| Literature DB >> 29334990 |
Hong-Mei Li1,2,3,4, Men-Bao Qian1,2,3,4, Yi-Chao Yang5, Zhi-Hua Jiang5, Kang Wei6, Jia-Xu Chen1,2,3,4, Jun-Hu Chen1,2,3,4, Ying-Dan Chen1,2,3,4, Xiao-Nong Zhou7,8,9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clonorchiasis ranks among the most important food-borne parasitic diseases in China. However, due to low compliance to traditional fecal examination techniques in the general population and medical personnel, immunodiagnosis is expected. This study evaluated, in parallel, the performance of four immunodiagnostic kits detecting clonorchiasis in China.Entities:
Keywords: Clonorchiasis; Clonorchis sinensis; Evaluation; Immunodiagnosis; Sensitivity; Specificity; Youden’s index
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29334990 PMCID: PMC5769360 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-018-2612-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Brief introduction of the four kits tested
| Kit | Kit name | Assay type | Antibody type | Antigen | Source | Time required per run | Sample volume (μl) | Extra suppliesa |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | Test kit for IgM to | Indirect ELISA | IgM | Crude antigen | Adult worms | 2 h | 5 | Yes |
| T2 | Test kit for IgG to | Indirect ELISA | IgG | Crude antigen | Adult worms | 1.5 h | 50 | Yes |
| T3 | Detection kit for IgG antibody to | Indirect ELISA | IgG | Recombinant antigen | Yeast | 1.5 h | 10 | Yes |
| T4 | Gold Immunochromatography assay for IgG antibody to | GICA | IgG | Recombinant antigen | Yeast | 10 min | 9 | No |
aRequired additional equipment to finish the test, such as incubator and microplate reader
Sensitivity of four immunodiagnostic kits for clonorchiasis in China
| Kit | Light infection ( | Moderate infection ( | Heavy infection ( | Total ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of positive | Sensitivity (%) (95% CI) | No. of positive | Sensitivity (%) (95% CI) | No. of positive | Sensitivity (%) (95% CI) | No. of positive | Sensitivity (%) (95% CI) | |
| T1 | 13 | 16.05 (11.39–18.43) | 12 | 14.81 (10.3–19.33) | 8 | 10.53 (6.63–14.43) | 33 | 13.87 (9.47–18.26) |
| T2 | 51 | 62.96 (56.83–66.09) | 75 | 92.59 (89.27–95.92) | 68 | 89.47 (85.57–93.37) | 194 | 81.51 (76.58–86.44) |
| T3 | 79 | 97.53 (95.56–98.54) | 81 | 100 (100) | 76 | 100 (100) | 236 | 99.16 (98.00–100) |
| T4 | 71 | 87.65 (83.47–89.79) | 79 | 97.53 (95.56–99.50) | 76 | 100 (100) | 226 | 94.96 (92.18–97.74) |
Comparison of sensitivity between kits by McNemar’s test
| Kit | T1 | T2 | T3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total sera ( | |||
| T1 | |||
| T2 | < 0.0001* | ||
| T3 | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | |
| T4 | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | 0.006* |
| Light infection intensity | |||
| T1 | |||
| T2 | < 0.0001* | ||
| T3 | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | |
| T4 | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | 0.021* |
| Moderate infection intensity | |||
| T1 | |||
| T2 | < 0.0001* | ||
| T3 | ns | ns | |
| T4 | < 0.0001* | 0.289 | ns |
| Heavy infection intensity | |||
| T1 | |||
| T2 | < 0.0001* | ||
| T3 | ns | ns | |
| T4 | ns | ns | ns |
Abbreviation: ns no statistics
*P < 0.05
Specificity of four immunodiagnostic kits for clonorchiasis in China
| Kit | Negative sera (Control 1) ( | Healthy sera (Control 2) ( | Heterologous sera (Control 3) ( | Total ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of false positives | Specificity (%) (95% CI) | No. of false positives | Specificity (%) (95% CI) | No. of false positives | Specificity (%) (95% CI) | No. of false positives | Specificity (%) (95% CI) | |
| T1 | 16 | 86.67 (80.58–92.75) | 2 | 96 (90.57–100) | 20 | 70.15 (59.68–81.5) | 38 | 83.97 (79.29–88.64) |
| T2 | 12 | 90 (84.63–95.37) | 1 | 98 (94.12–100) | 17 | 74.63 (64.63–85.37) | 30 | 87.34 (83.11–91.58) |
| T3 | 39 | 67.5 (59.10–75.88) | 3 | 94 (87.42–100) | 21 | 68.66 (58.05–80.18) | 63 | 73.42 (67.79–79.04) |
| T4 | 23 | 80.83 (73.79–87.88) | 2 | 96 (90.57–100) | 10 | 85.07 (76.81–93.77) | 35 | 85.23 (80.72–89.75) |
Comparison of specificity between kits by McNemar’s test
| Kit | T1 | T2 | T3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total sera ( | |||
| T1 | |||
| T2 | 0.256 | ||
| T3 | 0.003* | < 0.0001* | |
| T4 | 0.766 | 0.542 | 0.001* |
| Negative sera from endemic areas (Control 1) | |||
| T1 | |||
| T2 | 0.503 | ||
| T3 | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | |
| T4 | 0.210 | 0.035* | 0.023* |
| Healthy sera from non-endemic areas (Control 2) | |||
| T1 | |||
| T2 | 1 | ||
| T3 | 1 | 0.625 | |
| T4 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Heterologous sera (Control 3) | |||
| T1 | |||
| T2 | 0.629 | ||
| T3 | 1 | 0.481 | |
| T4 | 0.031* | 0.143 | 0.035* |
*P < 0.05
Fig. 1Youden’s index for the four kits