Rubella-specific IgG1 avidity : a comparison of methods

Two methods of determining the avidity of specific IgG1 were compared with sera from different categories of rubella infection. Both methods were based on an antiglobulin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. In one method the absorbances were compared with and without diethylamine (DEA) in the serum d...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of virological methods 1991-02, Vol.31 (2-3), p.219-227
Hauptverfasser: THOMAS, H. I. J, MORGAN-CAPNER, P
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 227
container_issue 2-3
container_start_page 219
container_title Journal of virological methods
container_volume 31
creator THOMAS, H. I. J
MORGAN-CAPNER, P
description Two methods of determining the avidity of specific IgG1 were compared with sera from different categories of rubella infection. Both methods were based on an antiglobulin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. In one method the absorbances were compared with and without diethylamine (DEA) in the serum diluent over a range of serum dilutions and the difference between the dilution curves measured (DEA-shift). In the other, the absorbances at a single serum dilution were compared with and without urea in the wash fluid used after the antigen/serum incubation (avidity index). Various concentrations of DEA were also assessed in the avidity-index method, as this method is simpler to perform. The DEA-shift method was shown to be more sensitive for diagnosing recent primary rubella or immunization by demonstrating specific IgG1 of low avidity. The avidity-index method, however, was more specific when sera from cases of reinfection or non-specific rubella IgM reactivity were tested. 35 mM DEA was found to be the optimal concentration of DEA when DEA was substituted for urea in the avidity index method.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/0166-0934(91)90160-2
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_80722857</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>80722857</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c332t-3a5a02e0806a2c07f34698d3c5d3fd988c657e1af16d89e85c8652f2a7efd20e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkG1Lw0AMxw9R5qx-A4W-UfRFNXfX3oPvZOgcDATR18ftHvSkXWuvFfbtbd1whBCS_BOSH0LnGG4xYHY3OMtA0vxa4hs5ZJCRAzTFgsuhLPJDNP2XHKOTGL8AoOCUTtAEC5ZL4FPEX_uVK0udxcaZ4INJFx9znOqfYEO3Se9TnZq6anQbYr1Oa59WrvusbTxFR16X0Z3tYoLenx7fZs_Z8mW-mD0sM0Mp6TKqCw3EgQCmiQHuac6ksNQUlnorhTCs4A5rj5kV0onCCFYQTzR33hJwNEFX271NW3_3LnaqCtGMF69d3UclgBMihq8SlG-Fpq1jbJ1XTRsq3W4UBjXyUiMMNcJQEqs_XooMYxe7_f2qcnY_tAU09C93fR2NLn2r1ybEvUwyQmGwX-S4cNk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>80722857</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Rubella-specific IgG1 avidity : a comparison of methods</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>THOMAS, H. I. J ; MORGAN-CAPNER, P</creator><creatorcontrib>THOMAS, H. I. J ; MORGAN-CAPNER, P</creatorcontrib><description>Two methods of determining the avidity of specific IgG1 were compared with sera from different categories of rubella infection. Both methods were based on an antiglobulin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. In one method the absorbances were compared with and without diethylamine (DEA) in the serum diluent over a range of serum dilutions and the difference between the dilution curves measured (DEA-shift). In the other, the absorbances at a single serum dilution were compared with and without urea in the wash fluid used after the antigen/serum incubation (avidity index). Various concentrations of DEA were also assessed in the avidity-index method, as this method is simpler to perform. The DEA-shift method was shown to be more sensitive for diagnosing recent primary rubella or immunization by demonstrating specific IgG1 of low avidity. The avidity-index method, however, was more specific when sera from cases of reinfection or non-specific rubella IgM reactivity were tested. 35 mM DEA was found to be the optimal concentration of DEA when DEA was substituted for urea in the avidity index method.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0166-0934</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-0984</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/0166-0934(91)90160-2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 1864907</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JVMEDH</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Elsevier</publisher><subject>Antibodies, Bacterial - analysis ; Antibody Affinity ; Antibody Specificity ; Biological and medical sciences ; Diethylamines ; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Humans ; Immune Sera ; Immunoglobulin G - analysis ; Microbiology ; Rubella - microbiology ; Rubella Vaccine ; Rubella virus - immunology ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Techniques used in virology ; Virology</subject><ispartof>Journal of virological methods, 1991-02, Vol.31 (2-3), p.219-227</ispartof><rights>1991 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c332t-3a5a02e0806a2c07f34698d3c5d3fd988c657e1af16d89e85c8652f2a7efd20e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c332t-3a5a02e0806a2c07f34698d3c5d3fd988c657e1af16d89e85c8652f2a7efd20e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=19623030$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1864907$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>THOMAS, H. I. J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MORGAN-CAPNER, P</creatorcontrib><title>Rubella-specific IgG1 avidity : a comparison of methods</title><title>Journal of virological methods</title><addtitle>J Virol Methods</addtitle><description>Two methods of determining the avidity of specific IgG1 were compared with sera from different categories of rubella infection. Both methods were based on an antiglobulin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. In one method the absorbances were compared with and without diethylamine (DEA) in the serum diluent over a range of serum dilutions and the difference between the dilution curves measured (DEA-shift). In the other, the absorbances at a single serum dilution were compared with and without urea in the wash fluid used after the antigen/serum incubation (avidity index). Various concentrations of DEA were also assessed in the avidity-index method, as this method is simpler to perform. The DEA-shift method was shown to be more sensitive for diagnosing recent primary rubella or immunization by demonstrating specific IgG1 of low avidity. The avidity-index method, however, was more specific when sera from cases of reinfection or non-specific rubella IgM reactivity were tested. 35 mM DEA was found to be the optimal concentration of DEA when DEA was substituted for urea in the avidity index method.</description><subject>Antibodies, Bacterial - analysis</subject><subject>Antibody Affinity</subject><subject>Antibody Specificity</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Diethylamines</subject><subject>Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immune Sera</subject><subject>Immunoglobulin G - analysis</subject><subject>Microbiology</subject><subject>Rubella - microbiology</subject><subject>Rubella Vaccine</subject><subject>Rubella virus - immunology</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Techniques used in virology</subject><subject>Virology</subject><issn>0166-0934</issn><issn>1879-0984</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1991</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkG1Lw0AMxw9R5qx-A4W-UfRFNXfX3oPvZOgcDATR18ftHvSkXWuvFfbtbd1whBCS_BOSH0LnGG4xYHY3OMtA0vxa4hs5ZJCRAzTFgsuhLPJDNP2XHKOTGL8AoOCUTtAEC5ZL4FPEX_uVK0udxcaZ4INJFx9znOqfYEO3Se9TnZq6anQbYr1Oa59WrvusbTxFR16X0Z3tYoLenx7fZs_Z8mW-mD0sM0Mp6TKqCw3EgQCmiQHuac6ksNQUlnorhTCs4A5rj5kV0onCCFYQTzR33hJwNEFX271NW3_3LnaqCtGMF69d3UclgBMihq8SlG-Fpq1jbJ1XTRsq3W4UBjXyUiMMNcJQEqs_XooMYxe7_f2qcnY_tAU09C93fR2NLn2r1ybEvUwyQmGwX-S4cNk</recordid><startdate>19910201</startdate><enddate>19910201</enddate><creator>THOMAS, H. I. J</creator><creator>MORGAN-CAPNER, P</creator><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</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>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19910201</creationdate><title>Rubella-specific IgG1 avidity : a comparison of methods</title><author>THOMAS, H. I. J ; MORGAN-CAPNER, P</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c332t-3a5a02e0806a2c07f34698d3c5d3fd988c657e1af16d89e85c8652f2a7efd20e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1991</creationdate><topic>Antibodies, Bacterial - analysis</topic><topic>Antibody Affinity</topic><topic>Antibody Specificity</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Diethylamines</topic><topic>Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immune Sera</topic><topic>Immunoglobulin G - analysis</topic><topic>Microbiology</topic><topic>Rubella - microbiology</topic><topic>Rubella Vaccine</topic><topic>Rubella virus - immunology</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Techniques used in virology</topic><topic>Virology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>THOMAS, H. I. J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MORGAN-CAPNER, P</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of virological methods</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>THOMAS, H. I. J</au><au>MORGAN-CAPNER, P</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Rubella-specific IgG1 avidity : a comparison of methods</atitle><jtitle>Journal of virological methods</jtitle><addtitle>J Virol Methods</addtitle><date>1991-02-01</date><risdate>1991</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>2-3</issue><spage>219</spage><epage>227</epage><pages>219-227</pages><issn>0166-0934</issn><eissn>1879-0984</eissn><coden>JVMEDH</coden><abstract>Two methods of determining the avidity of specific IgG1 were compared with sera from different categories of rubella infection. Both methods were based on an antiglobulin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. In one method the absorbances were compared with and without diethylamine (DEA) in the serum diluent over a range of serum dilutions and the difference between the dilution curves measured (DEA-shift). In the other, the absorbances at a single serum dilution were compared with and without urea in the wash fluid used after the antigen/serum incubation (avidity index). Various concentrations of DEA were also assessed in the avidity-index method, as this method is simpler to perform. The DEA-shift method was shown to be more sensitive for diagnosing recent primary rubella or immunization by demonstrating specific IgG1 of low avidity. The avidity-index method, however, was more specific when sera from cases of reinfection or non-specific rubella IgM reactivity were tested. 35 mM DEA was found to be the optimal concentration of DEA when DEA was substituted for urea in the avidity index method.</abstract><cop>London</cop><cop>Amsterdam</cop><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier</pub><pmid>1864907</pmid><doi>10.1016/0166-0934(91)90160-2</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0166-0934
ispartof Journal of virological methods, 1991-02, Vol.31 (2-3), p.219-227
issn 0166-0934
1879-0984
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_80722857
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Antibodies, Bacterial - analysis
Antibody Affinity
Antibody Specificity
Biological and medical sciences
Diethylamines
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Humans
Immune Sera
Immunoglobulin G - analysis
Microbiology
Rubella - microbiology
Rubella Vaccine
Rubella virus - immunology
Sensitivity and Specificity
Techniques used in virology
Virology
title Rubella-specific IgG1 avidity : a comparison of methods
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T08%3A34%3A37IST&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=Rubella-specific%20IgG1%20avidity%20:%20a%20comparison%20of%20methods&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20virological%20methods&rft.au=THOMAS,%20H.%20I.%20J&rft.date=1991-02-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=2-3&rft.spage=219&rft.epage=227&rft.pages=219-227&rft.issn=0166-0934&rft.eissn=1879-0984&rft.coden=JVMEDH&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/0166-0934(91)90160-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E80722857%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=80722857&rft_id=info:pmid/1864907&rfr_iscdi=true