MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1128/cvi.00660-12

Медицинская библиотека · Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI · 2013

Comparison of the sensitivity of laboratory diagnostic methods from a well-characterized outbreak of mumps in New York city in 2009.

Rota Jennifer S, Rosen Jennifer B, Doll Margaret K, McNall Rebecca J, McGrew Marcia, Williams Nobia, Lopareva Elena N, Barskey Albert E, Punsalang Amado, Rota Paul A, Oleszko William R, Hickman Carole J, Zimmerman Christopher M, Bellini William J

Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

A mumps outbreak in upstate New York in 2009 at a summer camp for Orthodox Jewish boys spread into Orthodox Jewish communities in the Northeast, including New York City. The availability of epidemiologic information, including vaccination records and parotitis onset dates, allowed an enhanced analysis of laboratory methods for mumps testing. Serum and buccal swab samples were collected from 296 confirmed cases with onsets from September through December 2009. All samples were tested using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) capture IgM enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and a real-time reverse transcription-PCR (rRT-PCR) that targets the short hydrophobic gene. A subset of the samples (n = 205) was used to evaluate 3 commercial mumps IgM assays and to assess the sensitivity of using an alternative target gene (nucleoprotein) in the rRT-PCR protocol. Among 115 cases of mumps with 2 documented doses of measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine, the CDC capture IgM EIA detected IgM in 51% of serum samples compared to 9% to 24% using three commercial IgM assays. The rRT-PCR that targeted the nucleoprotein gene increased RNA detection by 14% compared to that obtained with the original protocol. The ability to detect IgM improved when serum was collected 3 days or more after symptom onset, whereas sensitivity of RNA detection by rRT-PCR declined when buccal swabs were collected later than 2 days after onset. Selection of testing methods and timing of sample collection are important factors in the ability to confirm infection among vaccinated persons. These results reinforce the need to use virus detection assays in addition to serologic tests.

Для цитирования: Rota Jennifer S, Rosen Jennifer B, Doll Margaret K, McNall Rebecca J, McGrew Marcia, Williams Nobia, Lopareva Elena N, Barskey Albert E, Punsalang Amado, Rota Paul A, Oleszko William R, Hickman Carole J, Zimmerman Christopher M, Bellini William J. Comparison of the sensitivity of laboratory diagnostic methods from a well-characterized outbreak of mumps in New York city in 2009.. Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI. 2013. DOI: 10.1128/cvi.00660-12.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.