One Health approach for Brucella canis : Serological and molecular detection in animal-hoarding individuals and their dogs

Abstract

Animal hoarding disorder (AHD) is classified as a psychiatric obsessive-compulsive condition characterized by animal accumulation and often accompanied by unsanitary conditions and animal cruelty. Although AHD may increase pathogen transmission and spread, particularly for zoonotic diseases, human and dog exposure in such cases has yet to be fully established. Accordingly, this study aimed to assess Brucella canis in 19 individuals with AHD (11 households) and their 264 dogs (21 households) in Curitiba, the eighth largest city in Brazil, with approximately 1.8 million habitants. Anti-B. canis antibodies were detected by the 2-mercaptoethanol microplate agglutination test (2ME-MAT) and by a commercial lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), while molecular detection of previously positive seropositive samples was performed by conventional PCR. Although all the human samples were 2ME-MAT negative, 12/264 (4.5%, 95% Confidence Interval: 2.0–7.0%) dog samples were 2ME-MAT and LFIA positive, with 2ME-MAT titers ranging from 20 to 640. At least one dog in 4/21 (19.0%, 95% CI: 2.0–46.0%) households was seropositive. Despite the absence of seropositivity in individuals with AHD and the comparatively low seroprevalence in dogs, B. canis circulation and outbreaks should be considered in such human populations due to the high burden and recurrent character of B. canis exposure in high-density dog populations and the constant introduction of susceptible animals.

Citation:Schiavo L, Ribeiro ML, de Almeida MB, da Cunha GR, Espírito Santo GAN, Morikawa VM, et al. (2024) One Health approach for Brucella canis: Serological and molecular detection in animal-hoarding individuals and their dogs. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 18(3): e0011974. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0011974

Editor:Stuart D. Blacksell, Mahidol Univ, Fac Trop Med, THAILAND

Received:October 11, 2023; Accepted:February 6, 2024; Published: March 12, 2024

Copyright: © 2024 Schiavo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability:All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files.

Funding:This study was supported by the Araucaria Foundation of Paraná state (grant number SUS2020111000010 to AWB). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Animal hoarding disorder (AHD) is defined as a psychiatric obsessive-compulsive condition characterized by the accumulation of animals in households, frequently in high numbers and confined to small spaces and lacking minimum nutrition, physical space, sanitation, and veterinary assistance [1,2]. Individuals with AHD often live in unsanitary conditions, leading to vector proliferation and pathogen spread, particularly of zoonotic diseases [1,3–6]. In addition, such individuals often fail to recognize animal suffering, are often hungry, trapped, crowded, or even die [1], as indicated by case reports of dogs scavenging the owner’s remains [7].

In a One Health approach, AHD should be considered beyond simple ownership of multiple pets, as this practice impacts the health, welfare and safety of owners themselves, their animals, their families, the environmental health of their households and the surrounding community [3,5].

Canine brucellosis, a zoonotic disease caused by the intracellular bacterium B. canis that has spread worldwide and is considered endemic in Brazil, is the main cause of infection in domestic dogs, mainly leading to reproductive failure and infertility, with reports of human infection [8–16]. B. canis may insidiously infect dogs and cause intermittent bacteremia for months or even years, causing dogs to become a continuous source of infection [13,17,18]. In such a scenario, dogs may become a potential risk for humans and other animals, in addition to posing an occupational risk for veterinarians, laboratory-handling personnel and breeders [12,19,20].

As B. canis may persist in prostate and lymphoid tissues, neutering may only prevent semen contamination and not eliminate infection [13,16,17,18]. Human infection has rarely been reported, partially due to the absence of investigations, with many endemic countries reporting “no data” and a lack of active surveillance to pinpoint the actual prevalence [12,15,17,21,22]⁠. Clinical signs are nonspecific, transient, and often similar to those of influenza virus infection [16,17,19,21,23]. Concomitant detection of human and canine B. canis infections has been rare, as reported in Colombia and South America [11] and in case reports in New York City, USA [23]; Argentina, South America [24]; and the Netherlands [25]⁠.

Although markedly neglected, canine brucellosis has not been included in the list of mandatory notification diseases by the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) [14,26]. In addition, underdiagnosis may occur due to low suspicion, as dog reproductive failure and abortion may not be considered primary signs for brucellosis diagnosis by veterinarians (and owners’ physicians) [9,13,15].

The prevalence of dog anti-B. canis antibodies in Brazil has varied from 5/175 (2.9%) in Paraná state [27] to 7/106 (6.6%) in Rio de Janeiro state [28]⁠⁠ and 16/254 (6.3%) to 39/254 (16.5%) in Minas Gerais and Espírito Santo states (depending on the test used) [29] to 23/32 (71.8%) in São Paulo state [30]. Despite the close contact of humans with dogs under poor sanitary conditions, the lack of veterinary and nutritional care and the susceptibility to zoonotic diseases [5]⁠, no study has been conducted among individuals with AHD and their companion dogs for B. canis infection. Accordingly, this study aimed to assess the seroprevalence of anti-B. canis antibodies and molecular B. canis detection in individuals with AHD and their dogs in Curitiba, the eighth largest Brazilian city, which has 1.8 million habitants.

Materials and methods

Ethics statement

This study was approved by the Animal Use Ethics Committee (protocol number 077/2015) and by the National Human Ethics Research Committee (protocol number 3,166,749/2019) through the Federal University of Paraná, southern Brazil.

Study area

This study was conducted in Curitiba (25°25’47" S and 49°16’19" W), the capital of Paraná state and the eighth largest city in Brazil, which has more than 1.8 million habitants [31] and a high Municipal Human Development Index (MHDI) of 0.823, ranked 10th out of 5,568 Brazilian cities [31,32]. Fully covered by urban areas, with a subtropical climate and the highest and coldest Brazilian capital (among 27 total), Curitiba has an average annual temperature of 16.5°C and an altitude of 945 m above sea level [32].

Sample collection

As a previous study reported, at least 65 residences with animal hoarding cases within Curitiba city limits were found, corresponding to 724 dogs [33]. A random sample calculation with a confidence level of 95% and an accuracy of 5% resulted in a minimum sampling of 251 dogs, sampling the largest possible number of dogs in each household for convenience, to assess the brucellosis seroprevalence in this population.

Blood sampling of dogs was carried out in 2017 at each residence and officially conducted by the City Secretary of the Environment. For legal reasons, human blood sampling was conducted in 2019, officially conducted by the City Secretary of Health.

All individuals were first informed about this study, invited to voluntarily participate, signed an informed consent form, responded to an epidemiological questionnaire, and then were subjected to blood sampling through cephalic puncture by certified nurses. Blood was collected from the dogs after the owners provided consent through jugular puncture by certified veterinarians.

Epidemiological data and statistical analysis

For statistical purposes and due to exposure to the same accumulation conditions, all people and dogs residing in the households were considered hoarders and hoarding dogs, respectively, regardless of the exposure period prior to sampling. Signed informed consent was obtained before sampling by signing the Owner’s Consent Term, with all procedures performed in compliance with the National Human Ethics Research Committee for the use of human data and samples.

Serological analyses

2-Mercaptoethanol microplate agglutination test (2ME-MAT).

Dog and human serum samples were screened for anti-B. canis antibodies by the 2-mercaptoethanol microplate agglutination test (2ME-MAT) according to the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (ANSES, Maisons-Alfort, France) protocol, which is the national/European Union/WOAH (World Organization for Animal Health) reference laboratory for brucellosis [34]. The B. canis antigen 2ME-MAT was an inactivated suspension of B. canis that contained 4.5% cellules and 0.5% formaldehyde and was derived from the B. canis M-strain (nonmucoid strain). Serial dilutions from 1:20 to 1:640 were applied, with serum samples considered positive if antibody titers were ≥ 20 for B. canis [17], and final titers were determined at the last dilution with complete agglutination.

Lateral Flow Immunoassay (LFIA).

Serum samples seropositive for 2ME-MAT were tested by a commercial lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) for the qualitative detection of B. canis antibodies (Antigen Rapid C. Brucella Ab Test Kit, BioNote, Inc., Republic of Korea) [35,36].

Molecular analyses

The seropositive samples for anti-B. canis antibodies were also molecularly tested by conventional PCR. DNA from each blood sample was extracted using a commercially available kit (Relia Prep gDNA Tissue Miniprep System–Promega, USA) and tested by conventional PCR for Brucella spp. detection using a standard protocol (ITS66: ACA TAG ATC GCA GGC CAG TCA and ITS279: AGA TAC CGA CGC AAA CGC TAC), as previously described [8]. After PCR, the samples were analyzed in 1.5% agarose gel by electrophoresis and stained with SYBR Safe DNA gel stain. DNA bands were visualized under UV light.

Results

Although all 65 residences were visited within a year, dog sampling was allowed by residents only for 21 households, for a total of 264 dog samples. All people living in the 21 households were approached; however, blood samples were available from only 19 people from 11 households, and these individuals were fully evaluated.

No individual with AHD (0/19) was seropositive according to 2ME-MAT for anti-B. canis antibodies. Seropositivity for anti-B. canis antibodies by 2ME-MAT were observed in 14/264 (5.3%; 95% CI: 2.6–8.0%) dogs, with titers ranging from 20 to 640. At least one seropositive dog was found in 5/21 (23.8%, 95% CI: 5.6–42.0%) households, with the proportion of positive serological dogs per household ranging from 2/17 (11.8%) to 6/16 (37.5%).

All 14 dogs seropositive according to the 2ME-MAT were tested by LFIA, with 12/14 (85.7%) remaining seropositive. Thus, considering the two techniques (2ME-MAT and LFIA) together as a positive serological diagnosis, 12/264 (4.5%, 95% CI = 2.0–7.0%) dogs were seropositive in 4/21 (19.0%, 95% CI = 0.2–36.0%) households. These 14 seropositive samples were also tested by conventional PCR for Brucella spp., with no positive reaction (Table 1).

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 1. Detection of anti-B. canis antibodies by 2ME-MAT and LFIA and Brucella spp.

DNA by PCR in human and dog samples.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0011974.t001

The majority of the tested individuals with AHD were women (13/19), most of whom were elderly (9/13), with ages ranging from 66 to 86 years.

Overall, seropositive dog samples were equally distributed between males and females (six each), with ages ranging from 1 to 16 years and dogs mostly living freely in the yard (9/12). In one household, two seropositive dogs lived in a collective kennel (Table 2).

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 2. Distribution and frequency of presence of anti-B. canis antibodies in dogs and epidemiological data from dogs and individuals with AHD per household case.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0011974.t002

Discussion

The present study is the first comprehensive investigation of B. canis exposure in individuals with animal hoarding disorder (AHD) and their dogs. Considered a challenging diagnosis, B. canis exposure should be ideally detected by an association of different direct and indirect tests [13,17,26,28,37], such as 2ME-MAT and LFIA performed in the present study. Despite the reports of bacterial isolation as the gold positive standard and its use for early detection (2 weeks after bacterial contact), diagnosis requires laboratories with biosafety level 3, high cost, and high handling risk [15,16,38]. Although no diagnostic test has been considered solely satisfactory for assessing B. canis exposure, 2ME-MAT may be the choice for screening large populations [13,21], as it provides positive results 2–4 weeks after exposure [39]. For humans, we used the same diagnostic tests, as there are no approved tests for the diagnosis of B. canis to date [26].

Serological diagnosis of B. canis exposure may be even more relevant in this study, as individuals with AHD may experience self-health degradation [40] and poor perception of their animal and environmental health deterioration. Despite living in close contact with animals, clinical signs of dog brucellosis, such as abortion, may be ignored, unnoticed and unreported by elderly individuals with AHD, as reported in other low-income populations [41,42]. Although all individuals with AHD tested in our study were seronegative for Brucella spp., human exposure and outbreaks caused by B. canis have been reported [24,43]. A previous study revealed 4.6% (8/174) of individuals seropositive for B. canis from the slum community of Salvador, northeastern Brazil, related to the ongoing increase in the stray dog population [43]. A B. canis outbreak involving a female dog with her three puppies and three children and three adults was reported in Argentina in 2009. Humans exhibited fever, hepatomegaly and splenomegaly after close daily contact with the animals [24]. In addition, an unapparent B. canis infection was reported in kennel employees, suggesting the occupational risk of exposure [44]. Despite the positive outcome, human serological results should be cautiously interpreted, as the diagnostic techniques may vary and not be standardized, even in dogs [26].

The prevalence of anti-B. canis antibodies in dogs found in this study (4.5%) was within the range of those in previous surveys, from 5/175 (2.9%) [27] to 7/106 (6.6%) [28], which are all much lower than the 23/32 (71.8%) found in São Paulo state [30]. The last study focused on a population with a history of miscarriages, a history of failed conceptions, and characteristics of canine brucellosis [30]. As expected, the 4.5% dog overall seropositivity was lower than the per household seropositivity (11.8% to 37.5%), which may indicate that large unassisted dog populations living in confined places contributed to the transmission of B. canis, similarly observed in overpopulated kennels [17,30]. Furthermore, despite the absence of seropositivity in individuals with AHD and the comparatively low seroprevalence in dogs in the present study, B. canis outbreaks should be considered in such human populations due to the high burden and recurrent character of B. canis circulation in high-density dog populations and the constant introduction of susceptible animals.

These findings in dogs highlight human vulnerability as a risk factor for brucellosis, as has been observed for other zoonotic diseases in homeless, indigenous, and quilombola communities [45–48]. In addition, negative results for individuals with AHD may indicate that B. canis has the lowest zoonotic potential in the genus Brucella [12,17]. Nonetheless, seropositive dogs in close and continuous contact with owners with AHD, mostly elderly, unassisted (last medical visit over 6 months prior), lonely and with comorbidities [1,6], may be a tragic combination.

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has been commonly used to confirm Brucella species [10] and as a useful confirmatory test in seropositive dogs [8,16,49]. However, nondetection of DNA in seropositive samples for anti-B. canis antibodies may be the result of intermittent bacteremia and intracellular characteristics, leading to low diagnostic sensitivity [15].

Hoarding disorder cases are challenging mostly due to neglect, the multiplicity and complexity of associated factors [5], and difficulty accessing affected populations [7]. A recent study in the Metropolitan Region of Curitiba, Paraná, indicated challenges faced by the City Hall official services regarding animal hoarding disorders, such as the lack of standardization and exchange of service information between the involved city secretaries, including health, environment, and social services [50]. As a consequence, cases become chronic, with worsening of accumulation and consequences, particularly zoonoses.

B. canis is transmitted mainly through contact with tissues and secretions from contaminated reproductive organs of dogs [11,13,16,19]. Although the pathogen has also been found in whole blood [16], this may not be the best sample for DNA detection by PCR. Thus, negative PCR results for blood samples in this study may not be indicative of the absence of infection.

As a limitation of this study, no sampling was performed for tissues, saliva, nasal or genital secretions, or urine, particularly following reproductive problems, which would have increased the diagnostic sensitivity [16]. Furthermore, access to and monitoring of households of individuals with AHD was limited by the classic “refusal to receive help” characteristic of the AHD population, which also impacted the low sampling of individuals with AHD in this study. Furthermore, the sampling dates used were different for dogs and individuals with AHD in compliance with different time permits from the ethics committee of animal use and the city secretary of health, which may have impacted the results due to potential dynamics over time in B. canis exposure. In addition, the epidemiological questionnaires failed to include important questions on associated risk factors for B. canis exposure, such as serology following reproductive failure or molecular testing of abortion tissues.

Conclusion

The present study is the first to assess brucellosis in a vulnerable population as a silent disease based on the environment and susceptible population. Despite the absence of seropositivity in individuals with AHD and the comparatively low seroprevalence in dogs, B. canis circulation and outbreaks should be considered in such human populations due to the high burden and recurrent character of B. canis exposure in high-density dog populations and the constant introduction of susceptible animals. In conclusion, serological and molecular assessments of vulnerable populations, particularly those with silent diseases, may serve as the basis for public health policies, including systematic diagnosis, control, monitoring, and prevention.

Supporting information

S1 Questionnaire. Epidemiological questionnaire used to investigate serological and molecular Brucella canis and associated factors in individuals with animal hoarding disorder and their dogs in Curitiba.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0011974.s001

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

The authors are deeply thankful to professionals from the Curitiba Secretaries of Health, the Environment and Social Assistance.

References

1. 1. Ferreira EA, Paloski LH, Costa DB, Moret-Tatay C, Irigaray TQ. Psychopathological comorbid symptoms in animal hoarding disorder. Psychiatr Q. 2020 Sep;91(3):853–62. pmid:32319042.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

2. 2. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V). 5th ed. Arlington: American Psychiatry Publishing; 2013.

3. 3. Patronek GJ. Hoarding of animals: an under-recognized public health problem in a difficult-to-study population. Public Health Rep. 1999;114(1):81–7. pmid:9925176.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

4. 4. Reinisch AI. Understanding the human aspects of animal hoarding. Can Vet J. 2008 Dec;49(12):1211–4. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583418/. pmid:19252714

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

5. 5. da Cunha GR, Pellizzaro M, Martins CM, Rocha SM, Yamakawa AC, da Silva EC, et al. Spatial serosurvey of anti-Toxoplasma gondii antibodies in individuals with animal hoarding disorder and their dogs in Southern Brazil. PLoS One. 2020 May 1;15(5):e0233305. pmid:32413075.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

6. 6. da Cunha GR, Martins CM, Pellizzaro M, Pettan-Brewer C, Biondo AW. Sociodemographic, income, and environmental characteristics of individuals displaying animal and object hoarding behavior in a major city in South Brazil: A cross-sectional study. Vet World. 2021 Dec;14(12):3111–8. pmid:35153400.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

7. 7. Kmetiuk LB, Maiorka PC, Beck AM, Biondo AW. “Dying alone and being eaten”: dog scavenging on the remains of an elderly animal hoarder-a case report. Front Vet Sci. 2023;10. pmid:37706076.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

8. 8. Keid LB, Soares RM, Vieira NR, Megid J, Salgado VR, Vasconcellos SA, et al. Diagnosis of canine brucellosis: Comparison between serological and microbiological tests and a PCR based on primers to 16S-23S rDNA interspacer. Vet Res Commun. 2007 Nov;31(8):951–65. pmid:17308888.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

9. 9. Hensel ME, Negron M, Arenas-Gamboa AM. Brucellosis in dogs and public health risk. Emerg Infect Dis. 2018;24(8):1401–6. pmid:30014831.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

10. 10. Ferreira Vicente A, Girault G, Corde Y, Souza Ribeiro Mioni M, Borges Keid L, Jay M, et al. New insights into phylogeography of worldwide Brucella canis isolates by comparative genomics-based approaches: Focus on Brazil. BMC Genomics. 2018 Aug 28;19(1). pmid:30153798.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

11. 11. Sánchez-Jiménez MM, de la Cuesta Zuluaga JJ, Garcia-Montoya GM, Dabral N, Alzate JF, Vemulapalli R, et al. Diagnosis of human and canine Brucella canis infection: development and evaluation of indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays using recombinant Brucella proteins. Heliyon. 2020 Jul 1;6(7). pmid:32685723.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

12. 12. Yagupsky P, Morat P, Colmenero JD. Laboratory diagnosis of human brucellosis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2020 Jan 1;33(1). pmid:31722888.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

13. 13. Santos RL, Souza TD, Mol JPS, Eckstein C, Paíxão TA. Canine Brucellosis: An Update. Front Vet Sci. 2021 Mar 2;8:594291. pmid:33738302.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

14. 14. Galarce N, Escobar B, Martínez E, Alvarado N, Peralta G, Dettleff P, et al. Prevalence and genomic characterization of Brucella canis strains isolated from kennels, household, and stray dogs in Chile. Animals. 2020 Nov 1;10(11):1–13. pmid:33182313.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

15. 15. Hull NC, Schumaker BA. Comparisons of brucellosis between human and veterinary medicine. Infect Ecol Epidemiol. 2018 Jul 24;8(1):1500846. pmid:30083304.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

16. 16. Sebzda MK, Kauffman LK. Update on Brucella canis: Understanding the past and preparing for the future. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract. 2023 Sep;53(5):1047–1062. pmid:37385876.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

17. 17. De Massis F, Sacchini F, Averaimo D, Garofolo G, Lecchini P, Ruocco L, et al. First Isolation of Brucella canis from a breeding kennel in Italy. Vet Ital. 2021;57(3):215–26. pmid:34641664.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

18. 18. Egloff S, Schneeberger M, Gobeli Brawand S, Krudewig C, Schmitt S, Reichler I, et al. Brucella canis infection in a young dog with epididymitis and orchitis. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd. 2018 Dec 1;160(12):743–8. pmid:30516477.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

19. 19. Cosford KL. Brucella canis: An update on research and clinical management. Canadian Veterinary Journal. 2018;59(1):74–81. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29302106/

* View Article

* Google Scholar

20. 20. Buhmann G, Paul F, Herbst W, Melzer F, Wolf G, Hartmann K, et al. Canine Brucellosis: Insights Into the Epidemiologic Situation in Europe. Front Vet Sci. 2019 May 31;6:151. pmid:31214601.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

21. 21. Chacón-Díaz C, Altamirano-Silva P, González-Espinoza G, Medina MC, Alfaro-Alarcón A, Bouza-Mora L, et al. Brucella canis is an intracellular pathogen that induces a lower proinflammatory response than smooth zoonotic counterparts. Infect Immun. 2015;83(12):4861–70. pmid:26438796.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

22. 22. Vicente AF, Antunes JM, Lara GH, Mioni MS, Allendorf SD, Peres MG, et al. Evaluation of three formulations of culture media for isolation of Brucella spp. regarding their ability to inhibit the growth of contaminating organisms. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:702072. pmid:24949466.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

23. 23. Dentinger CM, Jacob K, Lee L V., Mendez HA, Chotikanatis K, Mcdonough PL, et al. Human Brucella canis infection and subsequent laboratory exposures associated with a puppy, New York City, 2012. Zoonoses Public Health. 2015 Aug 1;62(5):407–14. pmid:25363807.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

24. 24. Lucero NE, Corazza R, Almuzara MN, Reynes E, Escobar GI, Boeri E, et al. Human Brucella canis outbreak linked to infection in dogs. Epidemiol Infect. 2010 Feb;138(2):280–5. pmid:19653929.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

25. 25. Kolwijck E, Lutgens SPM, Visser VXN, van Apeldoorn MJ, Graham H, Koets AP, et al. First Case of Human Brucella canis Infection in the Netherlands. Clin Infect Dis. 2022 Dec 19;75(12):2250–2252. pmid:35653425.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

26. 26. Djokic V, Freddi L, de Massis F, Lahti E, van den Esker MH, Whatmore A, et al. The emergence of Brucella canis as a public health threat in Europe: what we know and what we need to learn. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2023 Dec;12(2):2249126. pmid:37649455.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

27. 27. de Paula Dreer M, Gonçalves D, da Silva Caetano I, Gerônimo E, Menegas P, Bergo D, et al. Toxoplasmosis, leptospirosis and brucellosis in stray dogs housed at the shelter in Umuarama municipality, Paraná, Brazil. Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins including Tropical Diseases. 2013;19(1):23. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/1678-9199-19-23.

* View Article

* Google Scholar

28. 28. Boechat VC, Pereira SA, Mendes Júnior AAV, Vicente AF, Megid J, Dasso MG, et al. Anti-Brucella canis antibodies in dogs naturally infected with leishmania infantum and associated histological alterations in the genital tract. An Acad Bras Cienc. 2021 Dec 1;93(suppl 4):e20201682. pmid:34878047.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

29. 29. Mol JPS, Guedes ACB, Eckstein C, Quintal APN, Souza TD, Mathias LA, et al. Diagnosis of canine brucellosis: comparison of various serologic tests and PCR. J Vet Diagn Invest. 2020 Jan;32(1):77–86. pmid:31752635.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

30. 30. Silva DAV da Diniz JA, Muner K Keid LB, Batinga MCA Soares RM. Surto de brucelose em canil comercial: relato de caso. Revista de Educação Continuada em Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia do CRMV-SP. 2018;16(3):44–51. Available from: https://www.revistamvez-crmvsp.com.br/index.php/recmvz/article/view/37818

* View Article

* Google Scholar

31. 31. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Cidades e Estados [Internet]. [cited 2023 set 23]. Available from: https://www.ibge.gov.br/cidades-e-estados/pr/curitiba.html

* View Article

* Google Scholar

32. 32. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Cidades–Panorama Geral [Internet]. [cited 2023 set 23]. Available from: https://cidades.ibge.gov.br/brasil/pr/curitiba/panorama

* View Article

* Google Scholar

33. 33. da Cunha GR, Martins CM, Ceccon-Valente M de F, da Silva LL, Martins FD, Floeter D, et al. Frequência e distribuição espacial do acúmulo compulsivo de animais e objetos em Curitiba, Paraná, Brasil. Cad Saude Publica. 2017;33(2):1–12. Available from: pmid:28380121

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

34. 34. Agence Nationale de Securité Sanitaire de L’Alimentation, de L’Environnement et du Travail (ANSES, Maisons-Alfort, IF, France) [Internet]. [cited 2023 set 23]. Available from: https://sitesv2.anses.fr/en/minisite/lrue-brucellose/brucellosis-home

* View Article

* Google Scholar

35. 35. Wan KIM J, Ju LEE Y, Yeol HAN M, Hwa BAE D, Chan JUNG S, Sik JO, et al. Evaluation of Immunochromatographic assay for serodiagnosis of Brucella canis. J Vet Med Sci. 2007 Nov;69(11):1103–7. pmid:18057823.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

36. 36. Keid LB, Diniz JA, Oliveira TMFS, Ferreira HL, Soares RM. Evaluation of an Immunochromatographic Test to the Diagnosis of Canine Brucellosis Caused by Brucella canis. Reprod Domest Anim. 2015 Dec;50(6):939–44. pmid:26489371.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

37. 37. Keid LB, Soares RM, Vasconcellos SA, Megid J, Salgado VR, Richtzenhain LJ. Comparison of agar gel immunodiffusion test, rapid slide agglutination test, microbiological culture and PCR for the diagnosis of canine brucellosis. Res Vet Sci. 2009 Feb;86(1):22–6. pmid:18656213.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

38. 38. Guarino C, Franklin-Guild R, Goodrich E, Conklin R, Frye E, Pinn-Woodcock T. Antibody response over time correlated with treatment outcome in 30 dogs naturally infected with Brucella canis (2017–2022). Am J Vet Res. 2023 Mar 13;84(4):ajvr.23.01.0014. pmid:36892988.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

39. 39. Hollett RB. Canine brucellosis: outbreaks and compliance. Theriogenology. 2006 Aug;66(3):575–87. pmid:16716382.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

40. 40. Ayers CR, Dozier ME, Pachana NA, Oude Voshaar RC. Predictors of hoarding severity in older adults with hoarding disorder. Int Psychogeriatr. 2015 Jul;27(7):1147–56. pmid:25115688.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

41. 41. Molyneux D, Hallaj Z, Keusch GT, McManus DP, Ngowi H, Cleaveland S, et al. Zoonoses and marginalised infectious diseases of poverty: Where do we stand? Parasit Vectors. 2011 Jun 14;4:106. pmid:21672216.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

42. 42. Ghanbari MK, Gorji HA, Behzadifar M, Sanee N, Mehedi N, Bragazzi NL. One health approach to tackle brucellosis: a systematic review. Trop Med Health. 2020 Oct 20;48:86. pmid:33093792.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

43. 43. Angel MO, Ristow P, Ko AI, Di-Lorenzo C. Serological trail of Brucella infection in an urban slum population in Brazil. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2012 Sep 17;6(9):675–9. pmid:23000868.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

44. 44. Krueger WS, Lucero NE, Brower A, Heil GL, Gray GC. Evidence for Unapparent Brucella canis Infections among Adults with Occupational Exposure to Dogs. Zoonoses Public Health. 2014 Nov 1;61(7):509–18. pmid:24751191.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

45. 45. do Couto AC, Gravinatti ML, Pellizzaro M, Kmetiuk LB, Yamakawa AC, da Silva EC, et al. One health approach on serosurvey of anti-Leptospira spp. in homeless persons and their dogs in South Brazil. One Health. 2022 Jul 25;15:100421. pmid:36277102.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

46. 46. Doline FR, Farinhas JH, Biondo LM, de Oliveira PRF, Rodrigues NJL, Patrício KP, et al. Toxoplasma gondii exposure in Brazilian indigenous populations, their dogs, environment, and healthcare professionals. One Health. 2023 May 18;16:100567. pmid:37363212.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

47. 47. Santarém VA, Doline FR, Ferreira IB, Farinhas JH, Biondo LM, de Souza Filho RT, et al. One health approach to toxocariasis in Brazilian indigenous populations, their dogs, and soil contamination. Front Public Health. 2023 Sep 7;11:1220001. pmid:37744519.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

48. 48. Panazzolo GK, Kmetiuk LB, Domingues OJ, Farinhas JH, Doline FR, França DA, et al. One Health Approach in Serosurvey of Toxoplasma gondii in Former Black Slave (Quilombola) Communities in Southern Brazil and Among Their Dogs. Trop Med Infect Dis. 2023 Jul 24;8(7):377. pmid:37505673.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

49. 49. De Massis F, Sacchini F, Petrini A, Bellucci F, Perilli M, Garofolo G, et al. Canine brucellosis due to Brucella canis: description of the disease and control measures. Vet Ital. 2022 Nov 17;58(1):5–23. pmid:35766163.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

50. 50. de Moura RR, Chiba de Castro WA, Farinhas JH, Pettan-Brewer C, Kmetiuk LB, dos Santos AP, et al. One Health Index (OHI) applied to Curitiba, the ninth-largest metropolitan area of Brazil, with concomitant assessment of animal, environmental, and human health indicators. One Health. 2022 Jan 31;14:100373. pmid:35686146.

* View Article

* PubMed/NCBI

* Google Scholar

Citation: Schiavo L, Ribeiro ML, de Almeida MB, da Cunha GR, Espírito Santo GAN, Morikawa VM, et al. (2024) One Health approach for Brucella canis: Serological and molecular detection in animal-hoarding individuals and their dogs. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 18(3): e0011974. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0011974

References

1. Ferreira EA, Paloski LH, Costa DB, Moret-Tatay C, Irigaray TQ. Psychopathological comorbid symptoms in animal hoarding disorder. Psychiatr Q. 2020 Sep;91(3):853–62. pmid:32319042.

2. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V). 5th ed. Arlington: American Psychiatry Publishing; 2013.

3. Patronek GJ. Hoarding of animals: an under-recognized public health problem in a difficult-to-study population. Public Health Rep. 1999;114(1):81–7. pmid:9925176.

4. Reinisch AI. Understanding the human aspects of animal hoarding. Can Vet J. 2008 Dec;49(12):1211–4. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583418/. pmid:19252714

5. da Cunha GR, Pellizzaro M, Martins CM, Rocha SM, Yamakawa AC, da Silva EC, et al. Spatial serosurvey of anti-Toxoplasma gondii antibodies in individuals with animal hoarding disorder and their dogs in Southern Brazil. PLoS One. 2020 May 1;15(5):e0233305. pmid:32413075.

6. da Cunha GR, Martins CM, Pellizzaro M, Pettan-Brewer C, Biondo AW. Sociodemographic, income, and environmental characteristics of individuals displaying animal and object hoarding behavior in a major city in South Brazil: A cross-sectional study. Vet World. 2021 Dec;14(12):3111–8. pmid:35153400.

7. Kmetiuk LB, Maiorka PC, Beck AM, Biondo AW. “Dying alone and being eaten”: dog scavenging on the remains of an elderly animal hoarder-a case report. Front Vet Sci. 2023;10. pmid:37706076.

8. Keid LB, Soares RM, Vieira NR, Megid J, Salgado VR, Vasconcellos SA, et al. Diagnosis of canine brucellosis: Comparison between serological and microbiological tests and a PCR based on primers to 16S-23S rDNA interspacer. Vet Res Commun. 2007 Nov;31(8):951–65. pmid:17308888.

9. Hensel ME, Negron M, Arenas-Gamboa AM. Brucellosis in dogs and public health risk. Emerg Infect Dis. 2018;24(8):1401–6. pmid:30014831.

10. Ferreira Vicente A, Girault G, Corde Y, Souza Ribeiro Mioni M, Borges Keid L, Jay M, et al. New insights into phylogeography of worldwide Brucella canis isolates by comparative genomics-based approaches: Focus on Brazil. BMC Genomics. 2018 Aug 28;19(1). pmid:30153798.

11. Sánchez-Jiménez MM, de la Cuesta Zuluaga JJ, Garcia-Montoya GM, Dabral N, Alzate JF, Vemulapalli R, et al. Diagnosis of human and canine Brucella canis infection: development and evaluation of indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays using recombinant Brucella proteins. Heliyon. 2020 Jul 1;6(7). pmid:32685723.

12. Yagupsky P, Morat P, Colmenero JD. Laboratory diagnosis of human brucellosis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2020 Jan 1;33(1). pmid:31722888.

13. Santos RL, Souza TD, Mol JPS, Eckstein C, Paíxão TA. Canine Brucellosis: An Update. Front Vet Sci. 2021 Mar 2;8:594291. pmid:33738302.

14. Galarce N, Escobar B, Martínez E, Alvarado N, Peralta G, Dettleff P, et al. Prevalence and genomic characterization of Brucella canis strains isolated from kennels, household, and stray dogs in Chile. Animals. 2020 Nov 1;10(11):1–13. pmid:33182313.

15. Hull NC, Schumaker BA. Comparisons of brucellosis between human and veterinary medicine. Infect Ecol Epidemiol. 2018 Jul 24;8(1):1500846. pmid:30083304.

16. Sebzda MK, Kauffman LK. Update on Brucella canis: Understanding the past and preparing for the future. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract. 2023 Sep;53(5):1047–1062. pmid:37385876.

17. De Massis F, Sacchini F, Averaimo D, Garofolo G, Lecchini P, Ruocco L, et al. First Isolation of Brucella canis from a breeding kennel in Italy. Vet Ital. 2021;57(3):215–26. pmid:34641664.

18. Egloff S, Schneeberger M, Gobeli Brawand S, Krudewig C, Schmitt S, Reichler I, et al. Brucella canis infection in a young dog with epididymitis and orchitis. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd. 2018 Dec 1;160(12):743–8. pmid:30516477.

19. Cosford KL. Brucella canis: An update on research and clinical management. Canadian Veterinary Journal. 2018;59(1):74–81. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29302106/

20. Buhmann G, Paul F, Herbst W, Melzer F, Wolf G, Hartmann K, et al. Canine Brucellosis: Insights Into the Epidemiologic Situation in Europe. Front Vet Sci. 2019 May 31;6:151. pmid:31214601.

21. Chacón-Díaz C, Altamirano-Silva P, González-Espinoza G, Medina MC, Alfaro-Alarcón A, Bouza-Mora L, et al. Brucella canis is an intracellular pathogen that induces a lower proinflammatory response than smooth zoonotic counterparts. Infect Immun. 2015;83(12):4861–70. pmid:26438796.

22. Vicente AF, Antunes JM, Lara GH, Mioni MS, Allendorf SD, Peres MG, et al. Evaluation of three formulations of culture media for isolation of Brucella spp. regarding their ability to inhibit the growth of contaminating organisms. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:702072. pmid:24949466.

23. Dentinger CM, Jacob K, Lee L V., Mendez HA, Chotikanatis K, Mcdonough PL, et al. Human Brucella canis infection and subsequent laboratory exposures associated with a puppy, New York City, 2012. Zoonoses Public Health. 2015 Aug 1;62(5):407–14. pmid:25363807.

24. Lucero NE, Corazza R, Almuzara MN, Reynes E, Escobar GI, Boeri E, et al. Human Brucella canis outbreak linked to infection in dogs. Epidemiol Infect. 2010 Feb;138(2):280–5. pmid:19653929.

25. Kolwijck E, Lutgens SPM, Visser VXN, van Apeldoorn MJ, Graham H, Koets AP, et al. First Case of Human Brucella canis Infection in the Netherlands. Clin Infect Dis. 2022 Dec 19;75(12):2250–2252. pmid:35653425.

26. Djokic V, Freddi L, de Massis F, Lahti E, van den Esker MH, Whatmore A, et al. The emergence of Brucella canis as a public health threat in Europe: what we know and what we need to learn. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2023 Dec;12(2):2249126. pmid:37649455.

27. de Paula Dreer M, Gonçalves D, da Silva Caetano I, Gerônimo E, Menegas P, Bergo D, et al. Toxoplasmosis, leptospirosis and brucellosis in stray dogs housed at the shelter in Umuarama municipality, Paraná, Brazil. Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins including Tropical Diseases. 2013;19(1):23. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/1678-9199-19-23.

28. Boechat VC, Pereira SA, Mendes Júnior AAV, Vicente AF, Megid J, Dasso MG, et al. Anti-Brucella canis antibodies in dogs naturally infected with leishmania infantum and associated histological alterations in the genital tract. An Acad Bras Cienc. 2021 Dec 1;93(suppl 4):e20201682. pmid:34878047.

29. Mol JPS, Guedes ACB, Eckstein C, Quintal APN, Souza TD, Mathias LA, et al. Diagnosis of canine brucellosis: comparison of various serologic tests and PCR. J Vet Diagn Invest. 2020 Jan;32(1):77–86. pmid:31752635.

30. Silva DAV da Diniz JA, Muner K Keid LB, Batinga MCA Soares RM. Surto de brucelose em canil comercial: relato de caso. Revista de Educação Continuada em Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia do CRMV-SP. 2018;16(3):44–51. Available from: https://www.revistamvez-crmvsp.com.br/index.php/recmvz/article/view/37818

31. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Cidades e Estados [Internet]. [cited 2023 set 23]. Available from: https://www.ibge.gov.br/cidades-e-estados/pr/curitiba.html

32. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Cidades–Panorama Geral [Internet]. [cited 2023 set 23]. Available from: https://cidades.ibge.gov.br/brasil/pr/curitiba/panorama

33. da Cunha GR, Martins CM, Ceccon-Valente M de F, da Silva LL, Martins FD, Floeter D, et al. Frequência e distribuição espacial do acúmulo compulsivo de animais e objetos em Curitiba, Paraná, Brasil. Cad Saude Publica. 2017;33(2):1–12. Available from: pmid:28380121

34. Agence Nationale de Securité Sanitaire de L’Alimentation, de L’Environnement et du Travail (ANSES, Maisons-Alfort, IF, France) [Internet]. [cited 2023 set 23]. Available from: https://sitesv2.anses.fr/en/minisite/lrue-brucellose/brucellosis-home

35. Wan KIM J, Ju LEE Y, Yeol HAN M, Hwa BAE D, Chan JUNG S, Sik JO, et al. Evaluation of Immunochromatographic assay for serodiagnosis of Brucella canis. J Vet Med Sci. 2007 Nov;69(11):1103–7. pmid:18057823.

36. Keid LB, Diniz JA, Oliveira TMFS, Ferreira HL, Soares RM. Evaluation of an Immunochromatographic Test to the Diagnosis of Canine Brucellosis Caused by Brucella canis. Reprod Domest Anim. 2015 Dec;50(6):939–44. pmid:26489371.

37. Keid LB, Soares RM, Vasconcellos SA, Megid J, Salgado VR, Richtzenhain LJ. Comparison of agar gel immunodiffusion test, rapid slide agglutination test, microbiological culture and PCR for the diagnosis of canine brucellosis. Res Vet Sci. 2009 Feb;86(1):22–6. pmid:18656213.

38. Guarino C, Franklin-Guild R, Goodrich E, Conklin R, Frye E, Pinn-Woodcock T. Antibody response over time correlated with treatment outcome in 30 dogs naturally infected with Brucella canis (2017–2022). Am J Vet Res. 2023 Mar 13;84(4):ajvr.23.01.0014. pmid:36892988.

39. Hollett RB. Canine brucellosis: outbreaks and compliance. Theriogenology. 2006 Aug;66(3):575–87. pmid:16716382.

40. Ayers CR, Dozier ME, Pachana NA, Oude Voshaar RC. Predictors of hoarding severity in older adults with hoarding disorder. Int Psychogeriatr. 2015 Jul;27(7):1147–56. pmid:25115688.

41. Molyneux D, Hallaj Z, Keusch GT, McManus DP, Ngowi H, Cleaveland S, et al. Zoonoses and marginalised infectious diseases of poverty: Where do we stand? Parasit Vectors. 2011 Jun 14;4:106. pmid:21672216.

42. Ghanbari MK, Gorji HA, Behzadifar M, Sanee N, Mehedi N, Bragazzi NL. One health approach to tackle brucellosis: a systematic review. Trop Med Health. 2020 Oct 20;48:86. pmid:33093792.

43. Angel MO, Ristow P, Ko AI, Di-Lorenzo C. Serological trail of Brucella infection in an urban slum population in Brazil. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2012 Sep 17;6(9):675–9. pmid:23000868.

44. Krueger WS, Lucero NE, Brower A, Heil GL, Gray GC. Evidence for Unapparent Brucella canis Infections among Adults with Occupational Exposure to Dogs. Zoonoses Public Health. 2014 Nov 1;61(7):509–18. pmid:24751191.

45. do Couto AC, Gravinatti ML, Pellizzaro M, Kmetiuk LB, Yamakawa AC, da Silva EC, et al. One health approach on serosurvey of anti-Leptospira spp. in homeless persons and their dogs in South Brazil. One Health. 2022 Jul 25;15:100421. pmid:36277102.

46. Doline FR, Farinhas JH, Biondo LM, de Oliveira PRF, Rodrigues NJL, Patrício KP, et al. Toxoplasma gondii exposure in Brazilian indigenous populations, their dogs, environment, and healthcare professionals. One Health. 2023 May 18;16:100567. pmid:37363212.

47. Santarém VA, Doline FR, Ferreira IB, Farinhas JH, Biondo LM, de Souza Filho RT, et al. One health approach to toxocariasis in Brazilian indigenous populations, their dogs, and soil contamination. Front Public Health. 2023 Sep 7;11:1220001. pmid:37744519.

48. Panazzolo GK, Kmetiuk LB, Domingues OJ, Farinhas JH, Doline FR, França DA, et al. One Health Approach in Serosurvey of Toxoplasma gondii in Former Black Slave (Quilombola) Communities in Southern Brazil and Among Their Dogs. Trop Med Infect Dis. 2023 Jul 24;8(7):377. pmid:37505673.

49. De Massis F, Sacchini F, Petrini A, Bellucci F, Perilli M, Garofolo G, et al. Canine brucellosis due to Brucella canis: description of the disease and control measures. Vet Ital. 2022 Nov 17;58(1):5–23. pmid:35766163.

50. de Moura RR, Chiba de Castro WA, Farinhas JH, Pettan-Brewer C, Kmetiuk LB, dos Santos AP, et al. One Health Index (OHI) applied to Curitiba, the ninth-largest metropolitan area of Brazil, with concomitant assessment of animal, environmental, and human health indicators. One Health. 2022 Jan 31;14:100373. pmid:35686146.