Fernando de Ory1,2, María-Eulalia Guisasola1,2, Pilar Balfagón1, Juan Carlos Sanz2,3. 1. Laboratorio de Serología, Centro Nacional de Microbiología, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Majadahonda, Spain. 2. CIBER Epidemiology and Public Health, Madrid, Spain. 3. Laboratorio Regional de Salud Pública, Comunidad de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Serology for type-specific herpes simplex virus (HSV) is based on the use of the respective glycoprotein G (gG). METHODS: Chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA; BIO-FLASH® , Biokit, Spain), ELISA (HerpeSelect® , Focus, USA), and immunoblot (IB; Virotech, Germany) for detecting HSV-1- and HSV-2-specific IgG were compared using 384 serum samples received for HSV serology. The samples were classified as positive or negative according to a consensus criterion. RESULTS: For HSV-1, 262 samples were positive and 118 were negative (four samples were unclassifiable). IB showed agreement, sensitivity, and specificity values of 98.68%, 98.47% and 99.15%, respectively. The corresponding figures for CLIA and ELISA were 98.95%, 99.24% and 98.31%, and 98.16%, 99.62% and 94.92%, respectively. For HSV-2, 106 samples were positive and 278 were negative. Agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of IB were 99.48%, 98.11%, and 100%, respectively. The corresponding figures for CLIA and ELISA were 99.48%, 99.06% and 99.64%, and 98.18%, 99.06% and 97.84%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The three methods showed excellent and equivalent performance characteristics for the detection of type-specific IgG to HSV-1 and HSV-2.
BACKGROUND: Serology for type-specific herpes simplex virus (HSV) is based on the use of the respective glycoprotein G (gG). METHODS: Chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA; BIO-FLASH® , Biokit, Spain), ELISA (HerpeSelect® , Focus, USA), and immunoblot (IB; Virotech, Germany) for detecting HSV-1- and HSV-2-specific IgG were compared using 384 serum samples received for HSV serology. The samples were classified as positive or negative according to a consensus criterion. RESULTS: For HSV-1, 262 samples were positive and 118 were negative (four samples were unclassifiable). IB showed agreement, sensitivity, and specificity values of 98.68%, 98.47% and 99.15%, respectively. The corresponding figures for CLIA and ELISA were 98.95%, 99.24% and 98.31%, and 98.16%, 99.62% and 94.92%, respectively. For HSV-2, 106 samples were positive and 278 were negative. Agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of IB were 99.48%, 98.11%, and 100%, respectively. The corresponding figures for CLIA and ELISA were 99.48%, 99.06% and 99.64%, and 98.18%, 99.06% and 97.84%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The three methods showed excellent and equivalent performance characteristics for the detection of type-specific IgG to HSV-1 and HSV-2.
Authors: D Sánchez-Martínez; D S Schmid; W Whittington; D Brown; W C Reeves; S Chatterjee; R J Whitley; P E Pellett Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 1991-12 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Samuel Biraro; Philippe Mayaud; Rhoda Ashley Morrow; Heiner Grosskurth; Helen A Weiss Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Alexander Krüttgen; Christian G Cornelissen; Michael Dreher; Mathias Hornef; Matthias Imöhl; Michael Kleines Journal: J Clin Virol Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 3.168
Authors: Alexander Krüttgen; Christian G Cornelissen; Michael Dreher; Mathias W Hornef; Matthias Imöhl; Michael Kleines Journal: J Virol Methods Date: 2020-09-23 Impact factor: 2.014
Authors: Lía Monsalve Arteaga; Juan Luis Muñoz Bellido; María Carmen Vieira Lista; María Belén Vicente Santiago; Pedro Fernández Soto; Isabel Bas; Nuria Leralta; Fernando de Ory Manchón; Ana Isabel Negredo; María Paz Sánchez Seco; Montserrat Alonso Sardón; Sonia Pérez González; Ana Jiménez Del Bianco; Lydia Blanco Peris; Rufino Alamo-Sanz; Roger Hewson; Moncef Belhassen-García; Antonio Muro Journal: Euro Surveill Date: 2020-03