Literature DB >> 17078860

Sensitivity and specificity of immunoglobulin G titer for the diagnosis of mumps virus in infected patients depending on vaccination status.

Juan Carlos Sanz1, María Del Mar Mosquera, Juan Emilio Echevarría, Marisa Fernández, Nieves Herranz, Gustavo Palacios, Fernando De Ory.   

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate the usefulness of serological detection of mumps IgM and titration of IgG in patients with acute parotitis according to their vaccination status. The detection of mumps virus RNA in saliva by RT-PCR was used as reference. 116 patients (109 of them previously vaccinated) with mumps RT-PCR-negative results and 21 (19 vaccinated) with mumps RT-PCR-positive results were studied. Mumps-specific IgM and IgG were assayed by EIA (Enzygnost, Dade Behring, Germany). IgM results were expressed as positive or negative. For IgG, several cut-offs were calculated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Seven RT-PCR-positive and five RT-PCR-negative patients showed IgM-positive results (sensitivity 33.3% and specificity 95.7%). Among vaccinated patients, the sensitivity and specificity of IgM were 26.3% (5/19) and 99.1% (108/109). For IgG, a titer of 5,000 in all the patients showed a sensitivity of 76.2% (16/21) and a specificity of 83.6% (97/116). In vaccinated patients, the corresponding figures for this cut-off were 84.2% (16/19) and 83.5% (91/109), respectively. Although IgM detection against mumps is highly specific, its sensitivity is very low in immunized subjects. In this group, the titration of IgG could serve as an additional diagnostic tool.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17078860     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0463.2006.apm_463.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  APMIS        ISSN: 0903-4641            Impact factor:   3.205


  7 in total

1.  Detection of mumps virus RNA by real-time one-step reverse transcriptase PCR using the LightCycler platform.

Authors:  Jason J Leblanc; Janice Pettipas; Ross J Davidson; Graham A Tipples; Joanne Hiebert; Todd F Hatchette
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 2.  Mumps: an Update on Outbreaks, Vaccine Efficacy, and Genomic Diversity.

Authors:  Eugene Lam; Jennifer B Rosen; Jane R Zucker
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 26.132

3.  Laboratory diagnosis of mumps in a partially immunized population: The Nova Scotia experience.

Authors:  Tf Hatchette; R Davidson; S Clay; J Pettipas; J Leblanc; S Sarwal; M Smieja; Kr Forward
Journal:  Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.471

4.  Circulation of mumps virus genotypes in Spain from 1996 to 2007.

Authors:  J E Echevarría; A Castellanos; J C Sanz; C Pérez; G Palacios; M V Martínez de Aragón; I Peña Rey; M Mosquera; F de Ory; E Royuela
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2010-01-27       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Immuno-PCR--a new tool for paleomicrobiology: the plague paradigm.

Authors:  Nada Malou; Thi-Nguyen-Ny Tran; Claude Nappez; Michel Signoli; Cyrille Le Forestier; Dominique Castex; Michel Drancourt; Didier Raoult
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-02-09       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Resurgence of mumps in Korea.

Authors:  Sun Hee Park
Journal:  Infect Chemother       Date:  2015-03-30

7.  Long-term persistence of mumps antibody after receipt of 2 measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccinations and antibody response after a third MMR vaccination among a university population.

Authors:  Anand A Date; Moe H Kyaw; Alison M Rue; Julie Klahn; Leann Obrecht; Terry Krohn; Josh Rowland; Steve Rubin; Thomas J Safranek; William J Bellini; Gustavo H Dayan
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2008-06-15       Impact factor: 7.759

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.