Prince Harry E, Lapé-Nixon Mary, Brenner Andrew, Pitstick Nancy, Couturier Marc Roger
Focus Diagnostics Reference Laboratory, Cypress, California, USA
Focus Diagnostics Reference Laboratory, Cypress, California, USA.
Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2014 Jun;21(6):813-6. doi: 10.1128/CVI.00106-14. Epub 2014 Mar 26.
The measurement of cytomegalovirus (CMV) IgG avidity is a powerful tool for identifying individuals with recent CMV infection. Because such patients are expected to be positive for CMV IgM, several investigators have suggested that CMV IgG-positive sera first be screened for CMV IgM and then only the IgM-reactive sera be tested for avidity. We investigated the impact of different CMV IgM assays on such a reflexing algorithm using a panel of 369 consecutive IgG-positive serum samples submitted for avidity testing. A bead-based immunofluorescent assay (BIFA) identified 105 IgM-positive serum samples, whereas an IgM-capture enzyme immunoassay (EIA) identified 48 IgM-positive serum samples; this marked difference led us to evaluate additional CMV IgM assays. An enzyme-linked immunofluorescent assay (ELFA) and a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA) were used to test all sera with discordant BIFA/EIA results, all sera with concordant positive results, and selected sera with concordant negative results. The findings indicated that the ELFA would identify 74 CMV IgM-positive samples and the CIA would identify 64. Of the 23 low-avidity serum samples, 2 were IgM negative by BIFA, 3 by ELFA and CIA, and 4 by EIA; of the 23 intermediate-avidity serum samples, 6 were IgM negative by BIFA, 10 by ELFA, and 15 by EIA and CIA. In both these avidity groups, BIFA IgM-negative sera were also negative by the other 3 assays. These findings demonstrate that an algorithm requiring CMV IgM reactivity as a criterion for CMV IgG avidity testing does not identify all low-avidity sera and thus misses some cases of acute CMV infection.
巨细胞病毒(CMV)IgG亲和力的测定是识别近期感染CMV个体的有力工具。由于这类患者预计CMV IgM呈阳性,一些研究者建议首先对CMV IgG阳性血清进行CMV IgM筛查,然后仅对IgM反应性血清进行亲和力检测。我们使用提交进行亲和力检测的369份连续的IgG阳性血清样本,研究了不同的CMV IgM检测方法对这种反应性算法的影响。基于珠子的免疫荧光检测(BIFA)鉴定出105份IgM阳性血清样本,而IgM捕获酶免疫检测(EIA)鉴定出48份IgM阳性血清样本;这种显著差异促使我们评估其他CMV IgM检测方法。使用酶联免疫荧光检测(ELFA)和化学发光免疫检测(CIA)对所有BIFA/EIA结果不一致的血清、所有结果一致为阳性的血清以及部分结果一致为阴性的血清进行检测。结果表明,ELFA可鉴定出74份CMV IgM阳性样本,CIA可鉴定出64份。在23份低亲和力血清样本中,2份通过BIFA检测IgM为阴性,3份通过ELFA和CIA检测为阴性,4份通过EIA检测为阴性;在23份中等亲和力血清样本中,6份通过BIFA检测IgM为阴性,10份通过ELFA检测为阴性,15份通过EIA和CIA检测为阴性。在这两个亲和力组中,BIFA IgM阴性的血清在其他3种检测方法中也为阴性。这些结果表明,一种将CMV IgM反应性作为CMV IgG亲和力检测标准的算法并不能识别所有低亲和力血清,因此会遗漏一些急性CMV感染病例。