Improved efficiency using sequential automated immunoassays for syphilis screening in blood donors.

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 MICROBIOLOGY Journal of Clinical Microbiology Pub Date : 2024-08-14 Epub Date: 2024-07-15 DOI:10.1128/jcm.00476-24
Anthea Cheng, Anindita Das, Claire E Styles, Zin Naing, William D Rawlinson, Iain B Gosbell
{"title":"Improved efficiency using sequential automated immunoassays for syphilis screening in blood donors.","authors":"Anthea Cheng, Anindita Das, Claire E Styles, Zin Naing, William D Rawlinson, Iain B Gosbell","doi":"10.1128/jcm.00476-24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Using sequential immunoassays for the screening of blood donors is well described for viral serology testing but not for the screening of syphilis. In this study, we report the evaluation results and 2-year sequential testing data using two highly sensitive automated serology assays, the Alinity s Syphilis chemiluminescent immunoassay for screening, with all repeatedly reactive samples then tested on the Elecsys Syphilis electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. We screened 1,767,782 blood donor samples between 7 July 2021 and 6 July 2023 and found the Alinity false-positive rate to be low at 0.08% (1,456/1,767,782). The common false-positive rate between the two assays was also low (3.83%, 58/1,514). Concordantly reactive samples were further tested using a <i>Treponema pallidum</i> particle agglutination test, a rapid plasma reagin test, and a fluorescent treponemal antibody absorption test. There were 262/1,376 concordantly reactive Alinity and Elecsys blood donor samples with reactivity on one or more of the confirmatory tests. A total of 26/1,376 donors had a current syphilis infection, 152/1,376 reported a past history of syphilis and had been treated, and 84/1,376 did not report a past history of syphilis. We suggest that future studies could explore the use of sequential immunoassays to aid in the serodiagnosis for syphilis.</p><p><strong>Importance: </strong>The serodiagnosis for syphilis usually follows two methodologies-a \"traditional\" algorithm using a non-treponemal test followed by confirmation using a treponemal test, or a \"reverse\" algorithm using a treponemal test followed by a non-treponemal test. There are limited reports in the literature of using a modified reverse algorithm (treponemal test followed by a second treponemal test), and to the best of knowledge, there are currently no published articles using two highly sensitive automated immunoassays to aid the serodiagnosis of syphilis. In addition, the <i>Treponema pallidum</i> particle agglutination (TPPA) assay is commonly used as a confirmatory test for the diagnosis of syphilis. With the withdrawal of the TPPA assay from Australia and presumably from the global market also, alternative testing algorithms are now required. This study provides proof of concept for using sequential immunoassays in the diagnosis of syphilis.</p>","PeriodicalId":15511,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Microbiology","volume":" ","pages":"e0047624"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11323462/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00476-24","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Using sequential immunoassays for the screening of blood donors is well described for viral serology testing but not for the screening of syphilis. In this study, we report the evaluation results and 2-year sequential testing data using two highly sensitive automated serology assays, the Alinity s Syphilis chemiluminescent immunoassay for screening, with all repeatedly reactive samples then tested on the Elecsys Syphilis electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. We screened 1,767,782 blood donor samples between 7 July 2021 and 6 July 2023 and found the Alinity false-positive rate to be low at 0.08% (1,456/1,767,782). The common false-positive rate between the two assays was also low (3.83%, 58/1,514). Concordantly reactive samples were further tested using a Treponema pallidum particle agglutination test, a rapid plasma reagin test, and a fluorescent treponemal antibody absorption test. There were 262/1,376 concordantly reactive Alinity and Elecsys blood donor samples with reactivity on one or more of the confirmatory tests. A total of 26/1,376 donors had a current syphilis infection, 152/1,376 reported a past history of syphilis and had been treated, and 84/1,376 did not report a past history of syphilis. We suggest that future studies could explore the use of sequential immunoassays to aid in the serodiagnosis for syphilis.

Importance: The serodiagnosis for syphilis usually follows two methodologies-a "traditional" algorithm using a non-treponemal test followed by confirmation using a treponemal test, or a "reverse" algorithm using a treponemal test followed by a non-treponemal test. There are limited reports in the literature of using a modified reverse algorithm (treponemal test followed by a second treponemal test), and to the best of knowledge, there are currently no published articles using two highly sensitive automated immunoassays to aid the serodiagnosis of syphilis. In addition, the Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TPPA) assay is commonly used as a confirmatory test for the diagnosis of syphilis. With the withdrawal of the TPPA assay from Australia and presumably from the global market also, alternative testing algorithms are now required. This study provides proof of concept for using sequential immunoassays in the diagnosis of syphilis.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用连续自动免疫测定法提高献血者梅毒筛查的效率。
在病毒血清学检测中,使用序贯免疫测定法对献血者进行筛查的方法已被广泛应用,但在梅毒筛查中却鲜有应用。在本研究中,我们报告了使用两种高灵敏度自动血清学检测方法的评估结果和 2 年的连续检测数据,其中 Alinity s 梅毒化学发光免疫测定用于筛查,所有重复反应样本再用 Elecsys 梅毒电化学发光免疫测定进行检测。我们在 2021 年 7 月 7 日至 2023 年 7 月 6 日期间筛查了 1,767,782 份献血者样本,发现 Alinity 的假阳性率很低,仅为 0.08%(1,456/1,767,782)。两种检测方法的共同假阳性率也很低(3.83%,58/1,514)。对一致反应的样本还使用了苍白螺旋体颗粒凝集试验、快速血浆试剂试验和荧光三联体抗体吸收试验进行了进一步检测。在 262/1,376 份一致反应的 Alinity 和 Elecsys 献血者样本中,有 262 份样本在一项或多项确证试验中出现反应。共有 26/1,376 名献血者目前感染了梅毒,152/1,376 名献血者报告过去曾患梅毒并接受过治疗,84/1,376 名献血者未报告过去曾患梅毒。我们建议,今后的研究可以探索使用顺序免疫测定来帮助梅毒血清诊断:梅毒的血清诊断通常采用两种方法--一种是 "传统 "算法,即先进行非抗梅毒试验,然后再用三螺旋体试验进行确认;另一种是 "逆向 "算法,即先进行三螺旋体试验,然后再进行非抗梅毒试验。文献中关于使用改良的反向算法(先进行三帖试验,再进行第二次三帖试验)的报道很有限,而且据我所知,目前还没有发表过使用两种高灵敏度自动免疫测定法来辅助梅毒血清诊断的文章。此外,苍白螺旋体颗粒凝集试验(TPPA)通常被用作梅毒诊断的确证试验。随着 TPPA 检测法退出澳大利亚市场,估计也会退出全球市场,因此现在需要替代检测算法。这项研究证明了在梅毒诊断中使用顺序免疫测定的概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
Journal of Clinical Microbiology 医学-微生物学
CiteScore
17.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
347
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Microbiology® disseminates the latest research concerning the laboratory diagnosis of human and animal infections, along with the laboratory's role in epidemiology and the management of infectious diseases.
期刊最新文献
Erratum for Ganaie et al., "Discovery and Characterization of Pneumococcal Serogroup 36 Capsule Subtypes, Serotypes 36A and 36B". Multicenter evaluation of Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy as a first-line typing tool for carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae in clinical settings. Yield of solid AFB culture in addition to automated liquid culture for diagnosis of mycobacterial infections. Emergence of terbinafine-resistant Trichophyton indotineae in Ontario, Canada, 2014-2023. Pleural space infection microbiology as assessed using a clinical sequencing-based assay: Fusobacterium nucleatum group, Streptococcus intermedius, and other oral normal microbiota are the most common bacteria identified in community-acquired pleural space infections.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1