Literature DB >> 12522043

Evaluation of four commercially available Epstein-Barr virus enzyme immunoassays with an immunofluorescence assay as the reference method.

Barbara C Gärtner1, Ralf D Hess, Dirk Bandt, Alexander Kruse, Axel Rethwilm, Klaus Roemer, Nikolaus Mueller-Lantzsch.   

Abstract

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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12522043      PMCID: PMC145280          DOI: 10.1128/cdli.10.1.78-82.2003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Diagn Lab Immunol        ISSN: 1071-412X


  16 in total

1.  No correlation in Epstein-Barr virus reactivation between serological parameters and viral load.

Authors:  B C Gärtner; K Kortmann; M Schäfer; N Mueller-Lantzsch; U Sester; H Kaul; H Pees
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Evaluation of a recombinant line blot for diagnosis of Epstein-Barr Virus compared with ELISA, using immunofluorescence as reference method.

Authors:  B C Gärtner; J M Fischinger; K Roemer; M Mak; B Fleurent; N Mueller-Lantzsch
Journal:  J Virol Methods       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 2.014

3.  Evaluation of 11 enzyme immunoassays for the detection of immunoglobulin M antibodies to Epstein-Barr virus.

Authors:  B Weber; M Brunner; W Preiser; H W Doerr
Journal:  J Virol Methods       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 2.014

4.  Serological diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus infection by novel ELISAs based on recombinant capsid antigens p23 and p18.

Authors:  I Färber; W Hinderer; M Rothe; D Lang; H H Sonneborn; P Wutzler
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 2.327

5.  The p542 gene encodes an autoantigen that cross-reacts with EBNA-1 of the Epstein Barr virus and which may be a heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein.

Authors:  G H Rhodes; J R Valbracht; M D Nguyen; J H Vaughan
Journal:  J Autoimmun       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 7.094

6.  Anti-EBNA1/anti-EBNA2 ratio decreases significantly in patients with progression of HIV infection.

Authors:  B Winkelspecht; F Grässer; H W Pees; N Mueller-Lantzsch
Journal:  Arch Virol       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.574

7.  Novel immunoblot assay using four recombinant antigens for diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus primary infection and reactivation.

Authors:  M Buisson; B Fleurent; M Mak; P Morand; L Chan; A Ng; M Guan; D Chin; J M Seigneurin
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Evaluation of three commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays and two latex agglutination assays for diagnosis of primary Epstein-Barr virus infection.

Authors:  A Svahn; M Magnusson; L Jägdahl; L Schloss; G Kahlmeter; A Linde
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Serological evidence for reactivation of EBV infection due to uraemic immunodeficiency.

Authors:  B Winkelspecht; N Mueller-Lantzsch; H Köhler
Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 5.992

10.  Difficulties with the serologic diagnosis of infectious mononucleosis: a review of the RCPA quality assurance programs.

Authors:  P R Field; D E Dwyer
Journal:  Pathology       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 5.306

View more
  24 in total

Review 1.  Routine Epstein-Barr virus diagnostics from the laboratory perspective: still challenging after 35 years.

Authors:  Ralf D Hess
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Performance of two commercially available automated immunoassays for the determination of Epstein-Barr virus serological status.

Authors:  J Lupo; R Germi; T Semenova; M Buisson; J M Seigneurin; P Morand
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2012-04-25

Review 3.  Serological diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus infection: Problems and solutions.

Authors:  Massimo De Paschale; Pierangelo Clerici
Journal:  World J Virol       Date:  2012-02-12

4.  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.

Authors:  Isabel Corrales; Estela Giménez; David Navarro
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2014-03-12

5.  Comparison of three automated immunoassay methods for the determination of Epstein-Barr virus-specific immunoglobulin M.

Authors:  Mario Berth; Eugene Bosmans
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2010-02-10

6.  Mannose-binding lectin genotypes and susceptibility to epstein-barr virus infection in infancy.

Authors:  Jeppe T Friborg; Ruth F Jarrett; Anders Koch; Peter Garred; June M L Freeland; Andreas Andersen; Mads Melbye
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2010-07-07

7.  Stress-related Epstein-Barr virus reactivation.

Authors:  Omer Coskun; Kenan Sener; Selim Kilic; Hakan Erdem; Halil Yaman; Ahmet Bulent Besirbellioglu; Hanefi Cem Gul; Can Polat Eyigun
Journal:  Clin Exp Med       Date:  2009-09-25       Impact factor: 3.984

8.  Search for Anti-EA(D) Antibodies in Subjects with an "Isolated VCA IgG" Pattern.

Authors:  Massimo De Paschale; Debora Cagnin; Teresa Cerulli; Maria Teresa Manco; Carlo Agrappi; Paola Mirri; Arianna Gatti; Cristina Rescaldani; Pierangelo Clerici
Journal:  Int J Microbiol       Date:  2010-06-20

9.  Two-step Epstein-Barr virus immunoglobulin A enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay system for serological screening and confirmation of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Dewi K Paramita; Jajah Fachiroh; Sofia M Haryana; Jaap M Middeldorp
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2009-03-25

10.  Epstein-Barr virus antibody level and gastric cancer risk in Korea: a nested case-control study.

Authors:  Y Kim; A Shin; J Gwack; K-P Ko; C-S Kim; S K Park; Y-C Hong; D Kang; K-Y Yoo
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-06-23       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.