Diagnostic Performance and Comparative Evaluation of the Architect, Liaison, and Platelia Epstein-Barr Virus Antibody Assays
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background: Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) is one of the most prevalent causes of viral infection in humans. EBV infection stage (acute, past, or absent infection) is typically determined using a combination of assays that detect EBV-specific markers, such as IgG and IgM antibodies against the EBV viral capsid antigen (VCA) and IgG antibodies against the EBV nuclear antigen (EBNA). We compared the diagnostic performance and agreement of results between three commercial EBV antibody assays using an EBV performance panel (SeraCare Life Science, Milford, MA, USA) as a reference. Methods: EBV antibody tests of EBV VCA IgM, VCA IgG, and EBNA IgG antibodies were performed by the Architect (Abbott Diagnostics, Wiesbaden, Germany), Liaison (DiaSorin, Saluggia, Italy), and Platelia (Bio-Rad, Marnes-la-Coquette, France) assays. Agreement between the three assays was evaluated using 279 clinical samples, and EBV DNA and antibody test results were compared. Results: The three EBV antibody assays showed good diagnostic performance with good and excellent agreement with the performance panel (kappa coefficient, >0.6). The overall VCA IgM positivity rate was higher in EBV DNA-positive samples than in EBV DNA-negative samples for all three EBV antibody assays (P=0.02). The three EBV antibody assays exhibited good agreement in results for the clinical samples. Conclusions: The diagnostic performance of the three EBV antibody assays was acceptable, and they showed comparable agreement in results for the clinical samples.
Abstract
Background: Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) is one of the most prevalent causes of viral infection in humans. EBV infection stage (acute, past, or absent infection) is typically determined using a combination of assays that detect EBV-specific markers, such as IgG and IgM antibodies against the EBV viral capsid antigen (VCA) and IgG antibodies against the EBV nuclear antigen (EBNA). We compared the diagnostic performance and agreement of results between three commercial EBV antibody assays using an EBV performance panel (SeraCare Life Science, Milford, MA, USA) as a reference. Methods: EBV antibody tests of EBV VCA IgM, VCA IgG, and EBNA IgG antibodies were performed by the Architect (Abbott Diagnostics, Wiesbaden, Germany), Liaison (DiaSorin, Saluggia, Italy), and Platelia (Bio-Rad, Marnes-la-Coquette, France) assays. Agreement between the three assays was evaluated using 279 clinical samples, and EBV DNA and antibody test results were compared. Results: The three EBV antibody assays showed good diagnostic performance with good and excellent agreement with the performance panel (kappa coefficient, >0.6). The overall VCA IgM positivity rate was higher in EBV DNA-positive samples than in EBV DNA-negative samples for all three EBV antibody assays (P=0.02). The three EBV antibody assays exhibited good agreement in results for the clinical samples. Conclusions: The diagnostic performance of the three EBV antibody assays was acceptable, and they showed comparable agreement in results for the clinical samples.
참고문헌 (17)
- Henle G, "Relation of Burkitt's tumor-associated herpes-ytpe virus to infectious mononucleosis", Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 59, pp.94~101 (1968)[DOI]
- Balfour HH Jr, "Behavioral, virologic, and immunologic factors associated with acquisition and severity of primary Epstein-Barr virus infection in university students", J Infect Dis, 207, pp.80~88 (2013)[DOI]
- Gerber P, "Association of EB-virus infection with the post-perfusion syndrome", Lancet, 1, pp.593~595 (1969)
- Alfieri C, "Epstein-Barr virus transmission from a blood donor to an organ transplant recipient with recovery of the same virus strain from the recipient's blood and oropharynx", Blood, 87, pp.812~817 (1996)
- Hanto DW, "Clinical spectrum of lymphoproliferative disorders in renal transplant recipients and evidence for the role of Epstein-Barr virus", Cancer Res, 41, pp.4253~4261 (1981)
- Paya CV, "Epstein-Barr virus-induced posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders. ASTS", ASTP EBV-PTLD Task Force and The Mayo Clinic Organized International Consensus Development Meeting, 1999, pp.68, 1517~1525
- Bamoulid J, "Late persistent positive EBV viral load and risk of solid cancer in kidney transplant patients", Transplantation, 101, pp.1473~1478 (2017)[DOI]
- Ambinder RF, "Mononucleosis in the laboratory", J Infect Dis, 192, pp.1503~1504 (2005)[DOI]
- de Ory F, "Evaluation of four commercial systems for the diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus primary infections", Clin Vaccine Immunol, 18, pp.444~448 (2011)[DOI]
- Berth M, "Comparison of three automated immunoassay methods for the determination of Epstein-Barr virus-specific immunoglobulin M", Clin Vaccine Immunol, 17, pp.559~563 (2010)[DOI]
- Corrales I, "Evaluation of the Architect Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) viral capsid antigen (VCA) IgG, VCA IgM, and EBV nuclear antigen 1 IgG chemiluminescent immunoassays for detection of EBV antibodies and categorization of EBV infection status using immunofluorescence assays as the reference method", Clin Vaccine Immunol, 21, pp.684~688 (2014)[DOI]
- Grandjean Lapierre S, "Evaluation of the abbot <TEX>$Architect^{TM}$<", TEX> Epstein-Barr virus viral capsid antigen IgM, viral capsid antigen IgG and nuclear antigen IgG assays in a pediatric and adult population, 2016, pp.81, 1~5
- Lupo J, "Performance of two commercially available automated immunoassays for the determination of Epstein-Barr virus serological status", Clin Vaccine Immunol, 19, pp.929~934 (2012)[DOI]
- Sickinger E, "Comparative evaluation of the new ARCHITECT EBV assays considering different testing algorithms", Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis, 79, pp.310~316 (2014)[DOI]
- Guerrero-Ramos A, "Performance of the architect EBV antibody panel for determination of Epstein-Barr virus infection stage in immunocompetent adolescents and young adults with clinical suspicion of infectious mononucleosis", Clin Vaccine Immunol, 21, pp.817~823 (2014)[DOI]
- Klutts JS, "Evidence-based approach for interpretation of Epstein-Barr virus serological patterns", J Clin Microbiol, 47, pp.3204~3210 (2009)[DOI]
- Salehi H, "Comparison of serological and molecular test for diagnosis of infectious mononucleosis", Adv Biomed Res, 5, pp.95~ (2016)[DOI]