scholarly journals Comparison of Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay, Western Blotting, Microagglutination, Indirect Immunofluorescence Assay, and Flow Cytometry for Serological Diagnosis of Tularemia

2004 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1008-1015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustafa Porsch-Özcürümez ◽  
Nele Kischel ◽  
Heidi Priebe ◽  
Wolf Splettstösser ◽  
Ernst-Jürgen Finke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Flow Cytometry ◽  
Western Blotting ◽  
Francisella Tularensis ◽  
Immunosorbent Assay ◽  
Indirect Immunofluorescence ◽  
Immunofluorescence Assay ◽  
Indirect Immunofluorescence Assay ◽  
Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay ◽  
Serum Samples ◽  
Diagnostic Sensitivity And Specificity

ABSTRACT The serodiagnostic efficiencies of five different approaches to detecting antibodies (immunoglobulins G, A, and M) developed in clinically proven infections with Francisella tularensis have been assessed. Fifty serum samples from patients suffering from tularemia during an outbreak in Sweden were compared with samples from 50 healthy blood donors (controls) by using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), microagglutination (MA), Western blotting (WB), an indirect immunofluorescence assay (IIFA), and flow cytometry (FC). ELISA, WB, and FC were based on the use of preparations of lipopolysaccharides (LPS) of the live vaccine strain of Francisella tularensis subsp. holarctica (ATCC 29684) as a capture antigen. Whole methanol-fixed bacteria were used for IIFA and MA. Optimized protocols yielded a diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of 100% for WB, MA, and FC, 98% for ELISA, and 93% for IIFA. A total of 6,632 serum samples from individuals between the ages of 18 and 79 years, representatively recruited from all regions of Germany, were screened to estimate and confirm the positive predictive value (PVpos) of the ELISA. Serum samples from 15 (0.226%) individuals tested positive for F. tularensis-specific antibodies by ELISA and confirmatory WB. The resulting prevalence-dependent PVpos of 10.2% and specificity of 98.1% were consistent with our findings for tularemia patients and controls. We conclude that the combined usage of a screening ELISA and a confirmatory WB based on LPS as a common antigen, as well as the MA, is a suitable serodiagnostic tool, while the quality of the IIFA is hampered by subjective variations of the results. FC is a promising new approach that might be improved further in terms of multiplex analyses or high-throughput applications.

scholarly journals Establishment of a peptide-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for detecting antibodies against PRRSV M protein

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Zhao ◽  
Rubo Zhang ◽  
Ling Zhu ◽  
Huidan Deng ◽  
Fengqing Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Indirect Immunofluorescence ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Immunofluorescence Assay ◽  
M Protein ◽  
Indirect Immunofluorescence Assay ◽  
Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay ◽  
Inactivated Vaccine ◽  
Serum Samples ◽  
Swine Industry ◽  
Peptide Elisa

Abstract Background Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) is one of the most economically devastating diseases affecting the swine industry globally. Evaluation of antibody responses and neutralizing antibody titers is the most effective method for vaccine evaluation. In this study, the B cell line epitopes of PRRSV M protein were predicted, and two peptide ELISA assays were established (M-A110-129 ELISA, M-A148-174 ELISA) to detect antibodies against PRRSV M protein. Field serum samples collected from pig farms were used to validate the peptide ELISA and compare it with an indirect immunofluorescence assay. Results The sensitivity and specificity of M-A110-129 ELISA and M-A148-174 ELISA were (111/125) 88.80%, (69/70) 98.57% and (122/125) 97.60%, (70/70) 100%, relative to indirect immunofluorescence assay. This peptide ELISA could detect antibodies against different genotypes of PRRSV including type 1 PRRSV, classical PRRSV, HP-PRRSV, and NADC30 like PRRSV, but not antibodies against other common swine viruses. The results of ROC analysis showed that the area under the curve (AUC) of the M-A110-129 ELISA and M-A148-174 ELISA were 0.967 and 0.996, respectively. Compared the concordance of results using two peptide ELISA assays, the IDEXX PRRSV X3 Ab ELISA and a virus neutralization test, were assessed using a series of 147 sera from pigs vaccinated with the NADC30-like PRRSV inactivated vaccine. The M-A148-174 ELISA had the best consistency, with a Cohen’s kappa coefficient of 0.8772. The concordance rates of the Hipra PRRSV ELISA kit, M-A110-129 ELISA and M-A148-174 ELISA in the field seropositive detection results were 91.08, 86.32 and 95.35%, relative to indirect immunofluorescence assay. Conclusions In summary, compared with M-A110-129 ELISA, the PRRSV M-A148-174 ELISA is of value for detecting antibodies against PRRSV and the evaluation of the NADC30-like PRRSV inactivated vaccine, but the advantage is insufficient in serological early diagnosis.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Vircell Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Indirect Immunofluorescence Assay for Detection of Antibodies against Legionella pneumophila

2006 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bram M. W. Diederen ◽  
Jan A. J. W. Kluytmans ◽  
Marcel F. Peeters
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Immunosorbent Assay ◽  
Indirect Immunofluorescence ◽  
Legionella Pneumophila ◽  
Immunofluorescence Assay ◽  
Indirect Immunofluorescence Assay ◽  
Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay ◽  
Clinical Sensitivity ◽  
Igm Elisa ◽  
Legionnaires Disease

ABSTRACT We evaluated the abilities of the Vircell immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgM indirect immunofluorescence assay (IFA) for Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1, the IgM and IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1, and the IgM-plus-IgG ELISA for Legionella pneumophila serogroups 1 to 6 to diagnose Legionnaires' disease (LD) in a well-described sample of patients with and without LD. Also, we determined the agreements, sensitivities, and specificities of the different Vircell assays in comparison to a validated ELISA (Serion classic ELISA). Clinical sensitivity and specificity were 74.6% and 96.6%, respectively, for the IgM IFA, 65.1% and 88.0% for the IgG IFA, 92.3% and 100% for the IgM ELISA, 43.3% and 96.6% for the IgG ELISA, and 90.8% and 100% for the IgM-plus-IgG ELISA. Compared to Serion classic ELISA, agreement, sensitivity, and specificity were 80.0%, 83.1%, and 78.4%, respectively, for the IgM IFA, 75.2%, 66.0%, and 79.5% for the IgG IFA, 89.5%, 82.0%, and 97.6% for the IgM ELISA, 81.9%, 88.9%, and 78.0% for the IgG ELISA, and 93.5%, 90.0%, and 96.6% for the IgM-plus-IgG ELISA. The value of a positive diagnostic result obtained by the Vircell IgM IFA, the Vircell IgG IFA, and the Vircell IgG ELISA might not be acceptable for a diagnostic assay. Both the high specificities and sensitivities of the Vircell IgM ELISA and the IgM-plus-IgG ELISA and the high correlation with the Serion classic ELISA indicate that they are useful in the diagnosis of LD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document