• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology >Evaluation of Four Commercially Available Epstein-Barr Virus Enzyme Immunoassays with an Immunofluorescence Assay as the Reference Method
【24h】

Evaluation of Four Commercially Available Epstein-Barr Virus Enzyme Immunoassays with an Immunofluorescence Assay as the Reference Method

机译：以免疫荧光测定为参考方法评估四种市售的爱泼斯坦-巴尔病毒酶免疫测定

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Four commercially available enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) (Novitec, Biotest, Virotech, and DiaSorin) were evaluated, with an indirect immunofluorescence assay as the reference method, for Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) VCA (viral capsid antigen) immunoglobulin G (IgG), VCA IgM, or EBNA (EBV nuclear antigen) IgG at three different locations (Homburg, Stuttgart, and Dresden). Serum samples from 66 immunocompetent patients with infectious mononucleosis, 73 patients without prior EBV infection, and 96 patients with past EBV infections and 29 serum samples with possible cross-reactions to other herpesviruses were included. In addition, 25 samples from an extensively pretested panel that is commercially available (Boston Biomedica) were tested. Each sample was tested at only one location. The four EIAs varied considerably in performance. When analyzing for EBV diagnosis, the Novitec assay performed the best, with 4.9% discrepant diagnoses, followed by the Biotest, Virotech, and DiaSorin assays, with 6.8, 11.7, and 14.0% discrepant diagnoses, respectively. On the basis of single-parameter analysis, the Novitec assay also showed the lowest number of discrepant results, with 3.5%, compared with the Virotech, Biotest, and DiaSorin assays, which produced 5.4, 6.4, and 8.6% discrepant results, respectively. VCA assays using affinity-purified native antigens performed better than assays with recombinant or synthetic antigens. The synthetic EBNA-1s showed the lowest concordance with the reference compared to recombinant p72. Commercially available EBV EIAs differed considerably in performance; however, some proved to be reliable and convenient alternatives to the indirect immunofluorescence assay for routine diagnostics. Native antigens, rather than synthetic peptides, are favored for EBV serology testing.
机译：以间接免疫荧光测定为参考方法，对四种针对爱泼斯坦-巴尔病毒（EBV）VCA（病毒衣壳抗原）免疫球蛋白G（IgG）的市售酶免疫测定（EIA）（Novitec，Biotest，Virotech和DiaSorin）进行了评估，VCA IgM或EBNA（EBV核抗原）IgG在三个不同的位置（洪堡，斯图加特和德累斯顿）。包括来自66例具有免疫功能的传染性单核细胞增多症患者，73例先前未感染过EBV的患者和96例先前进行过EBV感染的患者的血清样本，以及29份可能与其他疱疹病毒发生交叉反应的血清样本。另外，对来自广泛预测试的可商购样品（波士顿生物医学公司）的25个样品进行了测试。每个样品仅在一个位置进行测试。四个EIA的性能差异很大。在分析EBV诊断时，Novitec分析的诊断结果最佳，为4.9％差异，其次是Biotest，Virotech和DiaSorin分析的诊断为6.8、11.7％和14.0％。在单参数分析的基础上，与Virotech，Biotest和DiaSorin分析分别产生5.4、6.4和8.6％差异的结果相比，Novitec分析也显示了最低的差异结果数量，为3.5％。使用亲和纯化的天然抗原的VCA分析的效果要好于使用重组或合成抗原的分析。与重组p72相比，合成EBNA-1与参考文献的一致性最低。商用EBV EIA的性能差异很大;然而，对于常规诊断，某些方法被证明是间接免疫荧光测定的可靠且方便的替代方法。天然抗原而非合成肽更适合用于EBV血清学检测。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号