These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of three commercially available peptide-based immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgA assays to microimmunofluorescence assay for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antibodies.
    Author: Morré SA, Munk C, Persson K, Krüger-Kjaer S, van Dijk R, Meijer CJ, van Den Brule AJ.
    Journal: J Clin Microbiol; 2002 Feb; 40(2):584-7. PubMed ID: 11825974.
    Abstract:
    Three commercially available, peptide-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) systems (Chlamydia trachomatis IgG and IgA EIA [CT-EIA; Labsystems OY, Helsinki, Finland], SeroCT IgG and IgA [SeroCT; Savyon Diagnostics Ltd., Ashdod, Israel], and Chlamydia trachomatis IgG and IgA pELISA [CT pELISA; Medac, Wedel, Germany]) were evaluated for the detection of serum immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgA antibodies specific for Chlamydia trachomatis and compared to the "gold standard" assay, the microimmunofluorescence (MIF) assay. Serological responses were analyzed in 149 women aged 20 to 30 years. Cervical swabs obtained from these women were examined for C. trachomatis by PCR, and 43 were found to be positive. The overall seroprevalence rates detected by CT-EIA, SeroCT, CT pELISA, and the MIF assay were 42, 42, 35, and 39%, respectively, for IgG and 7, 7, 3, and 7%, respectively, for IgA. The IgG seroprevalence rates for the PCR-positive women were two to three times higher than those for the PCR-negative women, i.e., 72 versus 29%, 72 versus 29%, 47 versus 26%, and 74 versus 25% for CT-EIA, SeroCT, CT pELISA, and the MIF assay, respectively. After discrepancy analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated for the IgG assays; for CT-EIA they were 84.7, 98.6, 98.4, and 86.7%, respectively; for CT pELISA they were 71.4, 97.3, 96.2, and 78.3%, respectively; for SeroCT they were 84.7, 98.6, 98.4, and 86.3%, respectively; and for the MIF assay they were 79.2, 83.1, 98.3, and 83.1%, respectively. In conclusion, these peptide-based ELISA systems for the serological detection of C. trachomatis infection performed as well as the MIF assay. Since these tests are less time-consuming, less expensive, and easier to perform than the MIF assay, they might be useful in the serodiagnosis of chlamydial infection.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]