Low sensitivity and frequent cross-reactions in commercially available antibody detection ELISA assays for Taenia solium cysticercosis

市售猪囊尾蚴病抗体检测ELISA试剂盒灵敏度低且交叉反应频繁

阅读:2

Abstract

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.

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。