Performance of seven serological assays for diagnosing tularemia

dc.contributor.authorChaignat, Valérie
dc.contributor.authorDjordjević-Spasić, Marina
dc.contributor.authorRuettger, Anke
dc.contributor.authorOtto, Peter H.
dc.contributor.authorKlimpel, Diana
dc.contributor.authorMüller, Wolfgang
dc.contributor.authorSachse, Konrad W.
dc.contributor.authorAraj, George F.
dc.contributor.authorDiller, Roland
dc.contributor.authorTomaso, Herbert
dc.contributor.departmentSurgery
dc.contributor.departmentDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension
dc.contributor.facultyFaculty of Medicine (FM)
dc.contributor.institutionAmerican University of Beirut
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-24T12:12:35Z
dc.date.available2025-01-24T12:12:35Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.description.abstractBackground: Tularemia is a rare zoonotic disease caused by the Gram-negative bacterium Francisella tularensis. Serology is frequently the preferred diagnostic approach, because the pathogen is highly infectious and difficult to cultivate. The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of tularemia specific tests.Methods: The Serazym®Anti-Francisella tularensis ELISA, Serion ELISA classic Francisella tularensis IgG/IgM, an in-house ELISA, the VIRapid® Tularemia immunochromatographic test, an in-house antigen microarray, and a Western Blot (WB) assay were evaluated. The diagnosis tularemia was established using a standard micro-agglutination assay. In total, 135 sera from a series of 110 consecutive tularemia patients were tested.Results: The diagnostic sensitivity and diagnostic specificity of the tests were VIRapid (97.0% and 84.0%), Serion IgG (96.3% and 96.8%), Serion IgM (94.8% and 96.8%), Serazym (97.0% and 91.5%), in-house ELISA (95.6% and 76.6%), WB (93.3% and 83.0%), microarray (91.1% and 97.9%).Conclusions: The diagnostic value of the commercial assays was proven, because the diagnostic accuracy was >90%. The diagnostic sensitivity of the in-house ELISA and the WB were acceptable, but the diagnostic accuracy was <90%. Interestingly, the antigen microarray test was very specific and had a very good positive predictive value. © 2014 Chaignat et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-234
dc.identifier.eid2-s2.0-84899896212
dc.identifier.pmid24885274
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10938/32792
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherBioMed Central Ltd.
dc.relation.ispartofBMC Infectious Diseases
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectDiagnostic sensitivity
dc.subjectDiagnostic specificity
dc.subjectSerology
dc.subjectTularemia
dc.subjectAgglutination tests
dc.subjectAnimals
dc.subjectAntibodies, bacterial
dc.subjectBlotting, western
dc.subjectEnzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
dc.subjectFrancisella tularensis
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectRetrospective studies
dc.subjectZoonoses
dc.subjectImmunoglobulin g antibody
dc.subjectImmunoglobulin m antibody
dc.subjectBacterium antibody
dc.subjectAgglutination test
dc.subjectAntibody detection
dc.subjectArticle
dc.subjectChromatograph
dc.subjectControlled study
dc.subjectDiagnostic accuracy
dc.subjectDiagnostic test accuracy study
dc.subjectDiagnostic value
dc.subjectElisa kit
dc.subjectEnzyme linked immunosorbent assay
dc.subjectFalse negative result
dc.subjectFalse positive result
dc.subjectHuman
dc.subjectImmunoaffinity chromatography
dc.subjectMajor clinical study
dc.subjectMicroarray analysis
dc.subjectMicroarray kit
dc.subjectPredictive value
dc.subjectReceiver operating characteristic
dc.subjectRetrospective study
dc.subjectSensitivity and specificity
dc.subjectSerodiagnosis
dc.subjectWestern blotting
dc.subjectAnimal
dc.subjectBlood
dc.subjectComparative study
dc.subjectIsolation and purification
dc.subjectZoonosis
dc.titlePerformance of seven serological assays for diagnosing tularemia
dc.typeArticle

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2014-10566.pdf
Size:
351.84 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format