NLM Gateway
A service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health
Your Entrance to
Resources from the
National Library of Medicine
    Home      Term Finder      Limits/Settings      Search Details      History      My Locker        About      Help      FAQ    
Skip Navigation Side Barintended for web crawlers only

Comparison of Commercial Parvovirus B19 IgM Antibody Assays Using Different Recombinant Antigens.

QU KZ, POPOV J, WONG A, SFERRUZZA A; Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (41st : 2001 : Chicago, Ill.).

Abstr Intersci Conf Antimicrob Agents Chemother Intersci Conf Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001 Dec 16-19; 41: abstract no. D-1404.

Quest Diagnostics, San Juan Capistrano, CA

BACKGROUND: Parvovirus B19 infection is associated with childhood erythema infectiosum, severe aplastic crisis in hemolytic disorders, and fetal loss. Serology assays are commonly used for diagnosis of current infection. Commercial tests using E coli recombined VP1 or baculovirus recombined VP2 antigens are available for detecting parvovirus B19 IgM antibodies. In this study, we compared a VP2 antigen EIA to a VP1 EIA/IFA system for IgM antibody detection. Materials and METHODS: Selected patient sera (N=300) were tested for presence of parvovirus B19 IgM antibody using the VP1 antigen-based Human Parvo B19 IgM ELISA (MRL Diagnostics) and the VP2 antigen-based Parvo B19 IgM EIA (Biotrin International). All equivocal or positive sera, ie, those with MRL EIA index values of 0.9-4.0, were subsequently tested in the ParvoB19 IgM IFA (MRL Diagnostics). RESULTS: Analysis of MRL EIA results indicated 70% of specimens (209/300) required subsequent IFA testing for confirmation. Of these, 55 sera (26%) were confirmed positive, and 154 sera (74%) were negative and possibly false positive. Conversely, 53 of 209 sera (25%) tested were positive in the Biotrin EIA assay. Overall, there was a 94% concordance between the Biotrin EIA and MRL EIA/IFA system: 64% were negative and 30% were positive in both methods. Eighteen sera (6%) were discrepant: nine were MRL+/Biotrin- and seven were MRL-/Biotrin +. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that when using the VP1 antigen-based EIA, an IFA confirmatory test appears to be a requirement, but when using a VP2 antigen EIA system, the IFA confirmatory test is optional.

Publication Types:
  • Meeting Abstracts
Keywords:
  • Animals
  • Antibodies, Viral
  • Antigens
  • Antigens, Viral
  • Baculoviridae
  • Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay
  • Epitopes
  • Equine Infectious Anemia
  • Erythema Infectiosum
  • Humans
  • Immunoenzyme Techniques
  • Serologic Tests
  • immunology
Other ID:
  • GWAIDS0030122
UI: 102269754

From Meeting Abstracts




Contact Us
U.S. National Library of Medicine |  National Institutes of Health |  Health & Human Services
Privacy |  Copyright |  Accessibility |  Freedom of Information Act |  USA.gov