Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2017
Low sensitivity and frequent cross-reactions in commercially available antibody detection ELISA assays for Taenia solium cysticercosis.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Garcia Hector H, Castillo Yesenia, Gonzales Isidro, Bustos Javier A, Saavedra Herbert, Jacob Louis, Del Brutto Oscar H, Wilkins Patricia P, Gonzalez Armando E, Gilman Robert H, Cysticercosis Working Group in Peru
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of two commercially available ELISA kits, Novalisa® and Ridascreen® , for the detection of antibodies to Taenia solium, compared to serological diagnosis of neurocysticercosis (NCC) by LLGP-EITB (electro-immunotransfer blot assay using lentil-lectin purified glycoprotein antigens).
METHODS: Archive serum samples from patients with viable NCC (n = 45) or resolved, calcified NCC (n = 45), as well as sera from patients with other cestode parasites (hymenolepiasis, n = 45 and cystic hydatid disease, n = 45), were evaluated for cysticercosis antibody detection using two ELISA kits, Novalisa® and Ridascreen® . All NCC samples had previously tested positive, and all samples from heterologous infections were negative on LLGP-EITB for cysticercosis. Positive rates were calculated by kit and sample group and compared between the two kits.
RESULTS: Compared to LLGP-EITB, the sensitivity of both ELISA assays to detect specific antibodies in patients with viable NCC was low (44.4% and 22.2%), and for calcified NCC, it was only 6.7% and 4.5%. Sera from patients with cystic hydatid disease were highly cross-reactive in both ELISA assays (38/45, 84.4%; and 25/45, 55.6%). Sera from patients with hymenolepiasis cross-reacted in five cases in one of the assays (11.1%) and in only one sample with the second assay (2.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: The performance of Novalisa® and Ridascreen® was poor. Antibody ELISA detection cannot be recommended for the diagnosis of neurocysticercosis.
METHODS: Archive serum samples from patients with viable NCC (n = 45) or resolved, calcified NCC (n = 45), as well as sera from patients with other cestode parasites (hymenolepiasis, n = 45 and cystic hydatid disease, n = 45), were evaluated for cysticercosis antibody detection using two ELISA kits, Novalisa® and Ridascreen® . All NCC samples had previously tested positive, and all samples from heterologous infections were negative on LLGP-EITB for cysticercosis. Positive rates were calculated by kit and sample group and compared between the two kits.
RESULTS: Compared to LLGP-EITB, the sensitivity of both ELISA assays to detect specific antibodies in patients with viable NCC was low (44.4% and 22.2%), and for calcified NCC, it was only 6.7% and 4.5%. Sera from patients with cystic hydatid disease were highly cross-reactive in both ELISA assays (38/45, 84.4%; and 25/45, 55.6%). Sera from patients with hymenolepiasis cross-reacted in five cases in one of the assays (11.1%) and in only one sample with the second assay (2.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: The performance of Novalisa® and Ridascreen® was poor. Antibody ELISA detection cannot be recommended for the diagnosis of neurocysticercosis.