Comparison of Three Diagnostic Methods for the Detection of Cytomegalovirus and Toxoplasma gondii IgG Antibodies at Prenatal Screening

Genco Francesca, Meroni Valeria, De Silvestri Annalisa, B. Elise
{"title":"Comparison of Three Diagnostic Methods for the Detection of Cytomegalovirus and Toxoplasma gondii IgG Antibodies at Prenatal Screening","authors":"Genco Francesca, Meroni Valeria, De Silvestri Annalisa, B. Elise","doi":"10.11648/J.AJBIO.20200801.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii) and cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections are typically asymptomatic infections, but they can have serious consequences mainly in newborns and immunocompromised patients. In many parts of the world, these infections are routinely screened during pregnancy (toxoplasmosis) and, in others, high-risk individuals are tested using fully automated screening assays. In this study, we investigated the performance of the three fully automated immunoassays, LIAISON® XL DiaSorin, Abbott Architect and Roche Cobas®, for the determination of specific IgG antibodies to Cytomegalovirus and Toxoplasma gondii in human serum or plasma samples in terms of prevalence of CMV and Toxo IgG detected, and both sensitivity and specificity. Performance of the LIAISON® assays was investigated compared to two other assays, ARCHITECT (CMV IgG and Toxo IgG assays) and Cobas® (CMV IgG and Toxo IgG assays). Discrepant anti CMV IgG and anti Toxoplasma IgG samples were tested for IgM to CMV and Toxoplasma to exclude early acute infection where IgG could be detected differently by the methods. Overall, for both CMV IgG and Toxo IgG, the LIAISON® assay was better than both the Cobas® and ARCHITECT assays in terms of CMV and Toxo IgG detected, and both diagnostic sensitivity and specificity performance although the difference is statistically significant only compared to Cobas®.","PeriodicalId":7478,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of BioScience","volume":"4 1","pages":"15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of BioScience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11648/J.AJBIO.20200801.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii) and cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections are typically asymptomatic infections, but they can have serious consequences mainly in newborns and immunocompromised patients. In many parts of the world, these infections are routinely screened during pregnancy (toxoplasmosis) and, in others, high-risk individuals are tested using fully automated screening assays. In this study, we investigated the performance of the three fully automated immunoassays, LIAISON® XL DiaSorin, Abbott Architect and Roche Cobas®, for the determination of specific IgG antibodies to Cytomegalovirus and Toxoplasma gondii in human serum or plasma samples in terms of prevalence of CMV and Toxo IgG detected, and both sensitivity and specificity. Performance of the LIAISON® assays was investigated compared to two other assays, ARCHITECT (CMV IgG and Toxo IgG assays) and Cobas® (CMV IgG and Toxo IgG assays). Discrepant anti CMV IgG and anti Toxoplasma IgG samples were tested for IgM to CMV and Toxoplasma to exclude early acute infection where IgG could be detected differently by the methods. Overall, for both CMV IgG and Toxo IgG, the LIAISON® assay was better than both the Cobas® and ARCHITECT assays in terms of CMV and Toxo IgG detected, and both diagnostic sensitivity and specificity performance although the difference is statistically significant only compared to Cobas®.
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
产前筛查巨细胞病毒和刚地弓形虫IgG抗体三种诊断方法的比较
刚地弓形虫(T. gondii)和巨细胞病毒(CMV)感染通常是无症状感染,但它们主要会对新生儿和免疫功能低下的患者造成严重后果。在世界上许多地方,这些感染在怀孕期间进行常规筛查(弓形虫病),在其他地方,使用全自动筛查分析对高危个体进行检测。在这项研究中,我们研究了三种全自动免疫检测方法(LIAISON®XL DiaSorin、雅培Architect和罗氏Cobas®)在测定人血清或血浆样本中巨细胞病毒和弓形虫特异性IgG抗体的表现,包括检测巨细胞病毒和弓形虫IgG的患病率,以及灵敏度和特异性。将LIAISON®检测方法与ARCHITECT (CMV IgG和弓形虫IgG检测)和Cobas®(CMV IgG和弓形虫IgG检测)两种检测方法进行比较。检测CMV和弓形虫抗巨细胞病毒IgG和弓形虫抗巨细胞病毒IgG的差异,以排除早期急性感染中IgG检测方法不同的情况。总的来说,对于巨细胞病毒IgG和弓形虫IgG, LIAISON®检测方法在检测巨细胞病毒和弓形虫IgG方面优于Cobas®和ARCHITECT检测方法,在诊断敏感性和特异性方面均优于Cobas®,尽管差异仅与Cobas®比较具有统计学意义。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Assessment of Some Agrochemical Types on the Biochemical Composition of Tomato’s Cultivars (Solanum lycopersicum L.) The Connection Between the High Frequency Data and Schizophrenia A New Epistemological Insight of the Coniacian-Santonian Oceanic Anoxic Event (OAE3) Prevalence of Fibromyalgia in Patients at the University Hospital of Cocody-Abidjan in Côte d'Ivoire Profile of Biochemical Markers and Viral Load in a Population of Blood Donors Infected with Hepatitis B and Naive Antiretroviral Treatment in Abidjan
×
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