dc.contributor.author |
García Lescano, Héctor Hugo |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Castillo Berrios, Yesenia |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Gonzales, Isidro |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Bustos Palomino, Javier Arturo |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Saavedra Pastor, Herbert |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Jacob, Louis |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Del Brutto, Oscar H. |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Wilkins, Patricia P. |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Gonzalez Zariquiey, Armando Emiliano |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Gilman, Robert Hugh |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Cysticercosis Working Group in Peru |
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2018-11-30T17:17:15Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2018-11-30T17:17:15Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2018 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12866/4113 |
|
dc.description.abstract |
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of two commercially available ELISA kits, Novalisa® and Ridascreen® , for the detection of antibodies to Taenia solium, compared to serological diagnosis of neurocysticercosis (NCC) by LLGP-EITB (electro-immunotransfer blot assay using lentil-lectin purified glycoprotein antigens). METHODS: Archive serum samples from patients with viable NCC (n = 45) or resolved, calcified NCC (n = 45), as well as sera from patients with other cestode parasites (hymenolepiasis, n = 45 and cystic hydatid disease, n = 45), were evaluated for cysticercosis antibody detection using two ELISA kits, Novalisa® and Ridascreen® . All NCC samples had previously tested positive, and all samples from heterologous infections were negative on LLGP-EITB for cysticercosis. Positive rates were calculated by kit and sample group and compared between the two kits. RESULTS: Compared to LLGP-EITB, the sensitivity of both ELISA assays to detect specific antibodies in patients with viable NCC was low (44.4% and 22.2%), and for calcified NCC, it was only 6.7% and 4.5%. Sera from patients with cystic hydatid disease were highly cross-reactive in both ELISA assays (38/45, 84.4%; and 25/45, 55.6%). Sera from patients with hymenolepiasis cross-reacted in five cases in one of the assays (11.1%) and in only one sample with the second assay (2.2%). CONCLUSIONS: The performance of Novalisa® and Ridascreen® was poor. Antibody ELISA detection cannot be recommended for the diagnosis of neurocysticercosis. |
en_US |
dc.language.iso |
eng |
|
dc.publisher |
Wiley |
|
dc.relation.ispartofseries |
Tropical Medicine and International Health |
|
dc.rights |
info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess |
|
dc.rights.uri |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es |
|
dc.subject |
Peru |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Neurocysticercosis |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Taenia solium |
en_US |
dc.subject |
neurocysticercosis |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Animals |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Antigens, Helminth |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Sensitivity and Specificity |
en_US |
dc.subject |
antibody |
en_US |
dc.subject |
cysticercosis |
en_US |
dc.subject |
ELISA |
en_US |
dc.subject |
anticorps |
en_US |
dc.subject |
cysticercose |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Immunologic Tests |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Immunomagnetic Separation |
en_US |
dc.subject |
neurocysticercose |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Pérou |
en_US |
dc.title |
Low sensitivity and frequent cross-reactions in commercially available antibody detection ELISA assays for Taenia solium cysticercosis |
en_US |
dc.type |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
|
dc.identifier.doi |
https://doi.org/10.1111/tmi.13010 |
|
dc.subject.ocde |
https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#3.03.06 |
|
dc.relation.issn |
1365-3156 |
|