Virology Division, SEALS Microbiology, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Pathology. 2013 Aug;45(5):501-5. doi: 10.1097/PAT.0b013e3283631cf9.
Accurate diagnosis of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is essential for infection control, treatment and screening of potential blood, organ and tissue donors. We assessed the sensitivity of the HBsAg and HBcAb as screening assays alone and in combination for detecting HBV infection in a series of Australian patients. The performance of the Architect (Abbott Diagnostics, Germany) and the Elecsys (Roche Diagnostics, Germany) platforms were assessed for detection of HBcAb.
There were 2778 blood samples assessed using the COBAS Ampliprep/TaqMan test for HBV DNA, of which 331 sera had concurrent HBV serology testing. This allowed determination of the correlation between HBV DNA and different serological markers. Of the 331 sera, 260 had sufficient residual volume to be retested for HBcAb using both Elecsys and the Architect assays.
Of the 331 patients, one (0.3%) was negative by the Architect Anti-HBc II assay, in the presence of HBV DNA and positive HBsAg, consistent with recent infection. Positive HBcAb in the absence of HBV DNA was found in 67 of 331 (20.2%) patients. Of these, 18 of 67 had isolated HBcAb with negative results on all other tests, with 12 of 18 (3.6%) demonstrating low HBcAb signals on chemiluminscent microparticle assay. No cases of detectable HBV DNA in the presence of negative serology were found. When the HBcAb was used as a marker for past exposure or chronic HBV infection, the Architect Anti-HBc II assay demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 98% and 79.9%, respectively, compared to 90% and 78.9%, respectively, for the Elecsys Anti-HBc assay. The combination of the Architect Anti-HBc II and HBsAg assays, as per conventional solid organ donor and recipient screening protocols, had 90% specificity and 100% sensitivity for determining HBV infection.
This study shows that the use of combined HBsAg and HBcAb is sensitive and reliable for screening and predicting HBV nucleic acid test (NAT) positivity, whereas HBcAb alone missed an acute infection in this study population. There were no significant differences detectable between the Architect and the Elecsys HBcAb assays (p=0.001), suggesting laboratories should assess individual assays in the local population before use as screening tests.
准确诊断乙型肝炎病毒(HBV)感染对于感染控制、治疗和筛查潜在的血液、器官和组织供体至关重要。我们评估了 HBsAg 和 HBcAb 作为单独和联合筛查检测用于检测一系列澳大利亚患者 HBV 感染的敏感性。评估了 Architect(雅培诊断,德国)和 Elecsys(罗氏诊断,德国)平台用于检测 HBcAb 的性能。
使用 COBAS Ampliprep/TaqMan 检测 HBV DNA 评估了 2778 份血样,其中 331 份血清具有同时的 HBV 血清学检测。这允许确定 HBV DNA 与不同血清学标志物之间的相关性。在 331 份血清中,有 260 份有足够的残留量可使用 Elecsys 和 Architect 检测分别重新检测 HBcAb。
在 331 名患者中,1 名(0.3%)患者的 Architect Anti-HBc II 检测呈阴性,但存在 HBV DNA 和阳性 HBsAg,这与近期感染一致。在 331 名患者中,67 名(20.2%)患者在没有 HBV DNA 的情况下出现阳性 HBcAb。其中,18 名中有 67 名(18 名中有 67 名,占 26.9%)患者仅存在 HBcAb,其他所有检测结果均为阴性,其中 12 名中有 18 名(12 名中有 18 名,占 3.6%)患者在化学发光微粒子免疫分析中表现出低 HBcAb 信号。未发现存在阴性血清学的可检测 HBV DNA 的情况。当 HBcAb 用作过去暴露或慢性 HBV 感染的标志物时,Architect Anti-HBc II 检测的敏感性和特异性分别为 98%和 79.9%,而 Elecsys Anti-HBc 检测的敏感性和特异性分别为 90%和 78.9%。根据传统的实体器官供体和受体筛选方案,使用 Architect Anti-HBc II 和 HBsAg 联合检测,特异性为 90%,敏感性为 100%,用于确定 HBV 感染。
本研究表明,联合使用 HBsAg 和 HBcAb 进行筛查和预测 HBV 核酸检测(NAT)阳性具有敏感性和可靠性,而单独使用 HBcAb 则会在本研究人群中漏诊急性感染。Architect 和 Elecsys HBcAb 检测之间没有检测到显著差异(p=0.001),这表明实验室在将其用作筛查检测之前,应在当地人群中评估各个检测。