Potential impact of different cytomegalovirus (CMV) IgM assays on an algorithm requiring IgM reactivity as a criterion for measuring CMV IgG avidity

不同巨细胞病毒 (CMV) IgM 检测方法对以 IgM 反应性作为测量 CMV IgG 亲和力标准的算法的潜在影响

阅读:1

Abstract

The measurement of cytomegalovirus (CMV) IgG avidity is a powerful tool for identifying individuals with recent CMV infection. Because such patients are expected to be positive for CMV IgM, several investigators have suggested that CMV IgG-positive sera first be screened for CMV IgM and then only the IgM-reactive sera be tested for avidity. We investigated the impact of different CMV IgM assays on such a reflexing algorithm using a panel of 369 consecutive IgG-positive serum samples submitted for avidity testing. A bead-based immunofluorescent assay (BIFA) identified 105 IgM-positive serum samples, whereas an IgM-capture enzyme immunoassay (EIA) identified 48 IgM-positive serum samples; this marked difference led us to evaluate additional CMV IgM assays. An enzyme-linked immunofluorescent assay (ELFA) and a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA) were used to test all sera with discordant BIFA/EIA results, all sera with concordant positive results, and selected sera with concordant negative results. The findings indicated that the ELFA would identify 74 CMV IgM-positive samples and the CIA would identify 64. Of the 23 low-avidity serum samples, 2 were IgM negative by BIFA, 3 by ELFA and CIA, and 4 by EIA; of the 23 intermediate-avidity serum samples, 6 were IgM negative by BIFA, 10 by ELFA, and 15 by EIA and CIA. In both these avidity groups, BIFA IgM-negative sera were also negative by the other 3 assays. These findings demonstrate that an algorithm requiring CMV IgM reactivity as a criterion for CMV IgG avidity testing does not identify all low-avidity sera and thus misses some cases of acute CMV infection.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。