Affiliation:
1. Department of Pathology and Immunology, Division of Laboratory Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
Abstract
ABSTRACT
Currently, serological assays using either indirect immunofluorescence assay or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are performed to evaluate the status of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection in humans. Although these methods are reliable, they are limited to testing an antibody response to a single viral antigen per reaction, thus necessitating a panel of assays to complete the evaluation. In contrast, a new bead-based method (BioPlex 2200; Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, Calif.) can analyze the humoral response to multiple antigens in a single tube. This approach potentially reduces overall cost, turnaround time, and sample volume. The aim of this study was to evaluate the multiplexed EBV serologic assays performed on the BioPlex 2200 platform compared to results of conventional heterophile and ELISA-based assays. A total of 167 nonconsecutive, stored serum samples from adult and pediatric patients submitted for EBV serologic studies were used in the evaluation. Concordance between results generated by the BioPlex 2200 system and conventional assays was calculated. The anti-EA-D assay had the lowest concordance at 91%. The BioPlex 2200 system showed 97% agreement with conventional heterophile and anti-nuclear antigen assays and 92% agreement with the anti-VCA IgG and immunoglobulin M assays. Agreement between the BioPlex 2200 system and conventional testing was 92% with respect to categorization of acute versus nonacute EBV disease. The correlation between these two systems with regard to assignment into one of four categories of EBV status was also good (82%). In summary, there is excellent correlation between contemporary EBV serologic testing and the BioPlex 2200 system.
Publisher
American Society for Microbiology
Reference15 articles.
1. Baetens, D. G. A., and L. M. L. Van Renterghem. 2001. Coupled particle light scattering: a new technique for serodiagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus infection. J. Med. Virol.64:519-525.
2. College of American Pathologists. 2003. VR3-11 Epstein-Barr virus antibody detection survey. College of American Pathologists Northfield Ill.
3. Debyser, Z., M. Reynders, P. Goubau, and J. Desmyter. 1997. Comparative evaluation of three ELISA techniques and an indirect immunofluorescence assay for the serological diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus infection. Clin. Diagn. Virol.8:71-81.
4. Fletcher, M. A., and B. J. Woolfolk. 1971. Immunochemical studies of infectious mononucleosis. I. Isolation and characterization of heterophile antigens from hemoglobin-free stroma. J. Immunol.107:842-853.
5. Fung, M. K., K. T. Mordarski, S. A. Bader, and A. M. Gronowski. 2002. Evaluation of the Wampole Laboratories ELISA-based assay for Epstein-Barr virus serology. Clin. Chem. Acta319:43-48.
Cited by
44 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献