Infection with Schistosoma haematobium causes urogenital disease associated with organ disfunction, bleeding, pain, and higher susceptibility to infections and cancer. Timely and accurate diagnosis is crucial for prompt and appropriate treatment as well as surveillance efforts, and the use of plasma biomarkers offers important advantages over parasitological examination of urine, including increased sensitivity and the possibility to use the same specimen for multiple investigations. The present study aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of different plasma biomarkers in endemic populations from Burkina Faso, West Africa. Schistosoma spp. Circulating Anodic Antigen (CAA), cell free S. haematobium DNA (cfDNA), class M and G antibodies against S. haematobium Soluble Worm Antigen Preparation (SWAP) and Soluble Egg Antigen (SEA) were measured in 406 plasma samples. Results of each biomarker test were compared to those of CAA, a Composite Reference Standard (CRS) and Latent Class Analysis (LCA). An identical proportion of positive samples (29%) was observed as a result of CAA and cfDNA testing, with a substantial agreement (84%, Cohen k=0.62) between the results of the two tests, and a comparable agreement with the results of CRS and LCA. A higher positivity was observed, as expected, as a result of specific antibody testing (47%-72%), with IgG showing a higher agreement than IgM with the three references. Also, higher IgG levels were observed in current vs past infection, and ROC analysis identified optimal cutoff values for improved testing accuracy. This study provides compelling evidence that can inform the choice of the most appropriate diagnostic plasma biomarker for urogenital schistosomiasis in endemic areas, depending on the purpose, context, and available resources for testing. Either CAA or cfDNA testing can be used for the diagnosis of patients and for epidemiological investigations, even in absence of urine filtration microscopy, whereas anti-SWAP or anti-SEA IgG can be employed for surveillance and integrated monitoring of control interventions against poverty-associated diseases.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Study subjects or their guardians gave written informed consent for participation. The original malaria epidemiological study received approval from the ethical committee of the Ministry of Health of Burkina Faso (2007-048). The use of archived plasma samples for schistosomiasis research received further approval from the ethical committee of the Ministry of Health and Public Hygiene of Burkina Faso (2022-05-15).

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes