Evaluation of 12 commercial tests for detection of Epstein-Barr virus-specific and heterophile antibodies

Citation
Al. Bruu et al., Evaluation of 12 commercial tests for detection of Epstein-Barr virus-specific and heterophile antibodies, CL DIAG LAB, 7(3), 2000, pp. 451-456
Citations number
8
Categorie Soggetti
Immunology
Journal title
CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY IMMUNOLOGY
ISSN journal
1071412X → ACNP
Volume
7
Issue
3
Year of publication
2000
Pages
451 - 456
Database
ISI
SICI code
1071-412X(200005)7:3<451:EO1CTF>2.0.ZU;2-T
Abstract
Ten microbiological departments in Norway have participated in a multicente r evaluation of the following commercial tests for detection of Epstein-Bar r virus (EBV)-specific and heterophile antibodies: CAPTIA Select viral caps id antigen (VCA)-M/G/EBNA (Centocor Inc.), Enzygnost anti-EBV/immunoglobuli n M (IgM) and IgG (Dade Behring), Vironostika EBV VCA IgM/IgG/EBNA enzyme-l inked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (Organon Teknika), SEROFLUOR immunofluore scence assay acid EBV Combi-Test (Institute Virion Ltd.), anti-EBV recombin ant IgM- and IgG-early antigen/EBNA IgG ELISA (Biotest Diagnostics), EBV Ig M/IgG/EBNA ELISA (Cull Laboratories), Paul-Bunnell-Davidsohn test (Sanofi D iagnostics Pasteur), Monosticon Dri-Dot (Organon Teknika), Avitex-IM (Omega Diagnostics Ltd.), Alexon Serascan infectious mononucleosis test (Alexon B iomedical me.), Clearview IM (Unipath Ltd.), and Cards+/-OS Mono (Pacific B iotech, Inc.). The test panel included sera from patients with primary EBV infection, immunocompromised patients with recent cytomegalovirus infection , healthy persons (blood donors), and EBV-seronegative persons. Among the t ests for EBV-specific antibodies the sensitivity was good, with only small differences between the different assays. However, there was a greater vari ation in specificity, which varied between 100% (Enzygnost) and 86% (Biotes t), Tests for detection of heterophile antibodies based on purified or sele cted antigen (Avitex, Alexon, Clearview IM, and Cards+/-OS Mono) were more sensitive than the Paul-Bunnell-Davidsohn and Monosticon tests.