...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Mumps Virus-Specific Antibody Titers from Pre-Vaccine Era Sera: Comparison of the Plaque Reduction Neutralization Assay and Enzyme Immunoassays
【24h】

Mumps Virus-Specific Antibody Titers from Pre-Vaccine Era Sera: Comparison of the Plaque Reduction Neutralization Assay and Enzyme Immunoassays

机译：疫苗前时代流行性腮腺炎病毒特异性抗体滴度：噬菌斑减少中和测定和酶免疫测定的比较

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

摘要

Mumps virus-neutralizing antibodies are believed to be the most predictable surrogate marker of protective immunity. However, assays used to detect neutralizing antibodies, such as the plaque reduction neutralization (PRN) assay, are labor- and time-intensive and consequently are often supplanted by the more rapid and inexpensive enzyme immunoassay (EIA) technique. For virus infections for which international antibody standards exist and are bridged to clinical studies of protection (e.g., measles and rubella), the EIA has been successfully used to determine immune surrogate endpoints, yet no such international reference exists for mumps serology. Since both virus-neutralizing and nonneutralizing antibodies are measured in the EIA, in the absence of a mumps serological standard, the EIA may be prone to yielding false-positive results when utilized for assessing surrogate markers of protective immunity. Moreover, since mumps virus-specific antibody titers are generally low in comparison to antibody levels induced by other viruses and EIA procedures often employ relatively high serum dilution factors, the EIA may be prone to yielding false-negative results. To examine these issues, a PRN assay and two commercially available EIA kits were used to evaluate wild-type mumps virus serological responses in human serum samples from the pre-mumps vaccine era. Our results indicate that the PRN assay is a more sensitive and specific method of measuring serological responses to wild-type mumps virus.
机译：腮腺炎病毒中和抗体被认为是保护性免疫的最可预测的替代标志。但是，用于检测中和抗体的测定（例如噬斑减少中和（PRN）测定）是费时费力的，因此通常被更快速，更便宜的酶免疫测定（EIA）技术所取代。对于存在国际抗体标准并与保护性临床研究相联系的病毒感染（例如麻疹和风疹），EIA已成功用于确定免疫替代终点，但对于腮腺炎血清学尚无此类国际参考文献。由于在EIA中同时测量了病毒中和性抗体和非中和性抗体，因此在没有腮腺炎血清学标准的情况下，EIA在用于评估保护性免疫的替代标志物时可能会产生假阳性结果。此外，由于流行性腮腺炎病毒特异性抗体的滴度通常比其他病毒诱导的抗体水平低，而且EIA程序通常使用相对较高的血清稀释因子，因此EIA可能会产生假阴性结果。为了检查这些问题，使用了PRN测定法和两种市售EIA试剂盒来评估流行性腮腺炎疫苗时代以来人血清样品中的野生型流行性腮腺炎病毒血清学反应。我们的结果表明，PRN分析是一种更敏感，更具体的方法，用于测量对野生型腮腺炎病毒的血清学应答。

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