Literature DB >> 23254301

Investigation into low-level anti-rubella virus IgG results reported by commercial immunoassays.

Wayne Dimech1, Nilukshi Arachchi, Jingjing Cai, Terri Sahin, Kim Wilson.   

Abstract

Since the 1980s, commercial anti-rubella virus IgG assays have been calibrated against a WHO International Standard and results have been reported in international units per milliliter (IU/ml). Laboratories testing routine patients' samples collected 100 samples that gave anti-rubella virus IgG results of 40 IU/ml or less from each of five different commercial immunoassays (CIA). The total of 500 quantitative results obtained from 100 samples from each CIA were compared with results obtained from an in-house enzyme immunoassay (IH-EIA) calibrated using the WHO standard. All 500 samples were screened using a hemagglutination inhibition assay (HAI). Any sample having an HAI titer of 1:8 or less was assigned a negative anti-rubella virus antibody status. If the HAI titer was greater than 1:8, the sample was tested in an immunoblot (IB) assay. If the IB result was negative, the sample was assigned a negative anti-rubella virus IgG status; otherwise, the sample was assigned a positive status. Concordance between the CIA qualitative results and the assigned negative status ranged from 50.0 to 93.8% and 74.5 to 97.8% for the assigned positive status. Using a receiver operating characteristic analysis with the cutoff set at 10 IU/ml, the estimated sensitivity and specificity ranged from 70.2 to 91.2% and 65.9 to 100%, respectively. There was poor correlation between the quantitative CIA results and those obtained by the IH-EIA, with the coefficient of determination (R(2)) ranging from 0.002 to 0.413. Although CIAs have been calibrated with the same international standard for more than 2 decades, the level of standardization continues to be poor. It may be time for the scientific community to reevaluate the relevance of quantification of anti-rubella virus IgG.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23254301      PMCID: PMC3571274          DOI: 10.1128/CVI.00603-12

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol        ISSN: 1556-679X


  28 in total

1.  Comparison of immulite with vidas for detection of infection in a low-prevalence population of pregnant women in The Netherlands.

Authors:  F Vlaspolder; P Singer; A Smit; R J Diepersloot
Journal:  Clin Diagn Lab Immunol       Date:  2001-05

2.  Automated rubella antibody screening:a cautionary tale.

Authors:  S O'Shea; H Dunn; S Palmer; J E Banatvala; J M Best
Journal:  J Med Microbiol       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 2.472

3.  Standardization: comparability and traceability of laboratory results.

Authors:  Rudolf M Lequin
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 8.327

4.  Antenatal screening for hepatitis B and antibodies to Toxoplasma gondii and rubella virus: evaluation of two commercial immunoassay systems.

Authors:  R J Diepersloot; H Dunnewold-Hoekstra; J Kruit-Den Hollander; F Vlaspolder
Journal:  Clin Diagn Lab Immunol       Date:  2001-07

5.  The impact of rubella immunization on the serological status of women of childbearing age: a retrospective longitudinal study in Melbourne, Australia.

Authors:  Barbara H Francis; Adrian K Thomas; Catherine A McCarty
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  A qualitative and quantitative comparison of two rubella virus-specific IgG antibody immunoassays.

Authors:  Nicholas P Greenwood; Inna G Ovsyannikova; Robert A Vierkant; Megan M O'Byrne; Gregory A Poland
Journal:  Viral Immunol       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 2.257

7.  Standardization of techniques and reagents for the study of rubella antibody.

Authors:  M Forsgren
Journal:  Rev Infect Dis       Date:  1985 Mar-Apr

8.  Variables of the rubella hemagglutination-inhibition test system and their effect on antigen and antibody titers.

Authors:  N J Schmidt; E H Lennette
Journal:  Appl Microbiol       Date:  1970-03

9.  Rubella screening and vaccination programme at a Melbourne maternity hospital. A five-year review.

Authors:  B H Francis; L I Hatherley; J E Walstab; L I Taft
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  1982-06-12       Impact factor: 7.738

10.  Haemagglutination-inhibition test for the detection of rubella antibody.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Hyg (Lond)       Date:  1978-12
View more
  7 in total

1.  Assessing Immunity to Rubella Virus: a Plea for Standardization of IgG (Immuno)assays.

Authors:  Elise Bouthry; Milena Furione; Daniela Huzly; Adaeze Ogee-Nwankwo; LiJuan Hao; Adebola Adebayo; Joseph Icenogle; Antonella Sarasini; Maria Grazia Revello; Liliane Grangeot-Keros; Christelle Vauloup-Fellous
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2016-05-04       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Where to Now for Standardization of Anti-Rubella Virus IgG Testing.

Authors:  Wayne Dimech
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  High-throughput assay optimization and statistical interpolation of rubella-specific neutralizing antibody titers.

Authors:  Nathaniel D Lambert; V Shane Pankratz; Beth R Larrabee; Adaeze Ogee-Nwankwo; Min-hsin Chen; Joseph P Icenogle; Gregory A Poland
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2014-01-03

4.  Harmonization of Multiple SARS-CoV-2 Reference Materials Using the WHO IS (NIBSC 20/136): Results and Implications.

Authors:  William Jonathan Windsor; Yannik Roell; Heidi Tucker; Chi-An Cheng; Sara Suliman; Laura J Peek; Gary A Pestano; William T Lee; Heinz Zeichhardt; Molly M Lamb; Martin Kammel; Hui Wang; Ross Kedl; Cody Rester; Thomas E Morrison; Bennet J Davenport; Kyle Carson; Jennifer Yates; Kelly Howard; Karen Kulas; David R Walt; Aner Dafni; Daniel Taylor; May Chu
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2022-05-30       Impact factor: 6.064

Review 5.  Standardization of Assays That Detect Anti-Rubella Virus IgG Antibodies.

Authors:  Wayne Dimech; Liliane Grangeot-Keros; Christelle Vauloup-Fellous
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 26.132

6.  How to determine protective immunity in the post-vaccine era.

Authors:  Carmen L Charlton; Florence Y Lai; Douglas C Dover
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2016-04-02       Impact factor: 3.452

7.  Characterization of rubella-specific humoral immunity following two doses of MMR vaccine using proteome microarray technology.

Authors:  Iana H Haralambieva; Michael J Gibson; Richard B Kennedy; Inna G Ovsyannikova; Nathaniel D Warner; Diane E Grill; Gregory A Poland
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-16       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.