Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

[Comparison among four kits in detection of anti-SARS-CoV IgG in sera of SARS patients].
Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi. 2004 Jun; 25(6):514-6.ZL

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the sensitivity and specificity of four kits for detection of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV IgG in sera of SARS patients.

METHODS

Anti-SARS-CoV IgG was detected in 99 serial sera from 18 SARS patients and in 123 negative reference sera, using two enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (EIA No. A and No. B) and two indirect immunofluorescence assays (Australian IFA and Euroimmun IFA).

RESULTS

Anti-SARS-CoV IgG was not detected in sera collected from SARS patients at the first week after onset by any of the four kits, however, it was detectable in sera obtained at the second week of illness by EIA No. B, and two IFA, but not by EIA No. A, with the positive rates of 57.1% (4/7), 57.1% (4/7) and 42.9% (3/7), respectively. The anti-SARS-CoV IgG was first determined in sera on the 9th day by Euroimmun IFA, 12th day by EIA No. B, 13th day by Australian IFA, and 16th day by EIA No. A. The positive rates of antibody on the 3rd week after onset were 84.2% (16/19), 94.7% (18/19), 78.9% (15/19) and 52.6% (10/19) respectively. They were identical since the 4th week after the disease onset. Through detection of 123 negative reference sera, the specificity of EIA No. A and two IFA was 100%, with exception of 94.9% for EIA No. B.

CONCLUSION

The sensitivity and specificity of the two IFAs were relatively higher than that of the two EIAs. The quality of the two homemade EIAs should be improved.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Microbiology, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100083, China.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
English Abstract
Journal Article

Language

chi

PubMed ID

15231132

Citation

Liu, Xue-En, et al. "[Comparison Among Four Kits in Detection of anti-SARS-CoV IgG in Sera of SARS Patients]." Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi = Zhonghua Liuxingbingxue Zazhi, vol. 25, no. 6, 2004, pp. 514-6.
Liu XE, Li J, Li YH, et al. [Comparison among four kits in detection of anti-SARS-CoV IgG in sera of SARS patients]. Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi. 2004;25(6):514-6.
Liu, X. E., Li, J., Li, Y. H., Wang, L., Li, T., Lu, H. Y., Wang, G. F., Zhu, W. F., Gao, X. M., Wang, Y. C., Zhao, Z. D., Xu, X. Y., & Zhuang, H. (2004). [Comparison among four kits in detection of anti-SARS-CoV IgG in sera of SARS patients]. Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi = Zhonghua Liuxingbingxue Zazhi, 25(6), 514-6.
Liu XE, et al. [Comparison Among Four Kits in Detection of anti-SARS-CoV IgG in Sera of SARS Patients]. Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi. 2004;25(6):514-6. PubMed PMID: 15231132.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - [Comparison among four kits in detection of anti-SARS-CoV IgG in sera of SARS patients]. AU - Liu,Xue-En, AU - Li,Jie, AU - Li,Yong-Hua, AU - Wang,Ling, AU - Li,Tong, AU - Lu,Hai-Ying, AU - Wang,Guang-Fa, AU - Zhu,Wan-Fu, AU - Gao,Xiao-Ming, AU - Wang,You-Chun, AU - Zhao,Zhen-Dong, AU - Xu,Xiao-Yuan, AU - Zhuang,Hui, PY - 2004/7/3/pubmed PY - 2005/6/10/medline PY - 2004/7/3/entrez SP - 514 EP - 6 JF - Zhonghua liu xing bing xue za zhi = Zhonghua liuxingbingxue zazhi JO - Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi VL - 25 IS - 6 N2 - OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of four kits for detection of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV IgG in sera of SARS patients. METHODS: Anti-SARS-CoV IgG was detected in 99 serial sera from 18 SARS patients and in 123 negative reference sera, using two enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (EIA No. A and No. B) and two indirect immunofluorescence assays (Australian IFA and Euroimmun IFA). RESULTS: Anti-SARS-CoV IgG was not detected in sera collected from SARS patients at the first week after onset by any of the four kits, however, it was detectable in sera obtained at the second week of illness by EIA No. B, and two IFA, but not by EIA No. A, with the positive rates of 57.1% (4/7), 57.1% (4/7) and 42.9% (3/7), respectively. The anti-SARS-CoV IgG was first determined in sera on the 9th day by Euroimmun IFA, 12th day by EIA No. B, 13th day by Australian IFA, and 16th day by EIA No. A. The positive rates of antibody on the 3rd week after onset were 84.2% (16/19), 94.7% (18/19), 78.9% (15/19) and 52.6% (10/19) respectively. They were identical since the 4th week after the disease onset. Through detection of 123 negative reference sera, the specificity of EIA No. A and two IFA was 100%, with exception of 94.9% for EIA No. B. CONCLUSION: The sensitivity and specificity of the two IFAs were relatively higher than that of the two EIAs. The quality of the two homemade EIAs should be improved. SN - 0254-6450 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/15231132/[Comparison_among_four_kits_in_detection_of_anti_SARS_CoV_IgG_in_sera_of_SARS_patients]_ L2 - http://journal.yiigle.com/LinkIn.do?linkin_type=pubmed&issn=0254-6450&year=2004&vol=25&issue=6&fpage=514 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -