Next Article in Journal
Tuberculosis Infection in Children and Adolescents
Previous Article in Journal
HPV-Associated Breast Cancer: Myth or Fact?
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Pathogens
Volume 11
Issue 12
10.3390/pathogens11121511
pathogens-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Feline Toxoplasmosis in Greece: A Countrywide Seroprevalence Study and Associated Risk Factors

by
Georgios Sioutas
1,
Isaia Symeonidou
1,
Athanasios I. Gelasakis
2,
Christos Tzirinis
1 and
Elias Papadopoulos
1,*
1
Laboratory of Parasitology and Parasitic Diseases, School of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
2
Laboratory of Anatomy and Physiology of Farm Animals, Department of Animal Science, School of Animal Biosciences, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Pathogens 2022, 11(12), 1511; https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens11121511
Submission received: 11 November 2022 / Revised: 3 December 2022 / Accepted: 7 December 2022 / Published: 9 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Parasitic Pathogens)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Toxoplasma gondii is a ubiquitous zoonotic parasite, with felines being the only definitive hosts. Cats shed oocysts with their faeces, and seroprevalence studies can be used to indirectly assess the environmental contamination. The current study aimed to evaluate T. gondii seroprevalence in Greek cats and identify possible risk factors. In total, 1554 blood samples were analyzed from different cats across all nine geographic regions of Greece, and a short questionnaire was completed for each cat. A rapid immunochromatographic test was used to detect anti-T. gondii antibodies, IgG type, and 21.8% of cats were seropositive. Regarding risk factors, when chi-square tests were applied, seropositivity was significantly higher (p < 0.05) in rural cats, cats with outdoor access, and hunting cats. Gender, age, ownership, and raw feeding were not significant risk factors, although female, adult, stray, and raw-feeding cats had a higher seroprevalence than their counterparts. Binary logistic regression models were developed to adjust for the confounding effects of the initially recognized risk factors, and only hunting in urban areas remained a significant risk factor. Greek cats had lower seropositivity than the average European value, and the present research highlights the importance of updated seroprevalence and risk factor studies within the context of One-Health.

1. Introduction

Toxoplasma gondii (Phylum: Apicomplexa, Family: Sarcocystidae) is a ubiquitous, protozoan, coccidian, obligate intracellular parasite [1]. It has a facultative indirect life cycle with felids (i.e., domestic cats) as definitive hosts [2]. This protozoon can infect almost all homeothermic animals, including humans, who serve as intermediate hosts [3]. Regarding its life cycle, there are three infective stages: sporozoites, tachyzoites, and bradyzoites [4]. The most common infection routes are the ingestion of sporulated oocysts via water, soil, and raw or unwashed fruits and vegetables contaminated with infected cat faeces [5]; the ingestion of tissue cysts in raw or undercooked meat of infected animals; and the transplacental transmission of tachyzoites [6]. Cats typically become infected early in their life from ingesting cysts while hunting [7] and shed-resistant oocysts with their faeces [7]. Overall, toxoplasmosis in cats has a low morbidity and mortality rate [8], and the majority of cats are asymptomatic [7]. Intermediate hosts display symptoms such as cerebral disease [9] in immunosuppressed patients [10] and abortions [11,12,13]. Approximately one-third of the world’s human population is chronically infected with T. gondii [14]. This protozoon is ranked number three out of all food-borne hazards in Europe, in terms of disease burden, according to the World Health Organization [15], and congenital toxoplasmosis is the second most common congenital disease in humans [16]. Felidae, as the only definitive host, play a highly significant role in the epidemiology of toxoplasmosis [8].
Conclusive diagnosis in cats is rather difficult [17]. The serological identification of T. gondii-specific humoral antibodies is a widely used and reliable method [18,19] and is recommended in epidemiological studies [20]. Immunochromatographic tests (ICTs) represent an easy, practical, low-cost, and rapid screening method commonly used in field population studies without sophisticated equipment [21,22]. They can be employed to detect IgG antibodies in cats, and their high specificity and sensitivity compared to ELISA and LAT render them a reliable option [21,22,23]. Seropositive cats have already excreted oocysts with their faeces [24], while assessing the contamination of the environment with oocysts is impractical for technical reasons [25,26,27]. Hence, seroprevalence studies in domestic cats are very important for public health practitioners and veterinarians. They can be used to indirectly evaluate the environmental oocyst burden and consequently estimate the infection pressure to both people and animals. Until now, Greece remained one of the few countries in the E.E. without any relevant seroprevalence data for cats; therefore, the actual feline prevalence of T. gondii was vastly underrated [28,29]. Towards this end, the objectives of this novel study were to estimate the seroprevalence and assess associated risk factors of toxoplasmosis in cats in Greece.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Collection of Blood Samples and Study Area

All 1554 cat (Felis silvestris catus) blood samples were collected and tested during the summer of 2022 at the Laboratory of Parasitology and Parasitic Diseases, School of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece. The study area included all nine geographical regions of Greece (Thrace, Macedonia, Epirus, Thessaly, Central Greece, Peloponnese, Crete, Ionian islands, and Aegean islands). Cats included in this study were selected randomly and were clinically healthy. Owners or people from various animal welfare organizations brought the cats to private veterinary clinics around Greece for routine check-up examinations, vaccinations, or sterilizations, which required blood sampling. From each cat, 1 mL of blood was drawn by puncturing one jugular, cephalic, or femoral vein, and then transferred into EDTA-containing vials for later antibody testing. Each whole blood sample was stored in the refrigerator (+4 °C) until testing. A questionnaire was completed for each cat in order to collect relevant information regarding potential risk factors. In detail, the following were recorded:
Environment: Rural area (village) or urban area (city).
Gender: Female or male.
Age: Cat age was determined based on questionnaire answers, teeth development, and dental attrition (incisors, canines, premolars, and molars) [30]. Based on these data, cats were categorized into two groups reflecting age (those older than six months (>6 months) and those equal to or younger than six months (≤6 months)).
Raw feeding: Cats were categorized into two groups, those that additionally fed on a raw diet and those that fed strictly on commercial food.
Lifestyle: Cats were separated into those with outdoor access and those living strictly indoors.
Ownership: Cats were categorized into client-owned or stray-feral.
Hunting activity: Cats were split into two categories (those that hunt and those with no hunting activity).
This study was conducted in accordance with bioethics and animal welfare standards, and it was authorized by the Ethics Committee of the ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKI (192746/2022).

2.2. Immunochromatographic Test Kit

All blood samples were transported inside coolers with ice packs and examined at the Laboratory of Parasitology and Parasitic Diseases, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece. The ICT used (Anigen Rapid Toxoplasma Ab Test Kit, BioNote Inc., Hwaseong-si, Republic of Korea) is a reliable diagnostic kit (Sensitivity 100%, Specificity 99%) used for qualitatively detecting IgG antibodies against T. gondii in cats’ serum, plasma, or whole blood. Highly selective recombinant T. gondii antigens (GRA1 and SAG1) are used in the ICT, and the test’s principle is based on sandwich lateral flow immunochromatographic assay [31]. The steps outlined in the manufacturer’s instructions were precisely followed. Briefly, all reagents and samples were brought to room temperature before testing. The kit’s capillary tube was utilized, and 10 μL from each sample was added into the sample hole. Consequently, 3 drops of the assay diluents were added into the sample hole vertically. Results were interpreted at 10 min and no later than 20 min. If only one coloured line appeared in the control line region (C) and no line appeared in the test line region (T), then the test result was deemed as negative. If two lines appeared, one coloured line in the control line region (C), and another coloured line in the test line region (T), the test result was deemed positive. Faint lines in the regions mentioned above, (C) and (T), also implied a positive result. If no coloured line appeared in the control line region (C), for any reason, the test result was deemed invalid, and the sample was retested. A positive test result meant that the corresponding cat had been previously exposed to T. gondii. All result interpretations were based on the official brochure included with each test kit by the manufacturing company, and all whole blood samples were tested by the same person who was blind to each sample’s origin to avoid bias.

2.3. Statistical Analyses

Chi-square tests were performed, and odds ratios and relative risks were calculated to assess potential risk factors and the initial quantification of their association with seropositivity against T. gondii.
The seroprevalence of T. gondii infections was calculated, and its 95% confidence intervals (CI 95%) were estimated using the Wilson score interval method. A binary logistic regression model was used to assess the relationship between potential risk factors and the likelihood that a cat is seropositive to T. gondii in urban and rural areas separately. The aforementioned risk factors included age, sex, raw feeding, and hunting activity, as described in Model 1:
YG = α + β1Χ1 + β2Χ2 + β3Χ3 + β4Χ4 (Model 1)
where YG = the probability of a cat being seropositive for T. gondii, β1 to β4 the regression coefficients of age (X1, 0 = ≤6 months, 1 = >6 months), sex (X2, 0 = male, 1 = female), raw feeding (X3, 0 = no raw feeding, 1 = raw feeding), and hunting activity (X4, 0 = no hunting activity, 1= hunting activity).
The statistical significance of individual predictors was tested using the Wald χ2 statistic of their regression coefficients (βs). Goodness-of-fit for each individual model was assessed using the Hosmer–Lemeshow (H-L) test, as well as Cox and Snell R2 and Nagelkerke R2 indices. Statistical significance was set at the 0.05 level.

3. Results

3.1. Descriptive Statistical Analysis

In total, 1554 cat serum samples were examined from different areas of Greece, and 339 (21.8%) were seropositive. Seropositivity percentages for the different risk factor groups of the examined cats are summarized in Table 1.

3.2. In-Depth Risk Analyses

Overall, 21.8% (339/1554, CI 95% 19.8 to 23.9%) of the sampled cats were seropositive to T. gondii. Table 2 below summarizes the results of the chi-square tests as well as the odds ratios and relative risks.
The association between the studied risk factors forced into the model (sex, age, raw feeding, and hunting activity) and the seropositivity to T. gondii are presented below in Table 3.
The likelihood of T. gondii infection was lower (B = −0.82, df = 1, p < 0.01) for non-hunting cats in comparison to those who hunted in urban areas (ca. 2.3 times, CI 95%, 1.2 to 4.2). Similarly, a 1.3 times higher (CI 95%, 1 to 1.8 times) probability for T. gondii seropositivity was recorded for female cats in rural areas; however, this value was not statistically significant (B = −0.28, df = 1, p = 0.061).

3.3. Regional Seroprevalence

The seroprevalence rate of cats in each geographical region is illustrated in Figure 1, and the exact percentages are given in Table 4.

4. Discussion

4.1. Diagnosis of T. gondii and Seropositivity Interpretation

Many diagnostic methods have been employed for the diagnosis of T. gondii infections in cats, each having benefits and drawbacks. Given that no diagnostic test has a sensitivity and specificity of 100%, this research provides novel insight into the seroprevalence of cats in Greece. Up to now, two recent countrywide studies in Greece reported 0 [28] to 0.4% [32] prevalence of T. gondii-like oocysts in the faeces of examined cats. In these studies, the identification of oocysts was achieved with a flotation technique that has two major drawbacks. Microscopic analysis requires the cat to be shedding oocysts when the faeces are collected, which is typically only seven days during its lifetime [33]. Research has demonstrated that only 0.4% of client-owned cats and 4.1% of feral cats pass oocysts at any given time in their faeces [34]. Additionally, T. gondii oocysts cannot be differentiated based on morphology of other feline coccidian oocysts such as Hammondia spp. [35] and Besnoitia spp. [36]. Therefore, in epidemiological studies such as the current one, the serological investigation of anti-T. gondii antibodies is more useful than evaluating the prevalence of T. gondii-like oocysts in the faeces of examined cats [33].
The total seroprevalence of T. gondii detected in this present study (21.8%) is lower than the worldwide pooled seropositivity of 37.5% [37] and the average seroprevalence in Europe which is even higher at 45.3% [37]. T. gondii seroprevalence ranges significantly across European countries, from 17.3% in Spain (client-owned and stray cats) [38] to 80.5% in Romania (client-owned and stray cats) [39]. In countries neighbouring Greece, such as Albania and Turkey, feline seropositivity reaches up to 42% (client-owned cats) [40] and 34.2% (stray cats) [41], respectively. Seroprevalence among the tested regions ranged from 14.9% in Macedonia to 42.8% in Peloponnese. It should be highlighted that the seropositivity of cats in different countries/regions is affected by a variety of factors such as cat ownership (client-owned or stray), sampling methods (inclusion/exclusion criteria), sampling size, cat age, diet, population density, environmental oocyst burden, test employed (different specificity and sensitivity), cut-off titres, and seropositivity in intermediate hosts that serve as prey (such as rodents) [42,43,44,45]. Therefore, caution should be exercised when comparing seroprevalence results from different countries. A wiser approach would be to track the seropositivity changes in one nation throughout the years using the same methodology. Research indicates that seroprevalence in a country is expected to drop through the years [45].
The Anigen Rapid Toxoplasma Ab Test Kit detects IgG antibodies which are produced in all infected cats and can be detected 4–6 weeks post-primary infection. IgG antibody titres peak 2–3 weeks after their first detection [46] and can persist for more than six years [47]. In general, cats usually seroconvert between the second and third week after ingesting bradyzoites, and by that time, they have already finished shedding oocysts. It is safe to assume that most seropositive cats no longer shed oocysts [33,47], and most likely will never shed oocysts again, except in instances, i.e., immunosuppression [48,49]. A positive IgG titre reflects a developed humoral immune response and indicates latent (chronic) toxoplasmosis [50]. On the flip side, seronegative cats may be sampled during the first two weeks of infection, and thus are excreting oocysts at that time, or may begin to excrete oocysts if they become infected [46]. Nonetheless, most IgG seropositive cats are asymptomatic [7,47]. In an attempt to interpret the recorded seroprevalence rate, high seropositivity in cats indicates that cats play a vital role in the T. gondii epidemiology in the specific country, as they already have spread a lot of oocysts [44]. On the other hand, low seropositivity, as in the case of this research, implies that there are many naive cats that might become infected and expel oocysts. Hence, these seronegative cats represent a greater future risk of contaminating the environment and transmitting the parasite to humans.

4.2. Risk Factors Break Down

Factors influencing T. gondii seropositivity in cats have been extensively studied but are not yet completely clarified, and further research is required [51]. Nonetheless, the current study provides insight into the various risk factors that can influence infection in cats living in Greece. Hunting was identified as the most significant risk factor for T. gondii infection using chi-square tests (p < 0.001) and remained the only significant risk factor in the binary logistic regression model for cats living in urban areas (p < 0.01). Many other studies have also identified hunting, i.e., rodents, who are the natural intermediate host, other small mammals, birds, and mechanical vectors, as a crucial risk factor for the consumption of T. gondii tissue cysts and the acquisition of the protozoon [52,53,54,55,56].
Regarding the cat’s environment, cats living in rural [45,53,57,58,59] or peri-urban/suburban areas [60,61] usually are subject to a significantly higher risk of infection. This is because rural and peri-urban cats come in contact with the T. gondii natural reservoirs that they hunt, such as infected prey (i.e., rodents), more frequently [45,57,60,61,62]. In addition, rural regions tend to have a higher oocyst burden in the environment (soil and water) compared to urban regions [58]. Our results from the chi-square tests are in concordance with these studies, as it was found that cats living in rural areas (villages) of Greece had significantly higher seropositivity than cats living in urban areas (cities).
According to our findings from chi-square tests and the binary logistic regression model, gender was not a significant risk factor for T. gondii seropositivity, as showcased in almost all previous studies [44,50,54,56,57,58,59,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71]. Both male and female cats seem similarly vulnerable to acquiring T. gondii. A few studies which identified gender as a risk factor suggested that stray male cats have higher seropositivity than females. This finding might be explained because males consume more meals, and thus have a higher probability of becoming infected, and because they hunt in a larger area [72,73]. In particular, this difference in seropositivity was quite evident in regions with more prey intermediate hosts [72]. Conversely, some studies observed higher seropositivity in female cats [45,74,75,76]. The explanations provided were that females have different behaviours than males, and may wander more based on the season [45] or hormonal imbalances [76].
With regards to age, the risk of infection typically increases with cats’ age due to increased exposure, and not because older cats are more susceptible [59,77,78]. In this context, several studies recorded a significant increase in seropositivity as cats became older [44,45,52,53,54,56,57,58,59,65,66,67,69,70,72,73,74,78,79,80]. The only exception seems to be with kittens a few weeks old, as they may have a seroprevalence of 30% [66] or even 100% [76], probably due to the transfer of IgG maternal antibodies through the colostrum [64,76]. After that age, seropositivity starts to decrease before naturally increasing again after kittens become two months old and start hunting [66]. In our case, age was not a statistically significant risk factor both in the chi-square tests and in the binary logistic regression model, but the relative risk of seropositivity increased by 41% for cats older than six months compared to cats younger than six months. In detail, adult cats presented a seropositivity of 22.6% and young cats presented 16%, but the risk of infection was not significantly higher in adult cats, probably due to the small sample size of the young cats (n = 137). Moreover, the difference might not have been statistically significant due to the transfer of maternal antibodies in cats younger than six months, which increased their seropositivity. Similarly to our results, many researchers have not established any correlation between increased age and seroprevalence [50,61,63,64,71,76], although, in some of those studies, a non-significant increase in seropositivity in older cats was depicted [63,71].
Raw feeding has also been considered a significant risk factor for feline toxoplasmosis [52,54,57,74,78,81,82,83,84]. Cats consuming raw or undercooked viscera/meat may have a higher chance of ingesting tissue cysts containing bradyzoites [78]. Conversely, cats fed commercial diets have a lower risk of acquiring the infection. It has been shown that even cats that live indoors can have a high prevalence of T. gondii if they are fed a raw diet [65]. However, many researchers claim that raw meat diets are not always associated with a higher T. gondii seroprevalence in cats [50,53,56,59,69]. Our study’s results from the chi-square tests and the binary logistic regression model align with the latter findings since there was no statistically significant increase in seropositivity in raw-feeding cats. One possible explanation is that most owners stored the raw meat/viscera in the freezer for more than two days, allowing tissue cysts to be killed [85], a common practice for preserving meat in our country. Furthermore, the meat itself might not have been initially infected with T. gondii cysts, i.e., if it was beef which is generally considered safe [16].
Many previous studies consider outdoor access a key risk factor [52,53,57,59,70,80]. Our findings from the chi-square tests are consistent with the aforementioned studies; the risk of infection was significantly higher in cats with outdoor access, and the relative risk of infection was increased by 42%. Cats that freely roam outdoors hunt to eat, and their prey (rodents, birds, or even placentas/foetuses) might be infected or mechanically carrying oocysts (i.e., arthropods), compared with cats that live indoors and typically eat safe processed food [51,56,63]. In addition, cats that dwell outside have an increased chance of becoming infected with oocysts from the environment [53], i.e., when drinking contaminated water [27] or contacting contaminated trash [63]. Although some studies found no significant association between outdoor access and T. gondii seropositivity [58,69,74], almost all of them observed a slight increase in seropositivity in cats with outside access [69,74].
Finally, feral-stray cats usually have a higher risk of acquiring T. gondii than domiciled cats [52,65,80,86,87]. Stray cats play a major role in disseminating T. gondii oocysts in the environment and thus are of prime interest for the disease’s epidemiology. Considering their ability to overpopulate quickly, they pose an even greater risk [68]. However, in the present study, the risk of infection was not significantly different in stray cats than in client-owned cats, despite the higher seropositivity rate in stray cats. A possible explanation is that most client-owned cats also had outdoor access, such as those in a similar study [54], and were hunting. Alternatively, stray cats may only hunt occasionally and not feed directly from their prey, but rather from garbage containing human-prepared food that is cooked [27]. Furthermore, many owned cats in Greece derive from adoptions of shelter or stray cats. As a result, the risk of infection is not significantly different between client-owned and stray cats. Correspondingly, a few studies found no significant difference in the risk of infection between stray and client-owned cats [54,62,67,70,88].

5. Conclusions

T. gondii infections in cats are present in all nine geographic regions of Greece. In this large-scale study, the detection of anti-T. gondii IgG in cats was 21.8%. This finding implies that although a large portion of cats in Greece is seronegative, which translates to a relatively low environmental oocyst burden, T. gondii circulates among the feline population in the country. Therefore, our study highlights the importance of raising awareness to avoid infections. Towards this end, based on risk factor analyses, owners should limit their cats’ access outdoors and control their hunting habits, particularly in rural regions. The current research emphasizes the importance of updated seroprevalence estimation and risk factors studies which remain crucial within the One Health framework.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.S. and E.P.; methodology, G.S., I.S., A.I.G., and E.P.; software, A.I.G.; validation, G.S., I.S., and E.P.; formal analysis, G.S., I.S., A.I.G., C.T., and E.P.; investigation, G.S. and E.P.; resources, E.P. and A.I.G.; data curation, G.S., A.I.G., and E.P.; writing—original draft preparation, G.S.; writing—review and editing, G.S., I.S., A.I.G., C.T., and E.P.; visualization, G.S., I.S., and E.P.; supervision, E.P.; project administration, E.P.; funding acquisition, E.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The animal study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKI (192746/2022 and date of approval 20 July 2022).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

Authors are thankful to the Greek Action of Volunteer Veterinarians (E.D.K.E) for assisting in the collection of the blood samples during their missions in various parts of Greece.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Mehlhorn, H. (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Parasitology, 4th ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  2. Dubey, J.P. The history of Toxoplasma gondii—The first 100 years. J. Eukaryot. Microbiol. 2008, 55, 467–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Tenter, A.M.; Heckeroth, A.R.; Weiss, L.M. Toxoplasma gondii: From animals to humans. Int. J. Parasitol. 2000, 30, 1217–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Dubey, J.P.; Lindsay, D.S.; Speer, C.A. Structures of Toxoplasma gondii tachyzoites, bradyzoites, and sporozoites and biology and development of tissue cysts. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 1998, 11, 267–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Almeria, S.; Dubey, J.P. Foodborne transmission of Toxoplasma gondii infection in the last decade. An overview. Res. Vet. Sci. 2021, 135, 371–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Atmaca, H.T.; Dincel, G.C.; Macun, H.C.; Terzi, O.S.; Uzunalioglu, T.; Kalender, H.; Kul, O. A rare case of feline congenital Toxoplasma gondii infection: Fatal outcome of systemic toxoplasmosis for the mother and its kitten. Berl. Munch. Tierarztl. Wochenschr. 2013, 126, 216–219. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  7. Davidson, M.G. Toxoplasmosis. Vet. Clin. N. Am.—Small Anim. Pract. 2000, 30, 1051–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Calero-Berna, R.; Gennari, S.M. Clinical toxoplasmosis in dogs and cats: An update. Front. Vet. Sci. 2019, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Schlüter, D.; Barragan, A. Advances and challenges in understanding cerebral toxoplasmosis. Front. Immunol. 2019, 10, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wang, Z.D.; Wang, S.C.; Liu, H.H.; Ma, H.Y.; Li, Z.Y.; Wei, F.; Zhu, X.Q.; Liu, Q. Prevalence and burden of Toxoplasma gondii infection in HIV-infected people: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet HIV 2017, 4, e177–e188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Machumi, I.; M Mirambo, M.; Ruganuza, D.; Rambau, P.; Massinde, A.N.; Kihunrwa, A.; Mshana, S.E.; Morona, D. Factors Associated With Toxoplasma gondii IgG and IgM Antibodies, and Placental Histopathological Changes Among Women With Spontaneous Abortion in Mwanza City, Tanzania. East Afr. Health Res. J. 2017, 1, 86–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. de Moraes, É.P.B.X.; da Costa, M.M.; Dantas, A.F.M.; da Silva, J.C.R.; Mota, R.A. Toxoplasma gondii diagnosis in ovine aborted fetuses and stillborns in the State of Pernambuco, Brazil. Vet. Parasitol. 2011, 183, 152–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Sakamoto, C.A.M.; Da Costa, A.J.; Gennari, S.M.; Pena, H.F.J.; Toniollo, G.H.; Lopes, W.D.Z.; Bichuette, M.A.; Betini, C.M.; Amarante, A.F.T.; Bresciani, K.D.S. Experimental infection of pregnant queens with two major Brazilian clonal lineages of Toxoplasma gondii. Parasitol. Res. 2009, 105, 1311–1316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Montoya, J.G.; Liesenfeld, O. Toxoplasmosis. Lancet 2004, 363, 1965–1976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. World Health Organization. Available online: https://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/402989/50607-WHO-Food-Safety-publicationV4_Web.pdf (accessed on 30 September 2022).
  16. Beugnet, F.; Halos, L.; Guillot, J. Textbook of Clinical Parasitology in Dogs and Cats; Servet Editorial—Grupo Asís Biomedia, S.L.: Zaragoza, Spain, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  17. Davidson, M.G.; Lappin, M.R.; Rottman, J.R.; Tompkins, M.B.; English, R.V.; Bruce, A.T.; Jayawickrama, J. Paradoxical effect of clindamycin in experimental, acute toxoplasmosis in cats. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 1996, 40, 1352–1359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Montoya, J.G. Laboratory diagnosis of Toxoplasma gondii infection and toxoplasmosis. J. Infect. Dis. 2002, 185, 135–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  19. Dubey, J.P.; Cerqueira-Cézar, C.K.; Murata, F.H.A.; Kwok, O.C.H.; Yang, Y.R.; Su, C. All about toxoplasmosis in cats: The last decade. Vet. Parasitol. 2020, 283, 109145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Lappin, M.R. Feline toxoplasmosis: Interpretation of diagnostic test results. Semin. Vet. Med. Surg.-Small Anim. 1996, 11, 154–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Huang, X.; Xuan, X.; Hirata, H.; Yokoyama, N.; Xu, L.; Suzuki, N.; Igarashi, I. Rapid Immunochromatographic Test Using Recombinant SAG2 for Detection of Antibodies against Toxoplasma gondii in Cats. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2004, 42, 351–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Jiang, W.; Liu, Y.; Chen, Y.; Yang, Q.; Chun, P.; Yao, K.; Han, X.; Wang, S.; Yu, S.; Liu, Y.; et al. A novel dynamic flow immunochromatographic test (DFICT) using gold nanoparticles for the serological detection of Toxoplasma gondii infection in dogs and cats. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2015, 72, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ybañez, R.H.D.; Kyan, H.; Nishikawa, Y. Detection of antibodies against Toxoplasma gondii in cats using an immunochromatographic test based on GRA7 antigen. J. Vet. Med. Sci. 2020, 82, 441–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Dubey, J.P.; Frenkel, J.K. Cyst-Induced Toxoplasmosis in Cats. J. Protozool. 1972, 19, 155–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Dumètre, A.; Dardé, M.L. How to detect Toxoplasma gondii oocysts in environmental samples? FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2003, 27, 651–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Yan, C.; Fu, L.L.; Yue, C.L.; Tang, R.X.; Liu, Y.S.; Lv, L.; Shi, N.; Zeng, P.; Zhang, P.; Wang, D.H.; et al. Stray dogs as indicators of Toxoplasma gondii distributed in the environment: The first report across an urban-rural gradient in China. Parasites Vectors 2012, 5, 2–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Meireles, L.R.; Galisteo, A.J.; Pompeu, E.; Andrade, H.F. Toxoplasma gondii spreading in an urban area evaluated by seroprevalence in free-living cats and dogs. Trop. Med. Int. Health 2004, 9, 876–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Symeonidou, I.; Gelasakis, A.I.; Arsenopoulos, K.; Angelou, A.; Beugnet, F.; Papadopoulos, E. Feline gastrointestinal parasitism in Greece: Emergent zoonotic species and associated risk factors. Parasites Vectors 2018, 11, 227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Montazeri, M.; Mikaeili Galeh, T.; Moosazadeh, M.; Sarvi, S.; Dodangeh, S.; Javidnia, J.; Sharif, M.; Daryani, A. The global serological prevalence of Toxoplasma gondii in felids during the last five decades (1967-2017): A systematic review and meta-analysis. Parasites Vectors 2020, 13, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bellows, J.; Center, S.; Daristotle, L.; Estrada, A.H.; Flickinger, E.A.; Horwitz, D.F.; Lascelles, B.D.X.; Lepine, A.; Perea, S.; Scherk, M.; et al. Aging in cats: Common physical and functional changes. J. Feline Med. Surg. 2016, 18, 533–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Shin, S.; (BioNote Inc., Hwaseong-si, Republic of Korea). Personal communication, 2022.
  32. Kostopoulou, D.; Claerebout, E.; Arvanitis, D.; Ligda, P.; Voutzourakis, N.; Casaert, S.; Sotiraki, S. Abundance, zoonotic potential and risk factors of intestinal parasitism amongst dog and cat populations: The scenario of Crete, Greece. Parasites Vectors 2017, 10, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Dubey, J.P. Toxoplasmosis of Animals and Humans, 3rd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  34. Zhu, S.; Shapiro, K.; VanWormer, E. Dynamics and epidemiology of Toxoplasma gondii oocyst shedding in domestic and wild felids. Transbound. Emerg. Dis. 2021, 69, 2412–2423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Schares, G.; Vrhovec, M.G.; Pantchev, N.; Herrmann, D.C.; Conraths, F.J. Occurrence of Toxoplasma gondii and Hammondia hammondi oocysts in the faeces of cats from Germany and other European countries. Vet. Parasitol. 2008, 152, 34–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Verma, S.K.; Cerqueira-Cézar, C.K.; Murata, F.H.A.; Lovallo, M.J.; Rosenthal, B.M.; Dubey, J.P. Bobcats (Lynx rufus) are natural definitive host of Besnoitia darlingi. Vet. Parasitol. 2017, 248, 84–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Hatam-Nahavandi, K.; Calero-Bernal, R.; Rahimi, M.T.; Pagheh, A.S.; Zarean, M.; Dezhkam, A.; Ahmadpour, E. Toxoplasma gondii infection in domestic and wild felids as public health concerns: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 9509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Montoya, A.; Miró, G.; Mateo, M.; Ramírez, C.; Fuentes, I. Molecular characterization of Toxoplasma gondii isolates from cats in Spain. J. Parasitol. 2008, 94, 1044–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Hotea, I.; Oprescu, I.; Ilie, M.; Imre, K.; Imre, M.; Darabus, G. Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii infection in cats and sheep in Arad County. Med. Vet. 2011, 44, 63–68. [Google Scholar]
  40. Lamaj, S.; Dhamo, G.; Dova, I. Toxoplasma gondii Infection in cats from southwest areas of Albania. Albanian J. Agric. Sci. 2015, 14, 408–413. [Google Scholar]
  41. Can, H.; Döşkaya, M.; Ajzenberg, D.; Özdemir, H.G.; Caner, A.; Iz, S.G.; Döşkaya, A.D.; Atalay, E.; Çetinkaya, Ç.; Ürgen, S.; et al. Genetic characterization of Toxoplasma gondii isolates and toxoplasmosis seroprevalence in stray cats of Izmir, Turkey. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e104930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. de Jesus Pena, H.F.; Evangelista, C.M.; Casagrande, R.A.; Biezus, G.; Wisser, C.S.; Ferian, P.E.; de Moura, A.B.; Rolim, V.M.; Driemeier, D.; Oliveira, S.; et al. Fatal toxoplasmosis in an immunosuppressed domestic cat from Brazil caused by Toxoplasma gondii clonal type I. Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Vet. 2017, 26, 177–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Dubey, J.P.; Lappin, M.R.; Kwok, O.C.H.; Mofya, S.; Chikweto, A.; Baffa, A.; Doherty, D.; Shakeri, J.; MacPherson, C.N.L.; Sharma, R.N. Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii and concurrent Bartonella spp., Feline Immunodeficiency Virus, and Feline Leukemia Virus infections in cats from Grenada, West Indies. J. Parasitol. 2009, 95, 1129–1133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Pena, H.F.J.; Soares, R.M.; Amaku, M.; Dubey, J.P.; Gennari, S.M. Toxoplasma gondii infection in cats from São Paulo state, Brazil: Seroprevalence, oocyst shedding, isolation in mice, and biologic and molecular characterization. Res. Vet. Sci. 2006, 81, 58–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Hornok, S.; Edelhofer, R.; Joachim, A.; Farkas, R.; Berta, K.; Répási, A.; Lakatos, B. Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii and Neospora caninum infection of cats in Hungary. Acta Vet. Hung. 2008, 56, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Hartmann, K.; Addie, D.; Belák, S.; Boucraut-Baralon, C.; Egberink, H.; Frymus, T.; Gruffydd-Jones, T.; Hosie, M.J.; Lloret, A.; Lutz, H.; et al. Toxoplasma Gondii Infection in cats: ABCD guidelines on prevention and management. J. Feline Med. Surg. 2013, 15, 631–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Dubey, J.P.; Lappin, M.R.; Thulliez, P. Long-term antibody responses of cats fed Toxoplasma gondii tissue cysts. J. Parasitol. 1995, 81, 887–893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Malmasi, A.; Mosallanejad, B.; Mohebali, M.; Sharifian Fard, M.; Taheri, M. Prevention of shedding and re-shedding of Toxoplasma gondii oocysts in experimentally infected cats treated with oral clindamycin: A preliminary study. Zoonoses Public Health 2009, 56, 102–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Samad, A.; Islam, M.R.; Dey, B.C.; Alam, M.M. Effects of corticosteroids in stray cats with natural antibodies to Toxoplasma gondii. J. Protozool. Res. 1997, 7, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  50. Castillo-Morales, V.J.; Acosta Viana, K.Y.; Guzmán-Marín, E.D.S.; Jiménez-Coello, M.; Segura-Correa, J.C.; Aguilar-Caballero, A.J.; Ortega-Pacheco, A. Prevalence and risk factors of Toxoplasma gondii infection in domestic cats from the tropics of Mexico using serological and molecular tests. Interdiscip. Perspect. Infect. Dis. 2012, 2012, 529108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Jones, J.L.; Dubey, J.P. Waterborne toxoplasmosis—Recent developments. Exp. Parasitol. 2010, 124, 10–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Opsteegh, M.; Haveman, R.; Swart, A.N.; Mensink-Beerepoot, M.E.; Hofhuis, A.; Langelaar, M.F.M.; van der Giessen, J.W.B. Seroprevalence and risk factors for Toxoplasma gondii infection in domestic cats in The Netherlands. Prev. Vet. Med. 2012, 104, 317–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Must, K.; Lassen, B.; Jokelainen, P. Seroprevalence of and risk factors for Toxoplasma gondii infection in cats in Estonia. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2015, 15, 597–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Feitosa, T.F.; Vilela, V.L.R.; Dantas, E.S.; Souto, D.V.O.; Pena, H.F.J.; Athayde, A.C.R.; Azevêdo, S.S. Toxoplasma gondii and Neospora caninum in domestic cats from the Brazilian semi-arid: Seroprevalence and risk factors. Arq. Bras. Med. Vet. Zootec. 2014, 66, 1060–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Kulasena, V.A.; Rajapakse, R.P.V.J.; Dubey, J.P.; Dayawansa, P.N.; Premawansa, S. Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii in cats from Colombo, Sri Lanka. J. Parasitol. 2011, 97, 152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Fernández, F.; Ouviña, G.; Clot, E.; Fernandes Guido, R.; Codoni, C. Prevalence of Toxoplasma gondii antibodies in cats in the western part of Great Buenos Aires, Argentina, 1993. Vet. Parasitol. 1995, 59, 75–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Györke, A.; Opsteegh, M.; Mircean, V.; Iovu, A.; Cozma, V. Toxoplasma gondii in Romanian household cats: Evaluation of serological tests, epidemiology and risk factors. Prev. Vet. Med. 2011, 102, 321–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Ahmad, N.; Ahmed, H.; Irum, S.; Qayyum, M. Seroprevalence of IgG and IgM antibodies and associated risk factors for toxoplasmosis in cats and dogs from sub-tropical arid parts of Pakistan. Trop. Biomed. 2014, 31, 777–784. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  59. Rosa, L.D.; de Moura, A.B.; Trevisani, N.; Medeiros, A.P.; Sartor, A.A.; da Souza, A.P.; Bellato, V. Toxoplasma gondii antibodies on domiciled cats from Lages municipality, Santa Catarina State, Brazil. Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Vet. 2010, 19, 268–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  60. Munhoz, A.D.; Hage, S.B.; Cruz, R.D.S.; Calazans, A.P.F.; Silva, F.L.; Albuquerque, G.R.; Lacerda, L.C. Toxoplasmosis in cats in northeastern Brazil: Frequency, associated factors and coinfection with Neospora caninum, Feline Immunodeficiency Virus and Feline Leukemia Virus. Vet. Parasitol. Reg. Stud. Rep. 2017, 8, 35–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Oi, M.; Yoshikawa, S.; Maruyama, S.; Nogami, S. Comparison of Toxoplasma gondii seroprevalence in shelter cats and dogs during 1999–2001 and 2009–2011 in Tokyo, Japan. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0135956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. DeFeo, M.L.; Dubey, J.P.; Mather, T.N.; Rhodes, R.C. Epidemiologic investigation of seroprevalence of antibodies to Toxoplasma gondii in cats and rodents. Am. J. Vet. Res. 2002, 63, 1714–1717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ayinmode, A.B.; Oluwayelu, D.O.; Babalola, E.T.; Lawani, M.A. Serologic survey of Toxoplasma gondii antibodies in cats (Felis catus) sold at live animal markets in southwestern Nigeria. Bulg. J. Vet. Med. 2017, 20, 58–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Gauss, C.B.L.; Almería, S.; Ortuño, A.; Garcia, F.; Dubey, J.P. Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii Antibodies in Domestic Cats from Barcelona, Spain. J. Parasitol. 2003, 89, 1063–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Salant, H.; Spira, D.T. A cross-sectional survey of anti-Toxoplasma gondii antibodies in Jerusalem cats. Vet. Parasitol. 2004, 124, 167–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Jakob-Hoff, R.M.; Dunsmore, J.D. Epidemiological aspects of toxoplasmosis in southern Western Australia. Aust. Vet. J. 1983, 60, 217–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Lee, S.E.; Kim, N.H.; Chae, H.S.; Cho, S.H.; Nam, H.W.; Lee, W.J.; Kim, S.H.; Lee, J.H. Prevalence of Toxoplasma gondii Infection in Feral Cats in Seoul, Korea. J. Parasitol. 2011, 97, 153–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Lopes, A.P.; Oliveira, A.C.; Granada, S.; Rodrigues, F.T.; Papadopoulos, E.; Schallig, H.; Dubey, J.P.; Cardoso, L. Antibodies to Toxoplasma gondii and Leishmania spp. in domestic cats from Luanda, Angola. Vet. Parasitol. 2017, 239, 15–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Deksne, G.; Petruseviča, A.; Kirjušina, M. Seroprevalence and factors associated with Toxoplasma gondii infection in domestic cats from urban areas in Latvia. J. Parasitol. 2013, 99, 48–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. da Silva Rocha Fournier, G.F.; Lopes, M.G.; Marcili, A.; Ramirez, D.G.; Acosta, I.C.L.; da Silva Ferreira, J.I.G.; Cabral, A.D.; de Lima, J.T.R.; de Jesus Pena, H.F.; Dias, R.A.; et al. Toxoplasma gondii in domestic and wild animals from forest fragments of the municipality of Natal, northeastern Brazil. Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Vet. 2014, 23, 501–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Arene, F.O.I. The prevalence and public health significance of Toxoplasma gondii in domestic cats in the Niger Delta. Public Health 1984, 98, 333–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Afonso, E.; Thulliez, P.; Pontier, D.; Gilot-Fromont, E. Toxoplasmosis in prey species and consequences for prevalence in feral cats: Not all prey species are equal. Parasitology 2007, 134, 1963–1971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Vollaire, M.R.; Radecki, S.V.; Lappin, M.R. Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii antibodies in clinically ill cats in the United States. Am. J. Vet. Res. 2005, 66, 874–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Besné-Mérida, A.; Figueroa-Castillo, J.A.; Martínez-Maya, J.J.; Luna-Pastén, H.; Calderón-Segura, E.; Correa, D. Prevalence of antibodies against Toxoplasma gondii in domestic cats from Mexico City. Vet. Parasitol. 2008, 157, 310–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Jittapalapong, S.; Nimsupan, B.; Pinyopanuwat, N.; Chimnoi, W.; Kabeya, H.; Maruyama, S. Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii antibodies in stray cats and dogs in the Bangkok metropolitan area, Thailand. Vet. Parasitol. 2007, 145, 138–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Dhamraa, R.; Alwan, J. Seropathological Diagnosis of Toxoplasma gondii in Stray Cats in Baghdad Province. Iraqi J. Vet. Med. 2014, 38, 92–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Dubey, J.P.; Lindsay, D.S.; Lappin, M.R. Toxoplasmosis and other intestinal coccidial infections in cats and dogs. Vet. Clin. North Am.—Small Anim. Pract. 2009, 39, 1009–1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Must, K.; Hytönen, M.K.; Orro, T.; Lohi, H.; Jokelainen, P. Toxoplasma gondii seroprevalence varies by cat breed. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0184659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Childs, J.E.; Rooney, J.A.; Cooper, J.L.; Olson, J.G.; Regnery, R.L. Epidemiologic observations on infection with Rochalimaea species among cats living in Baltimore, Md. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1994, 204, 1775–1778. [Google Scholar]
  80. Nutter, F.B.; Dubey, J.P.; Levine, J.F.; Breitschwerdt, E.B.; Ford, R.B.; Stoskopf, M.K. Seroprevalences of antibodies against Bartonella henselae and Toxoplasma gondii and fecal shedding of Cryptosporidium spp., Giardia spp., and Toxocara cati in feral and pet domestic cats. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 2004, 225, 1394–1398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Lucas, S.R.R.; Hagiwara, M.K.; De Loureiro, V.S.; Ikesaki, J.Y.H.; Birgel, E.H. Toxoplasma gondii infection in Brazilian domestic outpatient cats. Rev. Inst. Med. Trop. Sao Paulo 1999, 41, 221–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Smielewska-Loś, E.; Pacoń, J. Toxoplasma gondii infection of cats in epizootiological and clinical aspects. Pol. J. Vet. Sci. 2002, 5, 227–230. [Google Scholar]
  83. Lopes, A.P.; Cardoso, L.; Rodrigues, M. Serological survey of Toxoplasma gondii infection in domestic cats from northeastern Portugal. Vet. Parasitol. 2008, 155, 184–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Jokelainen, P.; Simola, O.; Rantanen, E.; Näreaho, A.; Lohi, H.; Sukura, A. Feline toxoplasmosis in Finland: Cross-sectional epidemiological study and case series study. J. Vet. Diagn. Investig. 2012, 24, 1115–1124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. El-Nawawi, F.A.; Tawfik, M.A.; Shaapan, R.M. Methods for inactivation of Toxoplasma gondii cysts in meat and tissues of experimentally infected sheep. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2008, 5, 687–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Knaus, B.U.; Fehler, K. Toxoplasma gondii infections and oocyst shedding in domestic cats and the significance of this for the epidemiology and epizootiology of toxoplasmosis. Angew. Parasitol. 1989, 30, 155–160. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  87. Al-Mohammed, H.I. Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii infection in cats, dogs and ruminant animals in Al-Ahsa area in Saudi Arabia. Res. J. Med. Sci. 2011, 5, 190–192. [Google Scholar]
  88. Advincula, C.; Yaser Perez Iewida, S.; Salibay, C.C.; Karla, J.; Cabanacan-Salibay, C. Serologic detection of Toxoplasma gondii infection in stray and household cats and its hematologic evaluation. Sci. Med. (Porto Alegre) 2010, 20, 76–82. [Google Scholar]
Pathogens 11 01511 g001 550
Figure 1. Toxoplasma gondii IgG seroprevalence rate in cats from different geographical regions of Greece.
Figure 1. Toxoplasma gondii IgG seroprevalence rate in cats from different geographical regions of Greece.
Pathogens 11 01511 g001
Table
Table 1. Toxoplasma gondii IgG seroprevalence in cats belonging to different risk factor groups.
Table 1. Toxoplasma gondii IgG seroprevalence in cats belonging to different risk factor groups.
Risk FactorRisk Factor GroupNumber of Tested CatsSeroprevalence (%)95% CI of Seroprevalence (%)
EnvironmentLiving in rural areas (villages) 109023.320.8–25.8
Living in urban areas (cities) 46418.314.8–21.8
GenderFemale cats 79923.520.6–26.4
Male cats 75520.017.2–22.9
AgeAdult cats (>6 months) 132922.620.4–24.9
Young cats (≤6 months) 13716.09.9–22.1
Raw feedingYes 74522.619.6–25.6
No 80921.018.2–23.8
LifestyleCats with outdoor access 110123.821.3–26.3
Strictly indoor living cats 45316.713.3–20.1
OwnershipOwned cats 80520.617.8–23.4
Stray cats 74823.120.1–26.1
Hunting activityYes 99224.321.6–27.0
No 56217.214.1–20.3
Total seroprevalence-155421.819.8–23.9
Table
Table 2. Chi-square tests, odds ratios, and relatives risks for seropositivity of T. gondii in cats.
Table 2. Chi-square tests, odds ratios, and relatives risks for seropositivity of T. gondii in cats.
VariableGroup%
Seronegative
(78.2%, n = 1215)		%
Seropositive
(21.8%, n = 339)		χ2dfp-ValueϕcOR (95% CI)RR
Environment---4.7410.0290.0551.36 (1.03–1.78)1.27
Rural68.8 (836)74.9 (254)
Urban *31.2 (379)25.1 (85)
Gender---2.8410.0920.0431.23 (0.97–1.57)1.18
Female50.3 (611)55.5 (188)
Male *49.7 (604)44.5 (151)
Age---3.1410.0760.0461.53 (0.95–2.46)1.41
>6 months89.9 (1028)93.2 (301)
≤6 months *10.1 (115)6.8 (22)
Raw feeding---0.6410.4260.0201.10 (0.87–1.40)1.08
Yes47.4 (576)49.9 (169)
No *52.6 (639)50.1 (170)
Lifestyle---9.5110.0020.0781.56 (1.17–2.07)1.42
Outside69.0 (838)77.6 (263)
Inside *31.0 (377)22.4 (76)
Ownership---1.4310.2320.0301.16 (0.91–1.47)1.12
Owned52.6 (639)49.0 (166)
Stray *47.4 (575)51.0 (173)
Hunting activity---10.7110.0010.0831.55 (1.19–2.01)1.41
Yes61.7 (750)71.4 (242)
No *38.3 (465)28.6 (97)
* Reference groups, df: degrees of freedom, ϕc: Cramér’s V, OR: odds ratio, RR: relative risk.
Table
Table 3. The association between the studied risk factors forced into the model (sex, age, raw feeding, and hunting activity) and the seropositivity to Toxoplasma gondii.
Table 3. The association between the studied risk factors forced into the model (sex, age, raw feeding, and hunting activity) and the seropositivity to Toxoplasma gondii.
UrbanB 1S.E. 2WaldpOdds Ratio95% C.I. 3
for EXP(B)
LowerUpper
<6 months−0.590.4072.090.1480.560.251.23
≥6 monthsRef. 4
Male0.140.2490.300.5841.150.701.87
FemaleRef.
No raw feeding0.160.4450.1310.7171.180.492.81
Raw feedingRef.
No hunting activity−0.820.3136.840.0090.440.240.81
Hunting activityRef.
Constant−0.970.4005.840.0160.38
RuralBS.E.WaldpOdds ratio95% C.I.
for EXP(B)
LowerUpper
≤6 months−0.250.3130.640.4240.780.421.44
>6 monthsRef.
Male−0.280.1493.520.0610.760.571.01
FemaleRef.
No raw feeding0.240.1861.630.2011.270.881.83
Raw feedingRef.
No hunting activity−0.260.2511.110.2930.770.471.26
Hunting activityRef.
Constant−1.090.11195.950.0000.34
1 Beta coefficient, 2 standard error, 3 confidence interval, 4 reference groups.
Table
Table 4. Toxoplasma gondii IgG seropositivity percentages in cats from different geographical regions of Greece.
Table 4. Toxoplasma gondii IgG seropositivity percentages in cats from different geographical regions of Greece.
Geographical RegionNumber of Tested CatsSeroprevalence (%)95% CI of Seroprevalence (%)
Thrace 20021.816.1–27.5
Macedonia 24314.910.4–19.4
Epirus 18118.713.0–24.4
Thessaly 17118.512.7–24.3
Central Greece 17921.015.0–27.0
Peloponnese 10542.833.3–52.3
Crete 15222.816.1–29.5
Ionian islands 17020.014.0–26.0
Aegean islands15326.619.6–33.6
Total:155421.819.8–23.9
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sioutas, G.; Symeonidou, I.; Gelasakis, A.I.; Tzirinis, C.; Papadopoulos, E. Feline Toxoplasmosis in Greece: A Countrywide Seroprevalence Study and Associated Risk Factors. Pathogens 2022, 11, 1511. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens11121511

AMA Style

Sioutas G, Symeonidou I, Gelasakis AI, Tzirinis C, Papadopoulos E. Feline Toxoplasmosis in Greece: A Countrywide Seroprevalence Study and Associated Risk Factors. Pathogens. 2022; 11(12):1511. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens11121511

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sioutas, Georgios, Isaia Symeonidou, Athanasios I. Gelasakis, Christos Tzirinis, and Elias Papadopoulos. 2022. "Feline Toxoplasmosis in Greece: A Countrywide Seroprevalence Study and Associated Risk Factors" Pathogens 11, no. 12: 1511. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens11121511

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop