Enzyme-linked immunoadsorbent assay for the detection of cytomegalovirus-IgM: Comparison between eight commercial kits, immunofluorescence, and immunoblotting
Eight commercially available enzyme‐linked immunoadsorbent assays (ELISA) for the detection of cytomegalovirus (CMV)‐specific IgM were used in parallel to determine the presence of CMB‐IgM in 123 serum samples from pregnant women. The results obtained with the eight kits were compared. Based on conc...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical laboratory analysis 1992, Vol.6 (4), p.216-218 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 218 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 216 |
| container_title | Journal of clinical laboratory analysis |
| container_volume | 6 |
| creator | Lazzarotto, T. Casa, B. Dalla Campisi, B. Landini, M. P. |
| description | Eight commercially available enzyme‐linked immunoadsorbent assays (ELISA) for the detection of cytomegalovirus (CMV)‐specific IgM were used in parallel to determine the presence of CMB‐IgM in 123 serum samples from pregnant women. The results obtained with the eight kits were compared. Based on concordance of six or more of the eight kits, we assessed sensitivity, specificity, and overall agreement, as well as incidence of false‐positive and ‐negative results for each kit. The results obtained by ELISA were then compared with those obtained by immunofluorescence (IF) and immunoblotting (IB).
Our study did not single out one outstanding ELISA kit among the eight evaluated, nor did it suggest that IF or IB are better than ELISA. Furthermore our results indicate that IB might be useful in several cases as, beside its good sensitivity, most IB‐false‐positive sera are easily recognized as reacting exclusively with pp 150, the unique reactivity to pp 150 not being among the IB profiles of IB‐true‐positive sera. Nevertheless 14.6% of sera remained CMV‐IgM‐indeterminate. © 1992 Wiley‐Liss, Inc. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/jcla.1860060409 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_73259205</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>73259205</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3949-5e84169343fa6dd0d89b1d5b8936606a3b91b309f8471a4fce8991148a3c5f6e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU9v1DAUxCMEKkvhzAnJJ05Na8eJY8Op2v7XAhIL4mg5zsvWXcfe2g5t-DB8VlLtQsWpp3eY38wbabLsLcGHBOPi6EZbdUg4w5jhEotn2YxgwfOCF9XzbIY5r3OOCX2ZvYrxBmPMBWF72R6hBa_qcpb9PnW_xh5ya9waWmT6fnBetdGHBlxCKkY1os4HlK4BtZBAJ-Md8h3SY_I9rJT1P00YYn65-vQBzX2_UcHECWkg3QE4BGZ1nZD2fQ9BG2XR2qR4sPvU2cEHiBqchgOk3N8GjfUpGbd6nb3olI3wZnf3s-9np9_mF_niy_nl_HiRaypKkVfAS8IELWmnWNvilouGtFXDBWUMM0UbQRqKRcfLmqiy08CFIKTkiuqqY0D3s_fb3E3wtwPEJHsztbJWOfBDlDUtKlHg6kmQsIKRumITeLQFdfAxBujkJphehVESLB-mkw_TycfpJse7XfTQ9NA-8tutJv3jVr8zFsan4uTVfHH8X3q-dZuY4P6fW4W1ZDWtK_nj87k8WX69qi9OlnJJ_wCmtLlN</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>16261756</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Enzyme-linked immunoadsorbent assay for the detection of cytomegalovirus-IgM: Comparison between eight commercial kits, immunofluorescence, and immunoblotting</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Journals</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Lazzarotto, T. ; Casa, B. Dalla ; Campisi, B. ; Landini, M. P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lazzarotto, T. ; Casa, B. Dalla ; Campisi, B. ; Landini, M. P.</creatorcontrib><description>Eight commercially available enzyme‐linked immunoadsorbent assays (ELISA) for the detection of cytomegalovirus (CMV)‐specific IgM were used in parallel to determine the presence of CMB‐IgM in 123 serum samples from pregnant women. The results obtained with the eight kits were compared. Based on concordance of six or more of the eight kits, we assessed sensitivity, specificity, and overall agreement, as well as incidence of false‐positive and ‐negative results for each kit. The results obtained by ELISA were then compared with those obtained by immunofluorescence (IF) and immunoblotting (IB).
Our study did not single out one outstanding ELISA kit among the eight evaluated, nor did it suggest that IF or IB are better than ELISA. Furthermore our results indicate that IB might be useful in several cases as, beside its good sensitivity, most IB‐false‐positive sera are easily recognized as reacting exclusively with pp 150, the unique reactivity to pp 150 not being among the IB profiles of IB‐true‐positive sera. Nevertheless 14.6% of sera remained CMV‐IgM‐indeterminate. © 1992 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0887-8013</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1098-2825</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jcla.1860060409</identifier><identifier>PMID: 1328574</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject>Antibodies, Viral - blood ; CMV ; commercial ELISA kits ; Cytomegalovirus - immunology ; Cytomegalovirus Infections - diagnosis ; Cytomegalovirus Infections - immunology ; Diagnostic Errors ; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - methods ; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - statistics & numerical data ; Evaluation Studies as Topic ; Female ; Fluorescent Antibody Technique ; Humans ; Immunoblotting ; Immunoglobulin M - blood ; Pregnancy ; Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 1992, Vol.6 (4), p.216-218</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 1992 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3949-5e84169343fa6dd0d89b1d5b8936606a3b91b309f8471a4fce8991148a3c5f6e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3949-5e84169343fa6dd0d89b1d5b8936606a3b91b309f8471a4fce8991148a3c5f6e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjcla.1860060409$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjcla.1860060409$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,4024,27923,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1328574$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lazzarotto, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Casa, B. Dalla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campisi, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Landini, M. P.</creatorcontrib><title>Enzyme-linked immunoadsorbent assay for the detection of cytomegalovirus-IgM: Comparison between eight commercial kits, immunofluorescence, and immunoblotting</title><title>Journal of clinical laboratory analysis</title><addtitle>J. Clin. Lab. Anal</addtitle><description>Eight commercially available enzyme‐linked immunoadsorbent assays (ELISA) for the detection of cytomegalovirus (CMV)‐specific IgM were used in parallel to determine the presence of CMB‐IgM in 123 serum samples from pregnant women. The results obtained with the eight kits were compared. Based on concordance of six or more of the eight kits, we assessed sensitivity, specificity, and overall agreement, as well as incidence of false‐positive and ‐negative results for each kit. The results obtained by ELISA were then compared with those obtained by immunofluorescence (IF) and immunoblotting (IB).
Our study did not single out one outstanding ELISA kit among the eight evaluated, nor did it suggest that IF or IB are better than ELISA. Furthermore our results indicate that IB might be useful in several cases as, beside its good sensitivity, most IB‐false‐positive sera are easily recognized as reacting exclusively with pp 150, the unique reactivity to pp 150 not being among the IB profiles of IB‐true‐positive sera. Nevertheless 14.6% of sera remained CMV‐IgM‐indeterminate. © 1992 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</description><subject>Antibodies, Viral - blood</subject><subject>CMV</subject><subject>commercial ELISA kits</subject><subject>Cytomegalovirus - immunology</subject><subject>Cytomegalovirus Infections - diagnosis</subject><subject>Cytomegalovirus Infections - immunology</subject><subject>Diagnostic Errors</subject><subject>Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - methods</subject><subject>Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Evaluation Studies as Topic</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fluorescent Antibody Technique</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunoblotting</subject><subject>Immunoglobulin M - blood</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><issn>0887-8013</issn><issn>1098-2825</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1992</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU9v1DAUxCMEKkvhzAnJJ05Na8eJY8Op2v7XAhIL4mg5zsvWXcfe2g5t-DB8VlLtQsWpp3eY38wbabLsLcGHBOPi6EZbdUg4w5jhEotn2YxgwfOCF9XzbIY5r3OOCX2ZvYrxBmPMBWF72R6hBa_qcpb9PnW_xh5ya9waWmT6fnBetdGHBlxCKkY1os4HlK4BtZBAJ-Md8h3SY_I9rJT1P00YYn65-vQBzX2_UcHECWkg3QE4BGZ1nZD2fQ9BG2XR2qR4sPvU2cEHiBqchgOk3N8GjfUpGbd6nb3olI3wZnf3s-9np9_mF_niy_nl_HiRaypKkVfAS8IELWmnWNvilouGtFXDBWUMM0UbQRqKRcfLmqiy08CFIKTkiuqqY0D3s_fb3E3wtwPEJHsztbJWOfBDlDUtKlHg6kmQsIKRumITeLQFdfAxBujkJphehVESLB-mkw_TycfpJse7XfTQ9NA-8tutJv3jVr8zFsan4uTVfHH8X3q-dZuY4P6fW4W1ZDWtK_nj87k8WX69qi9OlnJJ_wCmtLlN</recordid><startdate>1992</startdate><enddate>1992</enddate><creator>Lazzarotto, T.</creator><creator>Casa, B. Dalla</creator><creator>Campisi, B.</creator><creator>Landini, M. P.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>1992</creationdate><title>Enzyme-linked immunoadsorbent assay for the detection of cytomegalovirus-IgM: Comparison between eight commercial kits, immunofluorescence, and immunoblotting</title><author>Lazzarotto, T. ; Casa, B. Dalla ; Campisi, B. ; Landini, M. P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3949-5e84169343fa6dd0d89b1d5b8936606a3b91b309f8471a4fce8991148a3c5f6e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1992</creationdate><topic>Antibodies, Viral - blood</topic><topic>CMV</topic><topic>commercial ELISA kits</topic><topic>Cytomegalovirus - immunology</topic><topic>Cytomegalovirus Infections - diagnosis</topic><topic>Cytomegalovirus Infections - immunology</topic><topic>Diagnostic Errors</topic><topic>Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - methods</topic><topic>Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Evaluation Studies as Topic</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fluorescent Antibody Technique</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunoblotting</topic><topic>Immunoglobulin M - blood</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lazzarotto, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Casa, B. Dalla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campisi, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Landini, M. P.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical laboratory analysis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lazzarotto, T.</au><au>Casa, B. Dalla</au><au>Campisi, B.</au><au>Landini, M. P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Enzyme-linked immunoadsorbent assay for the detection of cytomegalovirus-IgM: Comparison between eight commercial kits, immunofluorescence, and immunoblotting</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical laboratory analysis</jtitle><addtitle>J. Clin. Lab. Anal</addtitle><date>1992</date><risdate>1992</risdate><volume>6</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>216</spage><epage>218</epage><pages>216-218</pages><issn>0887-8013</issn><eissn>1098-2825</eissn><abstract>Eight commercially available enzyme‐linked immunoadsorbent assays (ELISA) for the detection of cytomegalovirus (CMV)‐specific IgM were used in parallel to determine the presence of CMB‐IgM in 123 serum samples from pregnant women. The results obtained with the eight kits were compared. Based on concordance of six or more of the eight kits, we assessed sensitivity, specificity, and overall agreement, as well as incidence of false‐positive and ‐negative results for each kit. The results obtained by ELISA were then compared with those obtained by immunofluorescence (IF) and immunoblotting (IB).
Our study did not single out one outstanding ELISA kit among the eight evaluated, nor did it suggest that IF or IB are better than ELISA. Furthermore our results indicate that IB might be useful in several cases as, beside its good sensitivity, most IB‐false‐positive sera are easily recognized as reacting exclusively with pp 150, the unique reactivity to pp 150 not being among the IB profiles of IB‐true‐positive sera. Nevertheless 14.6% of sera remained CMV‐IgM‐indeterminate. © 1992 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><pmid>1328574</pmid><doi>10.1002/jcla.1860060409</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0887-8013 |
| ispartof | Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 1992, Vol.6 (4), p.216-218 |
| issn | 0887-8013 1098-2825 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_73259205 |
| source | Wiley-Blackwell Journals; MEDLINE; EZB Electronic Journals Library |
| subjects | Antibodies, Viral - blood CMV commercial ELISA kits Cytomegalovirus - immunology Cytomegalovirus Infections - diagnosis Cytomegalovirus Infections - immunology Diagnostic Errors Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - methods Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - statistics & numerical data Evaluation Studies as Topic Female Fluorescent Antibody Technique Humans Immunoblotting Immunoglobulin M - blood Pregnancy Sensitivity and Specificity |
| title | Enzyme-linked immunoadsorbent assay for the detection of cytomegalovirus-IgM: Comparison between eight commercial kits, immunofluorescence, and immunoblotting |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T19%3A57%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Enzyme-linked%20immunoadsorbent%20assay%20for%20the%20detection%20of%20cytomegalovirus-IgM:%20Comparison%20between%20eight%20commercial%20kits,%20immunofluorescence,%20and%20immunoblotting&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20laboratory%20analysis&rft.au=Lazzarotto,%20T.&rft.date=1992&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=216&rft.epage=218&rft.pages=216-218&rft.issn=0887-8013&rft.eissn=1098-2825&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jcla.1860060409&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E73259205%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=16261756&rft_id=info:pmid/1328574&rfr_iscdi=true |