Schub Thilo, Klugherz Isabel, Wagener Johannes, Prattes Juergen, Hoenigl Martin, Suerbaum Sebastian, Held Jürgen, Dichtl Karl
Max von Pettenkofer-Institut für Hygiene und Medizinische Mikrobiologie, Medizinische Fakultät, LMU München, Munich, Germany.
Diagnostic and Research Institute of Hygiene, Microbiology and Environmental Medicine, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
J Clin Microbiol. 2024 Dec 11;62(12):e0095024. doi: 10.1128/jcm.00950-24. Epub 2024 Nov 4.
Invasive aspergillosis (IA) is a life-threatening infection. Early and specific diagnosis is pivotal to ensure adequate therapy. Antigen testing from blood is a widespread and convenient diagnostic approach. Various tests for the detection of antigen as well as for the panfungal antigen β-1,3-D-glucan (BDG) are available, for which comprehensive comparisons are still lacking. Blood samples of 82 proven/probable (11/71) IA patients and 52 controls were tested using two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) (Bio-Rad and Euroimmun), one chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) (Vircell), one BDG assay (Fujifilm Wako), and two point of care (PoC) assays (Immy sōna and OLM). PoC assays were evaluated visually and used automated read out systems. Of the 82 IA patients, 37 had received solid organ transplantation (SOT) and 25 hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). Sensitivities and specificities for the eight test systems ranged from 27% to 71% and from 64% to 100%. Estimating a 10% prevalence of IA, test performance would have resulted in positive and negative predictive values of 14%-100% and 91%-95%. Areas under the curve (AUCs) for all tests except GM were below 0.7. When the cut-off values for quantitative tests were normalized to a specificity close to 95%, sensitivities ranged from 14% to 40%. The use of automated read out systems for the PoC assays had a significant impact. Combining different tests did not result in better test strategies. Sensitivity of antigen testing from single serum samples is low. Due to specificity issues, the majority of tests is not suited for screening purposes. The different assays can meet different needs in different diagnostic settings.
侵袭性曲霉病(IA)是一种危及生命的感染。早期和特异性诊断对于确保适当治疗至关重要。血液抗原检测是一种广泛应用且便捷的诊断方法。目前有多种检测抗原以及泛真菌抗原β-1,3-D-葡聚糖(BDG)的检测方法,但仍缺乏全面的比较。使用两种酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)(伯乐和欧蒙)、一种化学发光免疫测定(CLIA)(维塞尔)、一种BDG测定(富士胶片和光)以及两种即时检测(PoC)测定(Immy sōna和OLM)对82例确诊/疑似(11/71)IA患者和52例对照的血液样本进行检测。PoC测定通过目视评估并使用自动读数系统。在82例IA患者中,37例接受了实体器官移植(SOT),25例接受了造血干细胞移植(HSCT)。八种检测系统的敏感性和特异性范围分别为27%至71%和64%至100%。估计IA患病率为10%时,检测性能将导致阳性和阴性预测值分别为14%至100%和91%至95%。除GM外,所有检测的曲线下面积(AUC)均低于0.7。当将定量检测的临界值标准化至特异性接近95%时,敏感性范围为14%至40%。PoC测定使用自动读数系统有显著影响。联合不同检测并未产生更好的检测策略。单次血清样本抗原检测的敏感性较低。由于特异性问题,大多数检测不适合用于筛查目的。不同检测方法可在不同诊断环境中满足不同需求。