Journal of Parasitic Diseases: Diagnosis and Therapy

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +1 (629)348-3199

Opinion Article - Journal of Parasitic Diseases: Diagnosis and Therapy (2025) Volume 10, Issue 2

Biomarkers for Imaging in Parasitic Diseases

Rashmi Verma*

Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, India

Corresponding Author:
Rashmi Verma
Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, India
E-mail: rashmiv@icmr.gov.in

Received: 02-Apr-2024, Manuscript No. AAPDDT-25-166446; Editor assigned: 03-Apr-2024, AAPDDT-25-166446(PQ); Reviewed: 01-Apr-2024, QC No. AAPDDT-25-166446; Revised: 14-Apr-2024, Manuscript No. AAPDDT-25-166446 (R); Published: 22-Apr-2024, DOI:10.35841/2591-7846.10.2.224

Citation:Verma R. Biomarkers for Imaging in Parasitic Diseases, J Parasit Dis Diagn Ther. 2025; 10(2):224

Introduction

Parasitic diseases continue to pose significant public health challenges worldwide, especially in tropical and subtropical regions. Early diagnosis and accurate monitoring of these diseases are essential for effective treatment and control. Imaging techniques, enhanced by specific biomarkers, have emerged as powerful tools in the diagnosis, staging, and therapeutic monitoring of parasitic infections. Biomarkers for imaging offer targeted visualization of parasite presence, host immune response, or pathological changes induced by parasitic infections, providing critical insights beyond conventional diagnostic methods [1, 2, 3, 4].

Single-photon emission computed tomography [SPECT]) are widely used to detect parasitic lesions, cysts, or tissue alterations. The Role of Imaging in Parasitic Diseases Imaging modalities such as ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and nuclear medicine techniques (e.g., positron emission tomography [PET] [5, 6, 7].

However, traditional imaging often lacks specificity, making it challenging to distinguish parasitic infections from other pathological conditions. Integration of biomarkers—molecules or signals indicative of infection or host response—into imaging improves specificity and sensitivity, facilitating better diagnosis and treatment planning. Types of Biomarkers Used in Imaging Biomarkers for imaging parasitic diseases can be broadly categorized as: 1. Molecular Biomarkers: These include parasite-specific antigens, enzymes, or nucleic acids that can be targeted by imaging probes (e.g., radiolabeled antibodies or ligands). 2. Host Response Biomarkers: Inflammatory markers, immune cells, or metabolic changes induced by infection can be visualized using specific imaging agents. 3. Metabolic Biomarkers: Parasites often alter local tissue metabolism, which can be detected using metabolic imaging probes [8, 9, 10].

Conclusion

Biomarkers for imaging in parasitic diseases represent a frontier that bridges molecular parasitology and clinical diagnostics. Their development enhances the ability to detect, characterize, and monitor parasitic infections with greater accuracy, facilitating improved patient management and advancing parasitic disease research. Continued innovation and validation of imaging biomarkers are essential to fully realize their potential in global health.

References

Allander K. The effects of an ectoparasite on reproductive success in the great tit: a 3-year experimental study. Can J Zool. 1998; 76(1):19-25.

Indexed atGoogle ScholarCross Ref

Brown CR, Brown MB. Ectoparasitism as a cause of natal dispersal in cliff swallows. Ecology. 1992; 73(5):1718-23.

Indexed atGoogle ScholarCross Ref

Christe P, Oppliger A, Richner H. Ectoparasite affects choice and use of roost sites in the great tit, Parus major. Animal Behaviour. 1994; 47(4):895-8.

Indexed atGoogle ScholarCross Ref

Christe P, Richner H, Oppliger A. Of great tits and fleas: sleep baby sleep: Animal Behaviour. 1996; 52(6):1087-92.

Indexed atGoogle ScholarCross Ref

Jolly GM. Explicit estimates from capture-recapture data with both death and immigration-stochastic model. Biometrika. 1965;52(2):225-47.

Indexed at, Google ScholarCross Ref

Krasnov BR, Korallo-Vinarskaya N, Vinarski MV, et.al. Temporal variation of metacommunity structure in arthropod ectoparasites harboured by small mammals: the effects of scale and climatic fluctuations. Parasitol Res. 2022;121(2):537-49.

Indexed atGoogle ScholarCross Ref

Fracasso G, Heylen D, Van Dongen S, et.al. Predictors of individual performance and evolutionary potential of life history traits in a hematophagous ectoparasite. Evol. 2022;76(4):799-816.

 Indexed atGoogle ScholarCross Ref

Garrido-Bautista J, Soria A, Trenzado CE, et.al. Within-brood body size and immunological differences in Blue Tit (Cyanistes caeruleus) nestlings relative to ectoparasitism. Avian Res. 2022; 100038.

Indexed atGoogle ScholarCross Ref

Noguera JC, Velando A. Maternal testosterone affects offspring telomerase activity in a long-lived seabird. Evol Ecol. 2022;12(9):e9281.

Indexed atGoogle ScholarCross Ref

McInerney PL, Arnold LJ, Burke C, et.al. Multiple occurrences of pathologies suggesting a common and severe bone infection in a population of the Australian Pleistocene giant, Genyornis newtoni (Aves, Dromornithidae). Pap Palaeontol. 2022;8(1):e1415.

 Indexed atGoogle ScholarCross Ref

Get the App