Valuable antibody detection method for classifying hepatitis E virus genotypes

2017 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. 142-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chenyan Zhao ◽  
Yansheng Geng ◽  
Weijing Huang ◽  
Hongxia Ma ◽  
Youchun Wang
2014 ◽  
Vol 160 (1) ◽  
pp. 183-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Béji-Hamza ◽  
M. Hassine-Zaafrane ◽  
H. Khélifi-Gharbi ◽  
S. Della Libera ◽  
M. Iaconelli ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 2697-2705
Author(s):  
Shuangshuang Li ◽  
Qiyu He ◽  
Li Yan ◽  
Manyu Li ◽  
Zhaochao Liang ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. 1460
Author(s):  
Eva Trojnar ◽  
Matthias Contzen ◽  
Dominik Moor ◽  
Anja Carl ◽  
Sabine Burkhardt ◽  
...  

Background: In the last years, the number of notified hepatitis E cases in humans has continuously increased in Europe. Foodborne infection with the zoonotic hepatitis E virus (HEV) genotype 3 is considered the major cause of this disease. Undercooked liver and raw sausages containing the liver of pigs and wild boar are at high risk of containing HEV. However, so far, no standardized method for the detection of HEV-RNA in pig liver is available. Methods: An international collaborative study on method reproducibility involving 11 laboratories was performed for an HEV-RNA detection method, which consists of steps of sample homogenization, RNA extraction and real-time RT-PCR detection, including a process control. Naturally contaminated pork liver samples containing two different amounts of HEV and a HEV-negative pork liver sample were tested by all laboratories using the method. Results: Valid results were retrieved from 10 laboratories. A specificity of 100% and a sensitivity of 79% were calculated for the method. False negative results were only retrieved from the sample containing very low HEV amounts near the detection limit. Conclusions: The results show that the method is highly specific, sufficiently sensitive and robust for use in different laboratories. The method can, therefore, be applied to routine food control as well as in monitoring studies.


2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 415-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Rui ◽  
F. Zhao ◽  
S. Yan ◽  
C. Wang ◽  
Q. Fu ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 79 (12) ◽  
pp. 1966-1973 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chenyan Zhao ◽  
Zhuo Li ◽  
Baoshan Yan ◽  
Tim J. Harrison ◽  
Xinhui Guo ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 50-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastien Lhomme ◽  
Florence Abravanel ◽  
Martine Dubois ◽  
Sabine Chapuy-Regaud ◽  
Karine Sandres-Saune ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sompong Sapsutthipas ◽  
Takeru Urayama ◽  
Masanobu Yamate ◽  
Muneo Tsujikawa ◽  
Hiromi Nishigaki ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashish C. Shrestha ◽  
Robert L. P. Flower ◽  
Clive R. Seed ◽  
Susan L. Stramer ◽  
Helen M. Faddy

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is transfusion-transmissible and therefore poses a risk to blood transfusion safety. Seroprevalence studies are useful for estimating disease burden and determining risk factors. Considerable variability in the sensitivity of HEV antibody detection assays exists. This study aimed to compare the performances of commercially available HEV enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) in Australian blood donor samples. Plasma samples that tested positive (n=194) or negative (n=200) for HEV IgG (Wantai HEV IgG ELISA) were selected. Of the 194 HEV IgG positive samples, 4 were positive for HEV IgM (Wantai HEV IgM ELISA). All samples were tested with the MP Diagnostics: HEV IgG ELISA, total (IgG, IgM, and IgA) HEV antibody ELISA, and HEV IgM ELISA. Of the 194 Wantai HEV IgG positive samples, 92 (47%) tested positive with the MP Diagnostics HEV IgG ELISA (κ=0.47) and 126 (65%) with MP Diagnostics total HEV antibody assay (κ=0.65). There was poor agreement between Wantai and MP Diagnostics HEV IgM assays. This study demonstrated poor agreement between the assays tested. These observations are consistent with previous reports demonstrating significant variability between HEV ELISAs, highlighting that results of HEV serology should be interpreted with caution.


Hepatology ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 988-997 ◽  
Author(s):  
David B. Rein ◽  
Gretchen A. Stevens ◽  
Jordan Theaker ◽  
John S. Wittenborn ◽  
Steven T. Wiersma

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document