This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Anderson, B. L.
Right arrow Articles by Litwin, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Anderson, B. L.
Right arrow Articles by Litwin, C. M.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Clinical and Vaccine Immunology, November 2008, p. 1644-1649, Vol. 15, No. 11
1071-412X/08/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/CVI.00271-08
Copyright © 2008, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Assessment of Three Commercially Available Serologic Assays for Detection of Antibodies to Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Identification of Active Tuberculosis {triangledown}

Brian L. Anderson,1 Ryan J. Welch,1 and Christine M. Litwin1,2*

Associated Regional and University Pathologists (ARUP) Institute for Clinical and Experimental Pathology,1 Department of Pathology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah2

Received 28 July 2008/ Returned for modification 3 September 2008/ Accepted 24 September 2008

Tuberculosis (TB) caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis remains a major world disease, with approximately 9 million new cases each year. Identification and treatment of active disease are essential for TB control. Serology may offer increased detection of active disease in patients with a positive tuberculin skin test (TST) or QuantiFERON-TB (QFT-G). The InBios Active TbDetect immunoglobulin G (IgG) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), IBL M. tuberculosis IgG ELISA, and Anda Biologics TB ELISAs were evaluated for the ability to detect M. tuberculosis antibodies in patients with active disease. Agreement, sensitivity, and specificity for each ELISA were determined and compared to those for culture or amplified direct detection and M. tuberculosis low-risk control patients. The InBios Active TbDetect ELISA had an agreement of 96.2%, a sensitivity of 83.3%, and a specificity of 98.9%. The IBL M. tuberculosis ELISA had an agreement of 84.0%, a sensitivity of 5.6%, and a specificity of 100.0%. The agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of the Anda Biologics TB ELISA were 74.2%, 83.3%, and 72.0%, respectively. The sensitivity for detecting M. tuberculosis antibodies in human immunodeficiency virus-associated TB was 50% for both the InBios Active TbDetect ELISA and the Anda Biologics TB ELISA and 0% for the IBL M. tuberculosis ELISA. The positivity rates for InBios Active TbDetect ELISA, IBL M. tuberculosis ELISA, and Anda Biologics TB ELISA in latently infected individuals positive by TST and/or QFT-G were 5.1%, 0.0%, and 30.8%, respectively. It can be concluded that the InBios Active TbDetect IgG ELISA is superior to the other ELISAs in accurately detecting active TB.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Pathology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84132. Phone: (801) 585-6864. Fax: (801) 584-5109. E-mail: Christine.litwin{at}path.utah.edu

{triangledown} Published ahead of print on 30 September 2008.

Clinical and Vaccine Immunology, November 2008, p. 1644-1649, Vol. 15, No. 11
1071-412X/08/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/CVI.00271-08
Copyright © 2008, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.





Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»