| Literature DB >> 30500842 |
Aili Cui1, Naiying Mao1, Huiling Wang1, Songtao Xu1, Zhen Zhu1, Yixin Ji1, Li Ren1, Lingyu Gao1, Yan Zhang1, Wenbo Xu1.
Abstract
In addition to high vaccination coverage, timely and accurate laboratory confirmation of measles cases is critical to interrupt measles transmission. To evaluate the role of real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in the diagnosis of measles cases, 46,363 suspected measles cases with rash and 395 suspected measles cases without rash were analyzed in this study; the cases were obtained from the Chinese measles surveillance system (MSS) during 2014-2017 and simultaneously detected by measles-specific IgM enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and real-time RT-PCR. However, some IgM-negative measles cases were identified by real-time RT-PCR. The proportion of these IgM-negative and viral nucleic acid-positive measles cases was high among measles cases with measles vaccination history, cases without rash symptoms, and cases within 3 days of specimen collection after onset. The proportion of IgM-negative and viral nucleic acid-positive measles cases in the 0-3 day group was up to 14.4% for measles cases with rash and 40% for measles cases without rash. Moreover, the proportions of IgM-negative and nucleic acid-positive measles cases gradually increased with the increase in the measles vaccination dose. Therefore, integrated with IgM ELISA, real-time RT-PCR would greatly improve the accurate diagnosis of measles cases and avoid missing the measles cases, especially for measles cases during the first few days after onset when the patients were highly contagious and for measles cases with secondary vaccine failure. In conclusion, our study reconfirmed that IgM ELISA is the gold-standard detection assay for measles cases confirmation. However, real-time RT-PCR should be introduced and used to supplement the laboratory diagnosis, especially in the setting of pre-elimination and/or elimination wherever appropriate.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30500842 PMCID: PMC6267958 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208161
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Summary of the suspected measles cases from MSS during 2014–2017.
| Year | No. of suspected cases | Measles IgM test | Real-time RT-PCR test | No. of confirmed measles cases | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of cases | No. of Positive (%) | No. of cases | No. of Positive (%) | Laboratory-confirmed | Epidemiologically confirmed | Clinically confirmed | Total cases | ||
| 2014 | 127,554 | 111,432 | 45,805 (41.1%) | 17,889 | 5,137 (28.7%) | 48,344 | 136 | 4,184 | 52,664 |
| 2015 | 104,948 | 96,918 | 37,555 (38.7%) | 38,548 | 13,766 (35.7%) | 40,717 | 161 | 1,504 | 42,382 |
| 2016 | 69,288 | 64,123 | 22,135 (34.5%) | 26,098 | 8,534 (32.7%) | 23,916 | 44 | 879 | 24,839 |
| 2017 | 36,854 | 34,583 | 5,067 (14.7%) | 16,164 | 1,755 (10.9%) | 5,131 | 50 | 812 | 5,993 |
| Total | 338,644 | 307,056 | 110,562 (36.0%) | 98,699 | 29,192 (29.6%) | 118,108 | 391 | 7,379 | 125,878 |
Results of measles cases with rash by the measles-specific IgM test and real-time RT-PCR.
| Days after rash onset | Doses of measles vaccination | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–3 | 4–5 | 6–10 | 〉10 | Total | 0 dose | 1 dose | 2 doses | ≥3 doses | Total | ||
| No. of suspected measles cases | IgM+,Nc+ | 7,129 | 2,887 | 910 | 85 | 11,011 | 8,968 | 1,389 | 581 | 73 | 11,011 |
| IgM+,Nc- | 1,661 | 931 | 357 | 79 | 3,028 | 1,773 | 856 | 348 | 51 | 3,028 | |
| IgM-,Nc+ | 1,479 | 375 | 84 | 22 | 1,960 | 1,200 | 480 | 232 | 48 | 1,960 | |
| IgM-,Nc- | 18,881 | 9,386 | 1,750 | 347 | 30,364 | 9,339 | 6,222 | 13,015 | 1,788 | 30,364 | |
| Total | 29,150 | 13,579 | 3,101 | 533 | 46,363 | 21,280 | 8,947 | 14,176 | 1,960 | 46,363 | |
| Total positive rates | 35.2% | 30.9% | 43.6% | 34.9% | 56.1% | 30.5% | 8.2% | 8.8% | |||
* Total positive rates indicate the positive rates for measles-specific IgM ELISA and/or real-time RT-PCR.
Nc: indicates real-time RT-PCR.
Fig 1Positive rates and proportion of measles cases with rash by both methods.
A: According to the sample collection date after rash onset. B: According to the vaccination status. Nc: indicates real-time RT-PCR.
Fig 2Age distribution among 4,058 laboratory-confirmed measles cases.
The age distribution of 4,058 measles cases with a vaccination history was compared with the entire group of suspected and laboratory-confirmed measles cases.
Results of measles cases without rash by the measles-specific IgM test and real-time RT-PCR.
| Days after rash onset | Doses of measles vaccination | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–3 | 4–5 | 6–10 | 〉10 | Total | 0 dose | 1 dose | 2 doses | ≥3 doses | Total | ||
| No. of suspected measles cases | IgM+,Nc+ | 12 | 16 | 8 | 2 | 38 | 26 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 38 |
| IgM+,Nc- | 14 | 9 | 4 | 2 | 29 | 14 | 6 | 8 | 1 | 29 | |
| IgM-,Nc+ | 9 | 7 | 8 | 4 | 28 | 10 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 28 | |
| IgM-,Nc- | 170 | 69 | 45 | 16 | 300 | 97 | 63 | 126 | 14 | 300 | |
| Total | 205 | 101 | 65 | 24 | 395 | 147 | 82 | 147 | 19 | 395 | |
| Total positive rates | 17.1% | 31.7% | 30.8% | 33.3% | 34.0% | 23.2% | 14.3% | 26.3% | |||
* Total positive rates indicate the positive rates for measles-specific IgM ELISA and/or real-time RT-PCR.
Nc: indicates real-time RT-PCR.
Fig 3Positive rates and proportion of measles cases without rash by both methods.
A: According to the sample collection date after onset. B: According to the vaccination status. Nc: indicates real-time RT-PCR.