal immune response to O. volvulus antigens, allowing the development of microfilariae without the presence of clinical symptoms. On the other hand, some patients have an intact and symptomatic immune response to O. volvulus antigens [82]. Moreover, contrary to most phenotypes of OSL [14,15,95,114,121], pruritus has been reported to be more prevalent in the younger age group [12,15,100]. This may be due to the fact that the first visible symptom of onchocerciasis is OSLs, which usually begin with intense itching, followed by irritating papular rashes [122]. The rate of acute papular onchodermatitis has been reported to increase until about 30 years; it decreases steadily with age [15,99,100,116], suggesting that acute papular onchodermatitis is common in early infections and disappears in long-standing infections, in which many microfilariae may have died [99]. From an immunological point of view, it can also be inferred that O. volvulus and the human immune system may have attained a state of equilibrium in the case of the elderly, which may decrease the cases of acute irritation [99].

5.4. Visual Impairment and Blindness

Onchocerca volvulus causes visual impairment, which often advances to blindness. It is the second leading infectious cause of blindness globally [123,124]. Blindness is the most severe complication of the disease and may affect more than 30% of the adult population in hyperendemic communities [117,125]. The development of keratitis depends on antigen-specific T-cell and antibody responses that control the sequence of molecular and cellular events leading to the migration of inflammatory cells to the cornea, with a consequent loss of corneal clarity [126]. Additionally, there is an upregulation of mRNA for IL-4 and IL-5 in the corneas of mice immunized with O. volvulus antigens upon intrastromal challenges. These cytokines were reported to regulate the severity of keratitis through the infiltration of inflammatory cells, particularly eosinophils, into the cornea [127,128,129]. Visual impairment and eye itching have been reported among several age groups, from children less than 10 years to a peak in old adults above 50 years [12,15,95,130]. Blindness is more prevalent in the elderly population [12,130,131], with some studies reporting all cases of blindness coming from the aged population [15,116,121] (see Table 4). Disability due to severe visual impairment or blindness affects productivity and effectiveness in labor and has important socio-economic implications [132]. The high frequency of blindness among the aged population may be due to the fact that they were already blind as a result of onchocerciasis before the commencement of treatment programs for the disease in their communities [121]. In addition, blindness may result from long-standing infection owing partly to the refusal of ivermectin treatment for fear of severe adverse events or persistent non-adherence and non-compliance to ivermectin intake [133,134]. A long-term impact evaluation of the African Programme for Onchocerciasis Control operations revealed that 400,000 persons—with an additional 200,000 at-risk persons—were protected from visual loss [135].

6. Concluding Remarks and Future Perspectives

The immune system of the elderly population is marked by the paradox of immunosenescence and inflammaging, which embody two sides of the same coin, resulting in immune disorder [137]. With aging, though there is a normal antibody response to recall antigens, the ability to manufacture high-affinity antibodies that can protect elderly individuals from infection wanes. Older persons not only create lower titers of antibodies, but they also create antibodies that demonstrate diminished functionalities [102,103]. This age-associated immune dysfunction contributes to the decline of protective responses by aged individuals against Onchocerca infection, which leads to the increased prevalence of onchocerciasis in elderly individuals. Th1 cytokines decrease in aged onchocerciasis patients; meanwhile, Th2 cytokines, including IL-10, increase. The production of high levels of IL-10 in older onchocerciasis patients suppresses Th1-type immunity and, thereby, favors the manifestation of chronic onchocerciasis [76,77]. Notably, most of the immunological changes observed during Onchocerca infections are similar to changes that occur in the immune system during aging. Therefore, it is plausible that Onchocerca infection in elderly individuals can aggravate the effects of immunosenescence in this population due to the synergistic immunomodulatory effects of each of them. In this perspective, it would be worthwhile to give greater attention to the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of onchocerciasis in elderly individuals. The development of new and appropriate tools to completely eliminate the disease is most worthy of further work, as this might reverse the burden of onchocerciasis in the vulnerable geriatric population.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.N.; validation, R.N., S.M.G., J.S., L.V., and T.M.; formal analysis, C.M.S. and R.N.; investigation, R.N., C.M.S., R.A.S., T.M., L.V., J.S., and S.M.G.; resources, R.N., S.M.G., and J.S.; data curation, C.M.S. and R.N. writing—original draft preparation, C.M.S.; writing—review and editing, all authors; supervision, R.N., S.M.G., and J.S.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by a grant from the Global Minds Joint, Vrije Universiteit Brussels (grant number: Joint 006, Cameroon) to Cabirou Mounchili Shintouo.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

Luc Vanhamme is a member of the Belgian National Fund for Scientific Research (FNRS).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kanasi, E.; Ayilavarapu, S.; Jones, J. The aging population: Demographics and the biology of aging. Periodontol. 2000 2016, 72, 13–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. World Health Organisation. Global Health and Aging. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA. Available online: https://www.who.int/ageing/publications/global_health/en/ (accessed on 14 May 2021).
  3. Tramujas Vasconcellos Neumann, L.; Albert, S.M. Aging in Brazil. Gerontologist 2018, 58, 611–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Gazzinelli-Guimaraes, P.H.; Nutman, T.B. Helminth parasites and immune regulation. F1000Research 2018, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Shintouo, C.M.; Nguve, J.E.; Asa, F.B.; Shey, R.A.; Kamga, J.; Souopgui, J.; Ghogomu, S.M.; Njemini, R. Entomological assessment of onchocerca species transmission by black flies in selected communities in the west region of Cameroon. Pathogens 2020, 9, 722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Schulz-Key, H.; Soboslay, P.T. Reproductive biology and population dynamics of Onchocerca volvulus in the vertebrate host. Parasite 1994, 1, S53–S55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Hoerauf, A.; Brattig, N. Resistance and susceptibility in human onchocerciasis—Beyond Th1 vs. Th2. Trends Parasitol. 2002, 18, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. World Health Organisation. Onchocerciasis key facts. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/onchocerciasis (accessed on 16 May 2021).
  9. Schulz-Key, H.; Soboslay, P.T.; Hoffmann, W.H. Ivermectin-facilitated immunity. Parasitol. Today 1992, 8, 152–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Soboslay, P.T.; Dreweck, C.M.; Hoffmann, W.H.; Lüder, C.G.; Heuschkel, C.; Görgen, H.; Banla, M.; Schulz-Key, H. Ivermectin-facilitated immunity in onchocerciasis. Reversal of lymphocytopenia, cellular anergy and deficient cytokine production after single treatment. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 1992, 89, 407–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bakajika, D.; Senyonjo, L.; Enyong, P.; Oye, J.; Biholong, B.; Elhassan, E.; Boakye, D.; Dixon, R.; Schmidt, E. On-going transmission of human onchocerciasis in the Massangam health district in the West Region of Cameroon: Better understanding transmission dynamics to inform changes in programmatic interventions. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2018, 12, e0006904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Anosike, J.C.; Onwuliri, O.E.; Onwuliri, V.A. The prevalence, intensity and clinical manifestations of Onchocerca volvulus infection in Toro local government area of Bauchi State, Nigeria. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2001, 203, 459–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Dana, D.; Debalke, S.; Mekonnen, Z.; Kassahun, W.; Suleman, S.; Getahun, K.; Yewhalaw, D. A community-based cross-sectional study of the epidemiology of onchocerciasis in unmapped villages for community directed treatment with ivermectin in Jimma Zone, southwestern Ethiopia. BMC Public Health 2015, 15, 595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Dori, G.U.; Belay, T.; Belete, H.; Panicker, K.N.; Hailu, A. Parasitological and clinico-epidemiological features of onchocerciasis in West Wellega, Ethiopia. J. Parasit. Dis. 2012, 36, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Dozie, I.; Onwuliri, C.; Nwoke, B. Onchocerciasis in Imo state, Nigeria (2): The prevalence, intensity and distribution in the upper Imo river basin. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 2004, 14, 359–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Little, M.P.; Breitling, L.P.; Basáñez, M.G.; Alley, E.S.; Boatin, B.A. Association between microfilarial load and excess mortality in onchocerciasis: An epidemiological study. Lancet 2004, 363, 1514–1521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Tielsch, J.M.; Beeche, A. Impact of ivermectin on illness and disability associated with onchocerciasis. Trop. Med. Int. Health 2004, 9, A45–A56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Castle, S.C. Clinical relevance of age-related immune dysfunction. Clinical Infect. Dis. 2000, 31, 578–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  19. Yuan, J.; Liu, Y.; Wang, J.; Zhao, Y.; Li, K.; Jing, Y.; Zhang, X.; Liu, Q.; Geng, X.; Li, G.; et al. Long-term persistent organic pollutants exposure induced telomere dysfunction and senescence-associated secretary phenotype. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2018, 73, 1027–1035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Saule, P.; Trauet, J.; Dutriez, V.; Lekeux, V.; Dessaint, J.P.; Labalette, M. Accumulation of memory T cells from childhood to old age: Central and effector memory cells in CD4(+) versus effector memory and terminally differentiated memory cells in CD8(+) compartment. Mech. Ageing Dev. 2006, 127, 274–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Palmer, D.B. The effect of age on thymic function. Front. Immunol. 2013, 4, 316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Hale, J.S.; Boursalian, T.E.; Turk, G.L.; Fink, P.J. Thymic output in aged mice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2006, 103, 8447–8452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Rezzani, R.; Nardo, L.; Favero, G.; Peroni, M.; Rodella, L.F. Thymus and aging: Morphological, radiological, and functional overview. AGE 2014, 36, 313–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Fagnoni, F.F.; Vescovini, R.; Passeri, G.; Bologna, G.; Pedrazzoni, M.; Lavagetto, G.; Casti, A.; Franceschi, C.; Passeri, M.; Sansoni, P. Shortage of circulating naive CD8+ T cells provides new insights on immunodeficiency in aging. Blood 2000, 95, 2860–2868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Pera, A.; Campos, C.; López, N.; Hassouneh, F.; Alonso, C.; Tarazona, R.; Solana, R. Immunosenescence: Implications for response to infection and vaccination in older people. Maturitas 2015, 82, 50–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Crooke, S.N.; Ovsyannikova, I.G.; Poland, G.A.; Kennedy, R.B. Immunosenescence and human vaccine immune responses. Immun. Ageing 2019, 16, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Goronzy, J.J.; Weyand, C.M. Understanding immunosenescence to improve responses to vaccines. Nat. Immunol. 2013, 14, 428–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Ian, D.G. The effect of aging on susceptibility to infection. Rev. Infect. Dis. 1980, 2, 801–810. [Google Scholar]
  29. Esme, M.; Topeli, A.; Yavuz, B.B.; Akova, M. Infections in the elderly critically-Ill patients. Front. Med. 2019, 6, 118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Del Giudice, G.; Goronzy, J.J.; Grubeck-Loebenstein, B.; Lambert, P.-H.; Mrkvan, T.; Stoddard, J.J.; Doherty, T.M. Fighting against a protean enemy: Immunosenescence, vaccines, and healthy aging. NPJ Aging Mech. Dis. 2017, 4, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Barbé-Tuana, F.; Funchal, G.; Schmitz, C.R.R.; Maurmann, R.M.; Bauer, M.E. The interplay between immunosenescence and age-related diseases. Semin. Immunopathol. 2020, 42, 545–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Freund, A.; Orjalo, A.V.; Desprez, P.Y.; Campisi, J. Inflammatory networks during cellular senescence: Causes and consequences. Trends Mol. Med. 2010, 16, 238–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Van Deursen, J.M. The role of senescent cells in ageing. Nature 2014, 509, 439–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Davalos, A.R.; Coppe, J.P.; Campisi, J.; Desprez, P.Y. Senescent cells as a source of inflammatory factors for tumor progression. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2010, 29, 273–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Mathur, S.K.; Schwantes, E.A.; Jarjour, N.N.; Busse, W.W. Age-related changes in eosinophil function in human subjects. Chest 2008, 133, 412–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Gaya da Costa, M.; Poppelaars, F.; van Kooten, C.; Mollnes, T.E.; Tedesco, F.; Würzner, R.; Trouw, L.A.; Truedsson, L.; Daha, M.R.; Roos, A.; et al. Age and sex-associated changes of complement activity and complement levels in a healthy caucasian population. Front. Immunol. 2018, 9, 2664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Fougère, B.; Boulanger, E.; Nourhashémi, F.; Guyonnet, S.; Cesari, M. Chronic inflammation: Accelerator of biological aging. J. Gerontol. Ser. A 2016, 72, 1218–1225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  38. Franceschi, C.; Campisi, J. Chronic inflammation (inflammaging) and its potential contribution to age-associated diseases. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biomed. Sci. Med. Sci. 2014, 69, S4–S9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Wikby, A.; Ferguson, F.; Forsey, R.; Thompson, J.; Strindhall, J.; Löfgren, S.; Nilsson, B.-O.; Ernerudh, J.; Pawelec, G.; Johansson, B. An immune risk phenotype, cognitive impairment, and survival in very late life: Impact of allostatic load in Swedish octogenarian and nonagenarian humans. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2005, 60, 556–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Fulop, T.; Larbi, A.; Dupuis, G.; Le Page, A.; Frost, E.H.; Cohen, A.A.; Witkowski, J.M.; Franceschi, C. Immunosenescence and inflamm-aging as two sides of the same coin: Friends or foes? Front. Immunol. 2018, 8, 1960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  41. Licastro, F.; Candore, G.; Lio, D.; Porcellini, E.; Colonna-Romano, G.; Franceschi, C.; Caruso, C. Innate immunity and inflammation in ageing: A key for understanding age-related diseases. Immun. Ageing 2005, 2, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  42. Franceschi, C.; Bonafè, M.; Valensin, S.; Olivieri, F.; de Luca, M.; Ottaviani, E.; de Benedictis, G. Inflamm-aging—An evolutionary perspective on immunosenescence. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2000, 908, 244–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Fulop, T.; Witkowski, J.M.; Olivieri, F.; Larbi, A. The integration of inflammaging in age-related diseases. Semin. Immunol. 2018, 40, 17–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Ferrucci, L.; Fabbri, E. Inflammageing: Chronic inflammation in ageing, cardiovascular disease, and frailty. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 2018, 15, 505–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Giunta, B.; Fernandez, F.; Nikolic, W.V.; Obregon, D.; Rrapo, E.; Town, T.; Tan, J. Inflammaging as a prodrome to Alzheimer’s disease. J. Neuroinflamm. 2008, 5, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Boren, E.; Gershwin, M.E. Inflamm-aging: Autoimmunity, and the immune-risk phenotype. Autoimmun. Rev. 2004, 3, 401–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Franceschi, C.; Valensin, S.; Lescai, F.; Olivieri, F.; Licastro, F.; Grimaldi, L.M.; Monti, D.; de Benedictis, G.; Bonafè, M. Neuroinflammation and the genetics of Alzheimer’s disease: The search for a pro-inflammatory phenotype. Aging 2001, 13, 163–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Lencel, P.; Magne, D. Inflammaging: The driving force in osteoporosis? Med. Hypotheses 2011, 76, 317–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Ostan, R.; Lanzarini, C.; Pini, E.; Scurti, M.; Vianello, D.; Bertarelli, C.; Fabbri, C.; Izzi, M.; Palmas, G.; Biondi, F.; et al. Inflammaging and cancer: A challenge for the Mediterranean diet. Nutrients 2015, 7, 2589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Biragyn, A.; Ferrucci, L. Gut dysbiosis: A potential link between increased cancer risk in ageing and inflammaging. Lancet Oncol. 2018, 19, e295–e304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Strindhall, J.; Nilsson, B.O.; Löfgren, S.; Ernerudh, J.; Pawelec, G.; Johansson, B.; Wikby, A. No immune risk profile among individuals who reach 100 years of age: Findings from the Swedish NONA immune longitudinal study. Exp. Gerontol. 2007, 42, 753–761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Simpson, R.J.; Bigley, A.B.; Spielmann, G.; LaVoy, E.C.; Kunz, H.; Bollard, C.M. Human cytomegalovirus infection and the immune response to exercise. Exerc. Immunol. Rev. 2016, 22, 8–27. [Google Scholar]
  53. Pawelec, G.; Koch, S.; Franceschi, C.; Wikby, A. Human immunosenescence: Does it have an infectious component? Ann. N. Y Acad. Sci. 2006, 1067, 56–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Khan, N.; Shariff, N.; Cobbold, M.; Bruton, R.; Ainsworth, J.A.; Sinclair, A.J.; Nayak, L.; Moss, P.A. Cytomegalovirus seropositivity drives the CD8 T cell repertoire toward greater clonality in healthy elderly individuals. J. Immunol. 2002, 169, 1984–1992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  55. Acuto, O.; Michel, F. CD28-mediated co-stimulation: A quantitative support for TCR signalling. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2003, 3, 939–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Effros, R.B.; Cai, Z.; Linton, P.J. CD8 T cells and aging. Crit. Rev. Immunol. 2003, 23, 45–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Fülöp, T.; Larbi, A.; Pawelec, G. Human T cell aging and the impact of persistent viral infections. Front. Immunol. 2013, 4, 271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  58. Kusunoki, Y.; Yamaoka, M.; Kubo, Y.; Hayashi, T.; Kasagi, F.; Douple, E.B.; Nakachi, K. T-cell immunosenescence and inflammatory response in atomic bomb survivors. Radiat. Res. 2010, 174, 870–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Lange, A.M.; Yutanawiboonchai, W.; Scott, P.; Abraham, D. IL-4- and IL-5-dependent protective immunity to Onchocerca volvulus infective larvae in BALB/cBYJ mice. J. Immunol. 1994, 153, 205–211. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  60. Abraham, D.; Leon, O.; Schnyder-Candrian, S.; Wang, C.C.; Galioto, A.M.; Kerepesi, L.A.; Lee, J.J.; Lustigman, S. Immunoglobulin E and eosinophil-dependent protective immunity to larval Onchocerca volvulus in mice immunized with irradiated larvae. Infect. Immun. 2004, 72, 810–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  61. Brattig, N.W.; Henkle-Dührsen, K.; Hounkpatin, S.; Liebau, E.; Kruppa, T.F.; Zipfel, P.F. Characterization of human immune responses to the cytosolic superoxide dismutase and glutathione S-transferase from Onchocerca volvulus. Trop. Med. Int. Health 1997, 2, 788–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Brattig, N.W.; Tischendorf, F.W.; Strote, G.; Medina-de la Garza, C.E. Eosinophil-larval-interaction in onchocerciasis: Heterogeneity of in vitro adherence of eosinophils to infective third and fourth stage larvae and microfilariae of Onchocerca volvulus. Parasite Immunol. 1991, 13, 13–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Ngu, J.L.; Tume, C.; Lando, G.; Ndumbe, P.; Leke, R.G.; Titanji, V.; Asonganyi, T. Comparative studies of clinical groups of patients in an onchocerciasis endemic area for evidence of immune-mediated protection. Trop. Med. Parasitol. 1989, 40, 460–463. [Google Scholar]
  64. Dafa’alla, T.H.; Ghalib, H.W.; Abdelmageed, A.; Williams, J.F. The profile of IgG and IgG subclasses of onchocerciasis patients. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 1992, 88, 258–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Boyer, A.E.; Tsang, V.C.; Eberhard, M.L.; Zea-Flores, G.; Hightower, A.; Pilcher, J.B.; Zea-Flores, R.; Zhou, W.; Reimer, C.B. Guatemalan human onchocerciasis. II. Evidence for IgG3 involvement in acquired immunity to Onchocerca volvulus and identification of possible immune-associated antigens. J. Immunol. 1991, 146, 4001. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  66. MacDonald, A.J.; Turaga, P.S.D.; Harmon-Brown, C.; Tierney, T.J.; Bennett, K.E.; McCarthy, M.C.; Simonek, S.C.; Enyong, P.A.; Moukatte, D.W.; Lustigman, S. Differential cytokine and antibody responses to adult and larval stages of Onchocerca volvulus consistent with the development of concomitant immunity. Infect. Immun. 2002, 70, 2796–2804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Greene, B.M.; Taylor, H.R.; Aikawa, M. Cellular killing of microfilariae of Onchocerca volvulus: Eosinophil and neutrophil-mediated immune serum-dependent destruction. J. Immunol. 1981, 127, 1611–1618. [Google Scholar]
  68. Meri, T.; Jokiranta, T.S.; Hellwage, J.; Bialonski, A.; Zipfel, P.F.; Meri, S. Onchocerca volvulus microfilariae avoid complement attack by direct binding of factor H. J. Infect. Dis. 2002, 185, 1786–1793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Akuffo, H.; Maasho, K.; Lavebratt, C.; Engström, K.; Britton, S. Ivermectin-induced immunopotentiation in onchocerciasis: Recognition of selected antigens following a single dose of ivermectin. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 1996, 103, 244–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. McKechnie, N.M.; Gürr, W.; Yamada, H.; Copland, D.; Braun, G. Antigenic mimicry: Onchocerca volvulus antigen-specific T cells and ocular inflammation. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2002, 43, 411–418. [Google Scholar]
  71. Meilof, J.F.; van der Lelij, A.; Rokeach, L.A.; Hoch, S.O.; Smeenk, R.J. Autoimmunity and filariasis. Autoantibodies against cytoplasmic cellular proteins in sera of patients with onchocerciasis. J. Immunol. 1993, 151, 5800. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  72. Gallin, M.; Edmonds, K.; Ellner, J.J.; Erttmann, K.D.; White, A.T.; Newland, H.S.; Taylor, H.R.; Greene, B.M. Cell-mediated immune responses in human infection with Onchocerca volvulus. J. Immunol. 1988, 140, 1999. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  73. Schönemeyer, A.; Lucius, R.; Sonnenburg, B.; Brattig, N.; Sabat, R.; Schilling, K.; Bradley, J.; Hartmann, S. Modulation of human T cell responses and macrophage functions by onchocystatin, a secreted protein of the filarial nematode—Onchocerca volvulus. J. Immunol. 2001, 167, 3207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Satoguina, J.; Mempel, M.; Larbi, J.; Badusche, M.; Löliger, C.; Adjei, O.; Gachelin, G.; Fleischer, B.; Hoerauf, A. Antigen-specific T regulatory-1 cells are associated with immunosuppression in a chronic helminth infection (onchocerciasis). Microbes Infect. 2002, 4, 1291–1300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Steel, C.; Nutman, T.B. CTLA-4 in filarial infections: Implications for a role in diminished T cell reactivity. J. Immunol. 2003, 170, 1930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Lüder, C.G.; Schulz-Key, H.; Banla, M.; Pritze, S.; Soboslay, P.T. Immunoregulation in onchocerciasis: Predominance of Th1-type responsiveness to low molecular weight antigens of Onchocerca volvulus in exposed individuals without microfilaridermia and clinical disease. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 1996, 105, 245–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Soboslay, P.T.; Lüder, C.G.; Riesch, S.; Geiger, S.M.; Banla, M.; Batchassi, E.; Stadler, A.; Schulz-Key, H. Regulatory effects of Th1-type (IFN-gamma, IL-12) and Th2-type cytokines (IL-10, IL-13) on parasite-specific cellular responsiveness in Onchocerca volvulus-infected humans and exposed endemic controls. Immunology 1999, 97, 219–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Katawa, G.; Layland, L.E.; Debrah, A.; Von Horn, C.; Batsa, L.; Kwarteng, A.; Arriens, S.; Taylor, D.W.; Specht, S.; Hoerauf, A.; et al. Hyperreactive onchocerciasis is characterized by a combination of Th17-Th2 immune responses and reduced regulatory T cells. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2015, 9, e3414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  79. Soboslay, P.T.; Geiger, S.M.; Weiss, N.; Banla, M.; Lüder, C.G.; Dreweck, C.M.; Batchassi, E.; Boatin, B.A.; Stadler, A.; Schulz-Key, H. The diverse expression of immunity in humans at distinct states of Onchocerca volvulus infection. Immunology 1997, 90, 592–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Elson, L.H.; Calvopiña, M.; Paredes, W.; Araujo, E.; Bradley, J.E.; Guderian, R.H.; Nutman, T.B. Immunity to onchocerciasis: Putative immune persons produce a Th1-like response to Onchocerca volvulus. J. Infect. Dis. 1995, 171, 652–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Schulz-Key, H. Observations on the reproductive biology of Onchocerca volvulus. Acta Leiden 1990, 59, 27–44. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  82. Mackenzie, C.D.; Williams, J.F.; Sisley, B.M.; Steward, M.W.; O’Day, J. Variations in host responses and the pathogenesis of human onchocerciasis. Rev. Infect. Dis. 1985, 7, 802–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Taylor, M.J.; Hoerauf, A.; Bockarie, M. Lymphatic filariasis and onchocerciasis. Lancet 2010, 376, 1175–1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Chung, H.Y.; Kim, D.H.; Lee, E.K.; Chung, K.W.; Chung, S.; Lee, B.; Seo, A.Y.; Chung, J.H.; Jung, Y.S.; Im, E.; et al. Redefining chronic inflammation in aging and age-related diseases: Proposal of the senoinflammation concept. Aging Dis. 2019, 10, 367–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  85. Brüünsgaard, H.; Pedersen, B.K. Age-related inflammatory cytokines and disease. Immunol. Allergy Clin. N. Am. 2003, 23, 15–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Cooper, P.J.; Espinel, I.; Paredes, W.; Guderian, R.H.; Nutman, T.B. Impaired tetanus-specific cellular and humoral responses following tetanus vaccination in human onchocerciasis: A possible role for interleukin-10. J. Infect. Dis. 1998, 178, 1133–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Kilian, H.D.; Nielsen, G. Cell-mediated and humoral immune response to tetanus vaccinations in onchocerciasis patients. Trop. Med. Parasitol. 1989, 40, 285–291. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  88. Prost, A.; Schlumberger, M.; Fayet, M.T. Response to tetanus immunization in onchocerciasis patients. Ann. Trop. Med. Parasitol. 1983, 77, 83–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Kilian, H.D.; Nielsen, G. Cell-mediated and humoral immune responses to BCG and rubella vaccinations and to recall antigens in onchocerciasis patients. Trop. Med. Parasitol. 1989, 40, 445–453. [Google Scholar]
  90. Bennuru, S.; Oduro-Boateng, G.; Osigwe, C.; Del-Valle, P.; Golden, A.; Ogawa, G.M.; Cama, V.; Lustigman, S.; Nutman, T.B. Integrating multiple biomarkers to increase sensitivity for the detection of Onchocerca volvulus infection. J. Infect. Dis. 2019, 221, 1805–1815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Vlaminck, J.; Fischer, P.U.; Weil, G.J. Diagnostic tools for onchocerciasis elimination programs. Trends Parasitol. 2015, 31, 571–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  92. Lagatie, O.; van Dorst, B.; Stuyver, L.J. Identification of three immunodominant motifs with atypical isotype profile scattered over the Onchocerca volvulus proteome. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2017, 11, e0005330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  93. Gbakima, A.A.; Nutman, T.B.; Bradley, J.E.; McReynolds, L.A.; Winget, M.D.; Hong, Y.; Scott, A.L. Immunoglobulin G subclass responses of children during infection with Onchocerca volvulus. Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol. 1996, 3, 98–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. Lucius, R.; Kern, A.; Seeber, F.; Pogonka, T.; Willenbucher, J.; Taylor, H.R.; Pinder, M.; Ghalib, H.W.; Schulz-Key, H.; Soboslay, P. Specific and sensitive IgG4 immunodiagnosis of onchocerciasis with a recombinant 33 kD Onchocerca volvulus protein (Ov33). Trop. Med. Parasitol. 1992, 43, 139–145. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  95. Kamalu, N.A.; Uwakwe, F.E. Evaluation of different onchocerciass manifestation by age and gender among residents in selected endemic villages in Okigwe Local Government Area of Imo State, Nigeria. Int. Lett. Nat. Sci. 2014, 20, 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Kamga, G.R.; Dissak-Delon, F.N.; Nana-Djeunga, H.C.; Biholong, B.D.; Mbigha-Ghogomu, S.; Souopgui, J.; Zoure, H.G.; Boussinesq, M.; Kamgno, J.; Robert, A. Still mesoendemic onchocerciasis in two Cameroonian community-directed treatment with ivermectin projects despite more than 15 years of mass treatment. Parasit Vectors 2016, 9, 581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Onekutu, A.; Ayom, F.I.; Iboyi, M.O. Prevalence and distribution of human onchocerciasis and dermatological features in kwande Local Government Area of Benue State, Nigeria. J. Adv. Med. Med. Res. 2018, 27, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Opara, K.N.; Fagbemi, B.O. Population dynamics of Onchocerca volvulus microfilariae in human host after six years of drug control. J. Vector Borne Dis. 2008, 45, 29–37. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  99. Okoye, I.C.; Onwuliri, C.O.E. Epidemiology and psycho-social aspects of onchocercal skin diseases in northeastern Nigeria. Filaria J. 2007, 6, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  100. Murdoch, M.E.; Murdoch, I.E.; Evans, J.; Yahaya, H.; Njepuome, N.; Cousens, S.; Jones, B.R.; Abiose, A. Pre-control relationship of onchocercal skin disease with onchocercal infection in Guinea Savanna, Northern Nigeria. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2017, 11, e0005489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Kifle, B.; Woldemichael, K.; Nigatu, M. Prevalence of onchocerciasis and associated factors among adults aged ≥ 15 years in Semen Bench District, Bench Maji Zone, Southwest Ethiopia: Community based cross-sectional study. Adv. Public Health 2019, 2019, 7276230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Miller, C.; Kelsoe, G. Ig VH hypermutation is absent in the germinal centers of aged mice. J. Immunol. 1995, 155, 3377–3384. [Google Scholar]
  103. Nicoletti, C.; Yang, X.; Cerny, J. Repertoire diversity of antibody response to bacterial antigens in aged mice. III. Phosphorylcholine antibody from young and aged mice differ in structure and protective activity against infection with Streptococcus pneumoniae. J. Immunol. 1993, 150, 543–549. [Google Scholar]
  104. Ventura, M.T.; Casciaro, M.; Gangemi, S.; Buquicchio, R. Immunosenescence in aging: Between immune cells depletion and cytokines up-regulation. Clin. Mol. Allergy 2017, 15, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  105. Ponnappan, S.; Ponnappan, U. Aging and immune function: Molecular mechanisms to interventions. Antioxid. Redox Signal 2011, 14, 1551–1585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  106. Agarwal, S.; Busse, P.J. Innate and adaptive immunosenescence. Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2010, 104, 183–190, quiz 190–182, 210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Stewart, G.R.; Boussinesq, M.; Coulson, T.; Elson, L.; Nutman, T.; Bradley, J.E. Onchocerciasis modulates the immune response to mycobacterial antigens. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 1999, 117, 517–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Prost, A. The burden of blindness in adult males in the savanna villages of West Africa exposed to onchocerciasis. Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1986, 80, 525–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Gopinath, R.; Ostrowski, M.; Justement, S.J.; Fauci, A.S.; Nutman, T.B. Filarial infections increase susceptibility to human immunodeficiency virus infection in peripheral blood mononuclear cells in vitro. J. Infect. Dis. 2000, 182, 1804–1808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  110. Egbert, P.R.; Jacobson, D.W.; Fiadoyor, S.; Dadzie, P.; Ellingson, K.D. Onchocerciasis: A potential risk factor for glaucoma. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2005, 89, 796–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  111. Siewe Fodjo, J.N.; Mandro, M.; Mukendi, D.; Tepage, F.; Menon, S.; Nakato, S.; Nyisi, F.; Abhafule, G.; Wonya’rossi, D.; Anyolito, A.; et al. Onchocerciasis-associated epilepsy in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Clinical description and relationship with microfilarial density. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2019, 13, e0007300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  112. Galán-Puchades, M.T. Onchocerciasis-associated epilepsy. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2019, 19, 21–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  113. Gibson, D.W.; Connor, D.H. Onchocercal lymphadenitis: Clinicopathologic study of 34 patients. Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1978, 72, 137–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Okoro, N.; Nwali, U.; Oli, A.; Innocent, O.; Somadina, O.; Shedrack, E. The prevalence and distribution of human onchocerciasis in two senatorial districts in Ebonyi State, Nigeria. Am. J. Infect. Dis. Microbiol. 2014, 2, 39–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  115. Nelson, G.S. “Hanging groin” and hernia, complications of onchocerciasis. Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1958, 52, 272–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Mbanefo, E.C.; Eneanya, C.I.; Nwaorgu, O.C.; Otiji, M.O.; Oguoma, V.M.; Ogolo, B.A. Onchocerciasis in Anambra State, Southeast Nigeria: Endemicity and clinical manifestations. Postgrad. Med. J. 2010, 86, 578–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Murdoch, M.E.; Payton, A.; Abiose, A.; Thomson, W.; Panicker, V.K.; Dyer, P.A.; Jones, B.R.; Maizels, R.M.; Ollier, W.E.R. HLA-DQ alleles associate with cutaneous features of onchocerciasis. Hum. Immunol. 1997, 55, 46–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Ali, M.M.; Elghazali, G.; Montgomery, S.M.; Farouk, S.E.; Nasr, A.; Noori, S.I.; Shamad, M.M.; Fadlelseed, O.E.; Berzins, K. Fc gamma RIIa (CD32) polymorphism and onchocercal skin disease: Implications for the development of severe reactive onchodermatitis (ROD). Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2007, 77, 1074–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Ovuga, E.B.; Okello, D.O.; Ogwal-Okeng, J.W.; Orwotho, N.; Opoka, R.O. Social and psychological aspects of onchocercal skin disease in Nebbi district, Uganda. East Afr. Med. J. 1995, 72, 449–453. [Google Scholar]
  120. Murdoch, M.E.; Asuzu, M.C.; Hagan, M.; Makunde, W.H.; Ngoumou, P.; Ogbuagu, K.F.; Okello, D.; Ozoh, G.; Remme, J. Onchocerciasis: The clinical and epidemiological burden of skin disease in Africa. Ann. Trop. Med. Parasitol. 2002, 96, 283–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Sufi, D.; Tukur, Z. Evaluation of Onchocerciasis: A decade of post treatment with ivermectin in Zainabi and Ririwai Doguwa local government area of Kano State. Adv. Entomol. 2015, 3, 53200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  122. Ramaiah, K.D.; Guyatt, H.; Ramu, K.; Vanamail, P.; Pani, S.P.; Das, P.K. Treatment costs and loss of work time to individuals with chronic lymphatic filariasis in rural communities in south India. Trop. Med. Int. Health 1999, 4, 19–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  123. Puente, S.; Ramirez-Olivencia, G.; Lago, M.; Subirats, M.; Perez-Blazquez, E.; Bru, F.; Garate, T.; Vicente, B.; Belhassen-Garcia, M.; Muro, A. Dermatological manifestations in onchocerciasis: A retrospective study of 400 imported cases. Enferm. Infect. Microbiol. Clin. 2018, 36, 633–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Winthrop, K.L.; Furtado, J.M.; Silva, J.C.; Resnikoff, S.; Lansingh, V.C. River blindness: An old disease on the brink of elimination and control. J. Glob. Infect. Dis. 2011, 3, 151–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Patterson, K.D. Disease and medicine in African history: A bibliographical essay. Hist. Afr. 1974, 1, 141–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Pearlman, E.; Hall, L.R. Immune mechanisms in Onchocerca volvulus-mediated corneal disease (river blindness). Parasite Immunol. 2000, 22, 625–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Pearlman, E.; Lass, J.H.; Bardenstein, D.S.; Diaconu, E.; Hazlett, F.E., Jr.; Albright, J.; Higgins, A.W.; Kazura, J.W. Onchocerca volvulus-mediated keratitis: Cytokine production by IL-4-deficient mice. Exp. Parasitol. 1996, 84, 274–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  128. Pearlman, E.; Lass, J.H.; Bardenstein, D.S.; Kopf, M.; Hazlett, F.E., Jr.; Diaconu, E.; Kazura, J.W. Interleukin 4 and T helper type 2 cells are required for development of experimental onchocercal keratitis (river blindness). J. Exp. Med. 1995, 182, 931–940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Chakravarti, B.; Lagoo-Deenadayalan, S.; Parker, J.S.; Whitfield, D.R.; Lagoo, A.; Chakravarti, D.N. In vivo molecular analysis of cytokines in a murine model of ocular onchocerciasis. I. Up-regulation of IL-4 and IL-5 mRNAs and not IL-2 and IFN gamma mRNAs in the cornea due to experimental interstitial keratitis. Immunol. Lett. 1996, 54, 59–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Kirkwood, B.; Smith, P.; Marshall, T.; Prost, A. Relationships between mortality, visual acuity and microfilarial load in the area of the Onchocerciasis Control Programme. Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1983, 77, 862–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Akogun, O.B. Eye lesions, blindness and visual impairment in the Taraba river valley, Nigeria and their relation to onchocercal microfilariae in skin. Acta Trop. 1992, 51, 143–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Köberlein, J.; Beifus, K.; Schaffert, C.; Finger, R.P. The economic burden of visual impairment and blindness: A systematic review. BMJ Open 2013, 3, e003471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Dyson, L.; Stolk, W.A.; Farrell, S.H.; Hollingsworth, T.D. Measuring and modelling the effects of systematic non-adherence to mass drug administration. Epidemics 2017, 18, 56–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Yirga, D.; Deribe, K.; Woldemichael, K.; Wondafrash, M.; Kassahun, W. Factors associated with compliance with community directed treatment with ivermectin for onchocerciasis control in Southwestern Ethiopia. Parasites Vectors 2010, 3, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  135. Fobi, G.; Yameogo, L.; Noma, M.; Aholou, Y.; Koroma, J.B.; Zouré, H.M.; Ukety, T.; Lusamba-Dikassa, P.-S.; Mwikisa, C.; Boakye, D.A.; et al. Managing the fight against onchocerciasis in Africa: APOC experience. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2015, 9, e0003542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  136. Schwartz, E.C.; Huss, R.; Hopkins, A.; Dadjim, B.; Madjitoloum, P.; Hénault, C.; Klauss, V. Blindness and visual impairment in a region endemic for onchocerciasis in the Central African Republic. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1997, 81, 443–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Thomas, R.; Wang, W.; Su, D.-M. Contributions of age-related thymic involution to immunosenescence and inflammaging. Immun. Ageing 2020, 17, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Table 1. Distribution of onchocerciasis in the older population.
Table 1. Distribution of onchocerciasis in the older population.
Total Number of Infected Participants Number of Elderly Individuals Infected (%)Age Range of Elderly IndividualsRemark per the Other Age GroupsGeographical DistributionAuthors
188100 (53.2)≥50Most infected groupNigeriaAnosike et al. [12]
9940 (40.4)≥55Most infected groupEthiopiaDana et al. [13]
833135 (16.2)≥55Overall increase with ageEthiopiaDori et al. [14]
889363 (53.9)≥50Most infected groupNigeriaDozie et al. [15]
17039 (22.9)≥56Most infected groupNigeriaKamalu and Uwakwe [95]
30595 (31.1)≥50Most infected groupCameroonKamga et al. [96]
12253 (43.4)≥50Most infected groupNigeriaOnekutu et al. [97]
398145 (36.4)>50Most infected groupNigeriaOpara and Fagbemi [98]
28153 (18.9)≥51Overall increase with ageNigeriaOkoye et al. [99]
3257351 (10.8)≥55Most infected groupNigeriaMurdoch et al. [100]
Table 2. Distribution of lymphatic complications in the older population.
Table 2. Distribution of lymphatic complications in the older population.
CategoryNumber of Participants AffectedNumber of Elderly Individuals Infected (%)Age Range of Elderly IndividualsRemark per the Other Age GroupsAuthors
Hernia22 (100.0)≥50Only group affectedAnosike et al. [12]
8827 (30.7)≥50Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
Hanging
groin
4129 (70.7)≥50Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
137 (53.8)≥56Most affected groupKamalu and Uwakwe [95]
9543 (45.3)≥55Most affected groupMurdoch et al. [100]
11 (100.0)≥50Most affected groupOkoro et al. [114]
Lymphadenopathy7328 (38.4)≥50Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
65 (83.3)≥50Most affected groupMbanefo et al. [116]
Lymphoedema5844 (75.9)≥50Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
Scrotal elephantiasis1815 (83.3)≥50Most affected groupAnosike et al. [12]
Table 3. Distribution of onchocercal skin lesions in the older population.
Table 3. Distribution of onchocercal skin lesions in the older population.
CategoryNumber of Participants AffectedNumber of Elderly Individuals Infected (%)Age Range of Elderly IndividualsRemark per the Other Age GroupsAuthors
Skin depigmentation7150 (70.4)≥50Most affected groupAnosike et al. [12]
357201 (56.3)≥50 Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
525109 (20.8)≥51Most affected groupOkoye et al. [99]
26191 (34.9)≥55Most affected groupMurdoch et al. [100]
Lichenified onchodermatitis7338 (52.1)≥50Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
410100 (24.4)≥51Most affected groupOkoye et al. [99]
Leopard skin119 (81.8)≥50Most affected groupAnosike et al. [12]
9023 (25.6)≥56Most affected groupKamalu and Uwakwe [95]
248 (33.3)≥50Most affected groupOkoro et al. [114]
22 (100)≥50Only group affectedSufi and Zainab [121]
Lizard skin87 (87.5)≥50Most affected groupAnosike et al. [12]
6822 (32.4)≥56Most affected groupKamalu and Uwakwe [95]
Atrophy4030 (75.0)≥50Most affected groupAnosike et al. [12]
10435 (33.7)≥50Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
18445 (24.5)≥51Most affected groupOkoye et al. [99]
Nodule116 (54.5)≥50Most affected groupAnosike et al. [12]
675178 (26.4)≥50Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
7021 (30.0)≥56Most affected groupKamalu and Uwakwe [95]
12747 (37.0)≥50Most affected groupKamga et al. [96]
63 (50.0)≥50Most affected groupOkoro et al. [114]
8635 (40.6)≥50Most affected groupMbanefo et al. [116]
54 (80)≥50Most affected groupSufi and Zainab [121]
Onchocercal skin disease29354 (18.4)≥55Most affected groupDori et al. [14]
Pruritus499 (18.4)≥50Least affected groupAnosike et al. [12]
57450 (8.7)≥50 Least affected groupDozie et al. [15]
64528 (4.3)≥55Least affected groupMurdoch et al. [100]
10535 (33.3)≥50Most affected groupMbanefo et al. [116]
Chronic papular onchodermatitis34984 (24.1)≥50Third most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
1034187 (18.1)≥51Fourth most affected groupOkoye et al. [99]
15533 (22.3)≥55Most affected groupMurdoch et al. [100]
Acute papular onchodermatitis27329 (10.6)≥50Fourth most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
57637 (6.4)≥51Least affected groupOkoye et al. [99]
23318 (7.7)≥55Third most affected groupMurdoch et al. [100]
7611 (14.5)≥50Fourth most affected groupMbanefo et al. [116]
Table 4. Distribution of ocular lesions in the older population.
Table 4. Distribution of ocular lesions in the older population.
CategoryNumber of Participants AffectedNumber of Elderly Individuals Infected (%)Age Range of Elderly IndividualsRemark per the Other Age GroupsAuthors
Ocular lesions1613 (81.3)≥50Most affected groupAnosike et al. [12]
506268 (53.0)≥50Most affected groupKirkwood et al. [130]
Eye itching145 (35.7)≥50Most affected groupAnosike et al. [12]
29780 (26.9)≥50Second most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
Impaired vision1009452 (44.8)≥50Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
7622 (28.9)≥56Most affected groupKamalu and Uwakwe [95]
7714 (18.2)≥50Fourth most affected groupOkoro et al. [114]
2319 (82.6)≥50Most affected groupMbanefo et al. [116]
46276 (16.5)≥50Second most affected groupAkogun [131]
Anterior uveitis28281 (28.7)≥50Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
Punctate opacity24179 (32.8)≥50Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
19754 (27.4)≥50Most affected groupAkogun [131]
Sclerosing keratitis23293 (40.1)≥50Most affected groupDozie et al. [15]
24759 (23.9)≥50Most affected groupAkogun [131]
Blindness1815 (83.3)≥50Most affected groupAnosike et al. [12]
66 (100.0)≥50Only group affectedDozie et al. [15]
17951 (28.5)≥50Second most affected groupOkoro et al. [114]
11 (100.0)≥50Only group affectedMbanefo et al. [116]
22 (100.0)≥50Only group affectedSufi and Zainab [121]
434246 (56.7)≥50Most affected groupKirkwood et al. [130]
339101 (29.8)≥50Most affected groupAkogun [131]
9876 (77.6)≥50Most affected groupSchwartz et al. [136]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shintouo, C.M.; Shey, R.A.; Mets, T.; Vanhamme, L.; Souopgui, J.; Ghogomu, S.M.; Njemini, R. Onchocerciasis Fingerprints in the Geriatric Population: Does Host Immunity Play a Role? Trop. Med. Infect. Dis. 2021, 6, 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/tropicalmed6030153

AMA Style

Shintouo CM, Shey RA, Mets T, Vanhamme L, Souopgui J, Ghogomu SM, Njemini R. Onchocerciasis Fingerprints in the Geriatric Population: Does Host Immunity Play a Role? Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease. 2021; 6(3):153. https://doi.org/10.3390/tropicalmed6030153

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shintouo, Cabirou Mounchili, Robert Adamu Shey, Tony Mets, Luc Vanhamme, Jacob Souopgui, Stephen Mbigha Ghogomu, and Rose Njemini. 2021. "Onchocerciasis Fingerprints in the Geriatric Population: Does Host Immunity Play a Role?" Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease 6, no. 3: 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/tropicalmed6030153

APA Style

Shintouo, C. M., Shey, R. A., Mets, T., Vanhamme, L., Souopgui, J., Ghogomu, S. M., & Njemini, R. (2021). Onchocerciasis Fingerprints in the Geriatric Population: Does Host Immunity Play a Role? Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease, 6(3), 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/tropicalmed6030153

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop