Jaye D L, Waites K B, Parker B, Bragg S L, Moser S A
Department of Pathology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 35233, USA.
Am J Clin Pathol. 1998 May;109(5):634-41. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/109.5.634.
The Murex Cryptococcus Test was compared with the Cryptococcal Antigen Latex Agglutination System (CALAS) for detecting cryptococcal polysaccharide in 173 cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) specimens and 117 serum samples with 99% and 97% concordance, respectively. Eighteen CSF samples and 17 serum samples were positive in both assays, and 249 were negative. The sensitivity and specificity of the Murex relative to the CALAS were 90% and 100%, respectively, for CSF, and 81% and 100%, respectively, for serum. Six discrepancies were arbitrated by retesting, using a third analytic method, review of other laboratory and clinical data, or both. The reaction in 1 CSF specimen was considered false positive by the CALAS, and the reactions in 2 serum samples were false negatives by the Murex. For 3 patients with previous cryptococcal meningitis but no active disease, only the CALAS detected antigen, suggesting that the Murex has less analytic sensitivity in this context. Titer differences dictate that direct comparisons between the 2 tests are not feasible. There were no false-positive reactions in limited testing with either method using specimens from patients with concurrent noncryptococcal infections or in rheumatoid factor-positive serum samples. Infections caused by Cryptococcus neoformans serotypes A or AD were detected equally by both assays. Based on our study, we have elected to continue to use the CALAS for routine testing for cryptococcal antigen.
将Murex隐球菌检测法与隐球菌抗原乳胶凝集系统(CALAS)进行比较,以检测173份脑脊液(CSF)标本和117份血清样本中的隐球菌多糖,一致性分别为99%和97%。两种检测方法中,18份脑脊液样本和17份血清样本呈阳性,249份呈阴性。相对于CALAS,Murex检测法对脑脊液的敏感性和特异性分别为90%和100%,对血清的敏感性和特异性分别为81%和100%。通过使用第三种分析方法重新检测、查阅其他实验室和临床数据或两者兼用,对6个差异结果进行了判定。CALAS判定1份脑脊液标本的反应为假阳性,Murex判定2份血清样本的反应为假阴性。对于3例既往有隐球菌性脑膜炎但无活动性疾病的患者,只有CALAS检测到了抗原,这表明在此情况下Murex的分析敏感性较低。效价差异表明两种检测方法之间无法进行直接比较。使用并发非隐球菌感染患者的标本或类风湿因子阳性血清样本进行有限检测时,两种方法均未出现假阳性反应。两种检测方法对新型隐球菌A或AD血清型引起的感染检测效果相同。基于我们的研究,我们选择继续使用CALAS进行隐球菌抗原的常规检测。