Zaaijer H L, Vrielink H, van Exel-Oehlers P J, Cuypers H T, Lelie P N
Viral Serology Department, Central Laboratory of the Netherlands Red Cross Blood Transfusion Service, Amsterdam.
Transfusion. 1994 Jul;34(7):603-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1994.34794330015.x.
Recently, new immunoblot assays for the detection of antibodies to hepatitis C virus (HCV) became available.
The performance of five confirmatory anti-HCV immunoblot assays was studied with samples with known HCV antibody and HCV RNA status. The assays were a third-generation strip recombinant immunoblot assay (RIBA-3, Chiron Corp., Emeryville, CA), a second-generation HCV blot (DB-2 blot, Diagnostic Biotechnology, Singapore), the Wellcozyme HCV Western blot (Murex blot, Murex Diagnostics, Dartford, UK), an immunodot HCV assay (Matrix, Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL), and the third-generation HCV line immunoassay (Liatek-III, Organon Teknika, Boxtel, The Netherlands).
Sensitivity on samples from 48 HCV RNA-positive, second-generation RIBA (RIBA-2)-positive persons and specificity on samples from 31 low-risk donors was 96 percent or better for all assays. The sensitivity on 31 HCV RNA-positive, RIBA-2-indeterminate samples was as follows: Liatek-III, 94 percent; RIBA-3, 90 percent; Murex blot, 61 percent; Matrix, 55 percent; and DB-2 blot, 39 percent. In testing 39 HCV RNA-negative, RIBA-2-indeterminate donor samples, the percentage found to be negative was Liatek-III, 77 percent; RIBA-3, 67 percent; Murex blot, 49 percent; DB-2 blot, 33 percent; and Matrix, 15 percent. The order of sensitivity on four HCV seroconversion series was (from high to low): RIBA-3, Liatek-III, DB-2 blot, Murex blot, and Matrix; the differences were small.
Detection of HCV antibodies was not refined by the addition of new HCV antigens (NS5, E2/NS1), but by improved classical antigens (core, NS3, NS4). Replacement of the commonly used RIBA-2 will resolve the status of a high proportion of RIBA-2-indeterminate samples.
最近，出现了用于检测丙型肝炎病毒（HCV）抗体的新型免疫印迹检测法。
使用已知HCV抗体和HCV RNA状态的样本，对五种确证性抗HCV免疫印迹检测法的性能进行了研究。这些检测法包括第三代条带重组免疫印迹检测法（RIBA - 3，Chiron公司，加利福尼亚州埃默里维尔）、第二代HCV印迹检测法（DB - 2印迹检测法，Diagnostic Biotechnology公司，新加坡）、Wellcozyme HCV免疫印迹检测法（Murex印迹检测法，Murex Diagnostics公司，英国达特福德）、免疫斑点HCV检测法（Matrix，雅培实验室，伊利诺伊州芝加哥）以及第三代HCV线性免疫检测法（Liatek - III，Organon Teknika公司，荷兰博克斯泰尔）。
对于所有检测法，在48例HCV RNA阳性、第二代重组免疫印迹检测法（RIBA - 2）阳性患者的样本上的敏感性以及在31例低风险供体样本上的特异性均达到96%或更高。在31例HCV RNA阳性、RIBA - 2结果不确定的样本上的敏感性如下：Liatek - III为94%；RIBA - 3为90%；Murex印迹检测法为61%；Matrix为55%；DB - 2印迹检测法为39%。在检测39例HCV RNA阴性、RIBA - 2结果不确定的供体样本时，检测为阴性的百分比分别为：Liatek - III为77%；RIBA - 3为67%；Murex印迹检测法为49%；DB - 2印迹检测法为33%；Matrix为15%。在四个HCV血清转化系列样本上的敏感性顺序为（从高到低）：RIBA - 3、Liatek - III、DB - 2印迹检测法、Murex印迹检测法和Matrix；差异较小。
添加新的HCV抗原（NS5、E2/NS1）并未改善HCV抗体的检测，而是改进经典抗原（核心抗原、NS3、NS4）起到了作用。取代常用的RIBA - 2将解决很大一部分RIBA - 2结果不确定样本的状况。
