Rollins, Leonard O.

ABSTRACT Detection of the Histoplasma capsulatum urinary antigen (UAg) is among the most sensitive and rapid means to diagnose histoplasmosis. Previously, we evaluated analyte-specific reagents (ASR) manufactured by IMMY (Norman, OK) for detection of Histoplasma galactomannan (GM) in urine using an enzyme immunoassay (EIA), and we showed low positive agreement (64.5%) with the MiraVista (MVista) Histoplasma antigen (Ag) quantitative EIA (MiraVista Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN). Here we reevaluated the IMMY GM ASR following modification of our original assay protocol and introduction of an indeterminate range. A total of 150 prospectively collected urine samples were tested with both the IMMY and MVista EIAs, and clinical histories were recorded for all study subjects. The IMMY GM ASR showed positive and negative agreements of 82.3% (14/17 samples) and 100% (121/121 samples), respectively (with exclusion of 12 indeterminate results), and overall agreement of 90% (135/150 samples) with respect to the MVista EIA. Of the three patients with negative IMMY GM ASR results and positive MVista EIA results, testing was performed for initial diagnostic purposes for one patient (<0.4 ng/ml by the MVista EIA) and UAg levels were being monitored for the remaining two patients (both <0.7 ng/ml by the MVista EIA). The MVista EIA results were positive for 6/12 samples that tested indeterminate by the IMMY GM ASR. We also show that the IMMY GM ASR can be used to serially monitor Histoplasma UAg levels. In conclusion, we demonstrate that, with modification, the IMMY GM ASR is a reliable rapid assay for detection of Histoplasma UAg.

ABSTRACT We compared the performance of four assays for the detection of cryptococcal antigen in serum samples ( n = 634) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples ( n = 51). Compared to latex agglutination, the sensitivity and specificity of the Premier enzyme immunoassay (EIA), Alpha CrAg EIA, and CrAg lateral flow assay (LFA) were 55.6 and 100%, 100 and 99.7%, and 100 and 99.8%, respectively, from serum samples. There was 100% agreement among the four tests for CSF samples, with 18 samples testing positive by each of the assays.

ABSTRACT We describe the first direct comparison of the reverse and traditional syphilis screening algorithms in a population with a low prevalence of syphilis. Among 1,000 patients tested, the results for 6 patients were falsely reactive by reverse screening, compared to none by traditional testing. However, reverse screening identified 2 patients with possible latent syphilis that were not detected by rapid plasma reagin (RPR).

ABSTRACT The diagnosis of syphilis is challenging and often relies on serologic tests to detect treponemal or nontreponemal antibodies. Recently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Association of Public Health Laboratories proposed an update to the syphilis serology testing algorithm, in which serum samples are first tested using a treponema-specific test and positive samples are analyzed with a nontreponemal assay. The goal of this study was to compare the performance of seven treponemal assays (BioPlex 2200 syphilis IgG [Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA], fluorescent treponemal antibody [FTA] assay [Zeus Scientific, Raritan, NJ], Treponema pallidum particle agglutination [TP-PA; Fujirebio Diagnostics, Malvern, PA], Trep-Sure enzyme immunoassay [EIA; Phoenix Biotech, Oakville, Ontario, Canada], Trep-Chek EIA [Phoenix Biotech], Trep-ID EIA [Phoenix Biotech], and Treponema ViraBlot IgG [Viramed Biotech AG, Planegg, Germany]) using serum samples ( n = 303) submitted to our reference laboratory. In addition to testing with these 7 assays, all samples were tested by a rapid plasma reagin (RPR) assay and a treponemal IgM Western blot assay (Viramed ViraBlot). Compared to the FTA assay as the gold standard, the evaluated treponemal tests demonstrated comparable levels of performance, with percent agreement ranging from 95.4% (95% confidence interval, 92.3 to 97.3) for the Trep-Sure EIA to 98.4% (96.1 to 99.4) for the Trep-ID EIA. Compared to a “consensus of the test panel” (defined as at least 4 of 7 treponemal tests being in agreement), the percent agreement ranged from 95.7% (92.7 to 97.5) for Trep-Sure to 99.3% (97.5 to 99.9) for Trep-ID. These data may assist clinical laboratories that are considering implementing a treponemal test for screening or confirmatory purposes.

ABSTRACTConventional methods for the detection of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-specific antibodies include the immunofluorescence assay (IFA) and enzyme immunoassay (EIA). While sensitive and specific, these methods are labor-intensive and require separate assays for each analyte. This study evaluated the performance of a multiplex bead assay (BioPlex 2200; Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA) for the simultaneous detection of immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgM class antibodies to the EBV viral capsid antigen (VCA) and IgG class antibodies to Epstein-Barr virus nuclear antigen-1 (EBNA-1). Serum specimens (n= 1,315) submitted for routine EBV-specific antibody testing by EIA (Grifols-Quest, Inc., Miami, FL) were also tested by the multiplex bead assay using the BioPlex 2200 automated analyzer. Specimens showing discordant results were tested by IFA. Following IFA resolution, the BioPlex VCA IgM, VCA IgG, and EBNA-1 IgG assays demonstrated 97.9%, 91.4%, and 96.9% agreement, respectively, with the results obtained by EIA. Furthermore, the BioPlex assays showed an overall agreement of 94.1% with the EIA when the specimens were categorized by disease state (susceptible, acute, or past infection) based on the EBV-specific antibody profiles. These findings indicate that the BioPlex EBV assays demonstrate a performance comparable to that of the conventional EIA, while allowing for a more rapid (2.3 h for 100 samples versus 4.5 h by the EIA) and higher-throughput (∼400 samples per 9 h versus 200 samples by the EIA) analysis of the EBV-specific antibody response.

ABSTRACT The diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis (LB) is commonly made by serologic testing with Western blot (WB) analysis serving as an important supplemental assay. Although specific, the interpretation of WBs for diagnosis of LB (i.e., Lyme WBs) is subjective, with considerable variability in results. In addition, the processing, reading, and interpretation of Lyme WBs are laborious and time-consuming procedures. With the need for rapid processing and more objective interpretation of Lyme WBs, we evaluated the performances of two automated interpretive systems, TrinBlot/BLOTrix (Trinity Biotech, Carlsbad, CA) and BeeBlot/ViraScan (Viramed Biotech AG, Munich, Germany), using 518 serum specimens submitted to our laboratory for Lyme WB analysis. The results of routine testing with visual interpretation were compared to those obtained by BLOTrix analysis of MarBlot immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG and by ViraScan analysis of ViraBlot and ViraStripe IgM and IgG assays. BLOTrix analysis demonstrated an agreement of 84.7% for IgM and 87.3% for IgG compared to visual reading and interpretation. ViraScan analysis of the ViraBlot assays demonstrated agreements of 85.7% for IgM and 94.2% for IgG, while ViraScan analysis of the ViraStripe IgM and IgG assays showed agreements of 87.1 and 93.1%, respectively. Testing by the automated systems yielded an average time savings of 64 min/run compared to processing, reading, and interpretation by our current procedure. Our findings demonstrated that automated processing and interpretive systems yield results comparable to those of visual interpretation, while reducing the subjectivity and time required for Lyme WB analysis.