Mitsutake K, Miyazaki T, Tashiro T, Yamamoto Y, Kakeya H, Otsubo T, Kawamura S, Hossain M A, Noda T, Hirakata Y, Kohno S
Second Department of Internal Medicine, Nagasaki University School of Medicine, Japan.
J Clin Microbiol. 1996 Aug;34(8):1918-21. doi: 10.1128/jcm.34.8.1918-1921.1996.
We compared the specificities and sensitivities of four tests used for the serodiagnosis of candidemia in 39 patients with candidemia, including 10 patients with superficial Candida colonization, 10 patients with deep mycosis, and 20 healthy subjects. The results obtained by the dot immunoblotting assay for detecting the enolase antigen (48 kDa) were compared with those of assays for detecting mannan antigen, heat-labile antigen (a threshold titer of four times), and beta-glucan (> or = 60 pg/ml). Enolase antigen was detected in 28 (71.8%) patients with candidemia, while 30 (76.9%), 10 (25.6%), and 27 (84.4%) patients were positive for the heat-labile antigen by the Cand-Tec assay, the mannan antigen by the Pastorex Candida assay, and beta-glucan by the limulus test, respectively. Ten patients with superficial Candida colonization, 5 patients with invasive pulmonary aspergillosis, 5 patients with cryptococcosis, and 20 healthy subjects were negative for both enolase antigen and mannan antigen. Two patients with superficial Candida colonization, one patient with invasive pulmonary aspergillosis, and two patients with cryptococcosis were positive by the Cand-Tec assay. The beta-glucan concentration was more than 60 pg/ml in all patients with invasive pulmonary aspergillosis; however, it was less than 10 pg/ml in all patients with cryptococcosis. The specificity of enolase antigen in the serodiagnosis of candidemia was 100%, but the sensitivity was 71.8%. The specificity and sensitivity of Cand-Tec, the assay for mannan antigen, and the assay for beta-glucan were 76.9 and 87.5%, 25.6 and 100%, and 84.4 and 87.5%, respectively. Our results demonstrated that antigen detection tests are useful for the diagnosis of candidemia; however, none is satisfactory for the serodiagnosis of candidemia. We suggest that a combination of two assays may increase the accuracy of diagnosis of candidiasis.
我们比较了用于39例念珠菌血症患者血清学诊断的四项检测的特异性和敏感性,其中包括10例浅表念珠菌定植患者、10例深部真菌病患者和20名健康受试者。将用于检测烯醇化酶抗原(48 kDa)的斑点免疫印迹法所获得的结果,与检测甘露聚糖抗原、热不稳定抗原(四倍阈值滴度)和β-葡聚糖(≥60 pg/ml)的检测结果进行比较。28例(71.8%)念珠菌血症患者检测到烯醇化酶抗原,而通过Cand-Tec检测热不稳定抗原、Pastorex念珠菌检测甘露聚糖抗原以及鲎试剂检测β-葡聚糖的阳性患者分别为30例(76.9%)、10例(25.6%)和27例(84.4%)。10例浅表念珠菌定植患者、5例侵袭性肺曲霉病患者、5例隐球菌病患者和20名健康受试者的烯醇化酶抗原和甘露聚糖抗原检测均为阴性。2例浅表念珠菌定植患者、1例侵袭性肺曲霉病患者和2例隐球菌病患者通过Cand-Tec检测呈阳性。所有侵袭性肺曲霉病患者的β-葡聚糖浓度均超过60 pg/ml;然而,所有隐球菌病患者的β-葡聚糖浓度均低于10 pg/ml。烯醇化酶抗原在念珠菌血症血清学诊断中的特异性为100%,但敏感性为71.8%。Cand-Tec、甘露聚糖抗原检测和β-葡聚糖检测的特异性和敏感性分别为76.9%和87.5%、25.6%和100%、84.4%和87.5%。我们的结果表明,抗原检测试验对念珠菌血症的诊断有用;然而,对于念珠菌血症的血清学诊断,没有一项检测是令人满意的。我们建议两种检测方法联合使用可能会提高念珠菌病诊断的准确性。