Publication:
Comparison of chemiluminescent immunoassay and ELISA for measles IgG and IgM.

dc.contributor.authorSanz, Juan C
dc.contributor.authorDe Ory, Fernando de
dc.contributor.authorMinguito, Teodora
dc.contributor.authorBalfagon, Pilar
dc.contributor.funderInstituto de Salud Carlos III
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-16T08:32:31Z
dc.date.available2020-06-16T08:32:31Z
dc.date.issued2015-08
dc.description.abstractIn the context of measles elimination, the identification of recent infections is important for clinical laboratories. Serological diagnosis is achieved by detecting specific IgG and IgM. Recently an automated chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) (Liaison, DiaSorin, Italy) has been used to quantify the measles antibody. The aim of this study was to compare this assay with Enzygnost ELISA (Siemens, Germany), with final classification of discrepancies by indirect immunofluorescence (Euroimmun, Germany). For measles IgM, 204 sera were analyzed: 50 IgM-positive, 104 IgM-negative/IgG-positive, and 50 from other viral infections (B19V, rubella, mumps, CMV, and EBV). For the measles IgG assay, 162 samples were tested: 106 were positive and 56 were negative. For measles IgM, the sensitivity and specificity of CLIA against ELISA were 94% (95% CI: 83.2-98.6) and 100% (95% CI: 97.1-100), respectively; the corrected figures after the final classification of discrepancies were 100% (95% CI: 91.0-100) and 99.4% (95% CI: 96.1-100), respectively. In relation to IgG, the sensitivity and specificity of CLIA against ELISA were, respectively, 97.2% (95% CI: 91.7-99.4) and 92.9% (95% CI: 82.5-97.7), and 95.5% (95% CI: 89.5-98.3) and 100% (95% CI: 91.8-100) after the final classification. CLIA showed excellent sensitivity and specificity in detecting measles IgG and IgM antibodies, eliminating the need to aliquot specimens before carrying out the assay.es_ES
dc.description.peerreviewedes_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipThis work was supported in part by a contract from DiaSorin Iberia SA and the Institute of Health Carlos III (MVP1235/12)es_ES
dc.format.number8es_ES
dc.format.page648-51es_ES
dc.format.volume123es_ES
dc.identifier.citationAPMIS . 2015 Aug;123(8):648-51es_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/apm.12413es_ES
dc.identifier.e-issn1600-0463es_ES
dc.identifier.journalAPMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavicaes_ES
dc.identifier.pubmedID26140432es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12105/10446
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherWileyes_ES
dc.relation.projectIDinfo:eu_repo/grantAgreement/ES/MVP1235/12es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://doi.org/10.1111/apm.12413es_ES
dc.repisalud.centroISCIII::Centro Nacional de Microbiologíaes_ES
dc.repisalud.institucionISCIIIes_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.rights.licenseAtribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/*
dc.subject.meshEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assayes_ES
dc.subject.meshHumanses_ES
dc.subject.meshImmunoassayes_ES
dc.subject.meshImmunoglobulin Ges_ES
dc.subject.meshImmunoglobulin Mes_ES
dc.subject.meshItalyes_ES
dc.subject.meshMeasleses_ES
dc.titleComparison of chemiluminescent immunoassay and ELISA for measles IgG and IgM.es_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES
dc.type.hasVersionAMes_ES
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication3934227c-f6db-420f-b986-334b16d5221a
relation.isAuthorOfPublication26a56bc6-4e8c-457c-8999-13fd4d2bed1a
relation.isAuthorOfPublication64f51951-876b-4169-888e-9688ddc33c7f
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery3934227c-f6db-420f-b986-334b16d5221a

Files