The Amazonian Tropical Bites Research Initiative, a hope for resolving zoonotic neglected tropical diseases in the One Health era.

BACKGROUND: Neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) disproportionately affect populations living in resource-limited settings. In the Amazon basin, substantial numbers of NTDs are zoonotic, transmitted by vertebrate (dogs, bats, snakes) and invertebrate species (sand flies and triatomine insects). However, no dedicated consortia exist to find commonalities in the risk factors for or mitigations against bite-associated NTDs such as rabies, snake envenoming, Chagas disease and leishmaniasis in the region. The rapid expansion of COVID-19 has further reduced resources for NTDs, exacerbated health inequality and reiterated the need to raise awareness of NTDs related to bites. METHODS: The nine countries that make up the Amazon basin have been considered (Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guyana, Peru, Surinam and Venezuela) in the formation of a new network. RESULTS: The Amazonian Tropical Bites Research Initiative (ATBRI) has been created, with the aim of creating transdisciplinary solutions to the problem of animal bites leading to disease in Amazonian communities. The ATBRI seeks to unify the currently disjointed approach to the control of bite-related neglected zoonoses across Latin America. CONCLUSIONS: The coordination of different sectors and inclusion of all stakeholders will advance this field and generate evidence for policy-making, promoting governance and linkage across a One Health arena.

A faster and less costly alternative for RNA extraction of SARS-CoV-2 using proteinase k treatment followed by thermal shock.

One of the biggest challenges during the pandemic has been obtaining and maintaining critical material to conduct the increasing demand for molecular tests. Sometimes, the lack of suppliers and the global shortage of these reagents, a consequence of the high demand, make it difficult to detect and diagnose patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, negatively impacting the control of virus spread. Many alternatives have enabled the continuous processing of samples and have presented a decrease in time and cost. These measures thus allow broad testing of the population and should be ideal for controlling the disease. In this sense, we compared the SARS-CoV-2 molecular detection effectiveness by Real time RT-PCR using two different protocols for RNA extraction. The experiments were conducted in the National Institute of Health (INS) from Peru. We compared Ct values average (experimental triplicate) results from two different targets, a viral and internal control. All samples were extracted in parallel using a commercial kit and our alternative protocol-samples submitted to proteinase K treatment (3 µg/µL, 56°C for 10 minutes) followed by thermal shock (98°C for 5 minutes followed by 4°C for 2 minutes); the agreement between results was 100% in the samples tested. In addition, we compared the COVID-19 positivity between six epidemiological weeks: the initial two in that the Real time RT-PCR reactions were conducted using RNA extracted by commercial kit, followed by two other using RNA obtained by our kit-free method, and the last two using kit once again; they did not differ significantly. We concluded that our in-house method is an easy, fast, and cost-effective alternative method for extracting RNA and conducing molecular diagnosis of COVID-19.