Binnicker M J, Jespersen D J, Harring J A
Division of Clinical Microbiology, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, SDSC 1-526, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2010 Nov;17(11):1734-8. doi: 10.1128/CVI.00332-10. Epub 2010 Sep 22.
The goal of this study was to evaluate the BioPlex 2200 Toxoplasma, rubella, and cytomegalovirus (CMV) (ToRC) IgG and IgM multiplex immunoassays (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA) and compare the results to those of conventional testing by enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and enzyme-linked fluorescent assay (ELFA). Serum specimens (n = 600) submitted for routine ToRC IgG and IgM testing by EIA (SeraQuest, Doral, FL; Diamedix, Miami, FL) or ELFA (Vidas; bioMérieux, Durham, NC) were also tested by the BioPlex ToRC multiplex immunoassays. Samples showing discordant results were retested by both methods, with further discrepancies being arbitrated by a third assay. Following repeat testing, the BioPlex Toxoplasma, rubella, and CMV IgG assays demonstrated agreements of 98.7 (592/600 specimens), 93.3 (560/600 specimens), and 98.3% (590/600 specimens), respectively, while the ToRC IgM assays yielded agreements of 91.2 (547/600 specimens), 87.3 (524/600 specimens), and 95.2% (571/600 specimens), respectively. The BioPlex ToRC IgG assays provided results comparable to EIA/ELFA results, with kappa coefficients showing near-perfect agreement for the Toxoplasma (κ = 0.94) and CMV (κ = 0.97) IgG assays and substantial agreement for the rubella IgG assay (κ = 0.66). The BioPlex ToRC IgM assays showed lower specificity with only slight agreement for Toxoplasma IgM (κ = 0.07), poor agreement for rubella IgM (κ = -0.03), and moderate agreement for CMV IgM (κ = 0.55). Both the BioPlex IgG and IgM assays reduced turnaround time (1.7 h versus 5.5 h by EIA/ELFA for 100 specimens) and eliminated the necessity to manually pipette or aliquot specimens prior to testing.
本研究的目的是评估BioPlex 2200弓形虫、风疹和巨细胞病毒(CMV)(ToRC)IgG和IgM多重免疫测定法(Bio-Rad实验室,加利福尼亚州赫拉克勒斯),并将结果与酶免疫测定法(EIA)和酶联荧光测定法(ELFA)的传统检测结果进行比较。提交用于通过EIA(SeraQuest,佛罗里达州多拉尔;Diamedix,佛罗里达州迈阿密)或ELFA(Vidas;bioMérieux,北卡罗来纳州达勒姆)进行常规ToRC IgG和IgM检测的血清标本(n = 600)也通过BioPlex ToRC多重免疫测定法进行检测。结果不一致的样本通过两种方法重新检测,进一步的差异通过第三种检测方法进行仲裁。重复检测后,BioPlex弓形虫、风疹和CMV IgG测定法的一致性分别为98.7%(592/600个标本)、93.3%(560/600个标本)和98.3%(590/600个标本),而ToRC IgM测定法的一致性分别为91.2%(547/600个标本)、87.3%(524/600个标本)和95.2%(571/600个标本)。BioPlex ToRC IgG测定法提供的结果与EIA/ELFA结果相当,kappa系数显示弓形虫(κ = 0.94)和CMV(κ = 0.97)IgG测定法几乎完全一致,风疹IgG测定法有实质性一致(κ = 0.66)。BioPlex ToRC IgM测定法显示特异性较低,弓形虫IgM只有轻微一致(κ = 0.07),风疹IgM一致性差(κ = -0.03),CMV IgM一致性中等(κ = 0.55)。BioPlex IgG和IgM测定法都缩短了周转时间(100个标本通过EIA/ELFA为5.5小时,而BioPlex为1.7小时),并消除了检测前手动移液或分装标本的必要性。