Clinical reliability of IgG, IgA, and IgM antibodies in detecting Epstein-Barr virus at different stages of infection with a commercial nonrecombinant polyantigenic ELISA

Serodiagnosis for tumor viruses

The known human tumor viruses include the DNA viruses Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), Kaposi sarcoma herpesvirus (KSHV), Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCPyV), human papillomavirus (HPV), and hepatitis B virus (BV). RNA tumor viruses include human T-cell lymphotrophic virus type 1 (HTLV-1) and hepatitis C virus (HCV). The serological identification of antigens/antibodies in serum is a rapidly progressing field with utility for both scientists and clinicians. Serology is useful for conducting seroepidemiology studies and to inform on the pathogenesis and host immune response to a particular viral agent. Clinically, serology is useful for diagnosing current or past infection and for aiding in clinical management decisions. Serology is useful for screening blood donations for infectious agents and for monitoring the outcome of vaccination against these viruses. Serodiagnosis of human tumor viruses has improved in recent years with increased specificity and sensitivity of the assays, as well as reductions in cost and the ability to assess multiple antibody/antigens in single assays. Serodiagnosis of tumor viruses plays an important role in our understanding of the prevalence and transmission of these viruses and ultimately in the ability to develop treatments/preventions for these globally important diseases.

Reliability of the Siemens Enzygnost and Novagnost Epstein-Barr virus assays for routine laboratory diagnosis: agreement with clinical diagnosis and comparison with the Merifluor Epstein-Barr virus immunofluorescence assay

Background

Diagnosis of Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) infection is routinely conducted by clinical laboratories, especially to diagnose infectious mononucleosis. At an estimated general population incidence of 1:200, this represents a potentially significant testing burden. We evaluated the reliability of the Siemens Novagnost® and Enzygnost® EBV microtiter assays measuring VCA IgM and IgG, and EBNA-1 IgG for clinical diagnosis of EBV-related infectious mononucleosis.

Methods

Remnant sera from 537 patients tested for EBV infection were used to compare the Siemens assays to each other and to the Merifluor assay. The Siemens assays are qualitative/semiquantitative, automatable enzyme immunoassays. The Merifluor assays are manual, qualitative indirect immunofluorescent assays. Testing was conducted on the Siemens and Merifluor assays in parallel. All assays were conducted and interpreted according to each manufacturer’s specifications. Agreement of serostatus between each of the three assays was assessed. Discrepant results were resolved using a third method (Mikrogen recomLine).

Results

Final EBV serostatus indicated 2.9% of the population had an acute infection, 89.6% had a past infection, and 7.5% were EBV naive. All three assays demonstrated 100% agreement with acute infection. Agreement with past-infection serostatus was 99.1% for Enzygnost, between 86% and 98.8% for Novagnost, and 98.1% for Merifluor. Seronegative agreement was 100% for Enzygnost, 89.7% for Novagnost, and 92.3% for Merifluor.

Conclusions

The Siemens Enzygnost and Novagnost EBV microtiter assays are suitable for clinical rule-in of acute EBV infection and for identifying EBV-naive individuals. Both assays also adequately identify remote EBV infections. Because these assays can be automated, they can improve speed and efficiency of EBV testing, especially in high-volume laboratories.

Performance of two commercially available automated immunoassays for the determination of Epstein-Barr virus serological status

This study evaluated the performance of two automated Vidas (V) and Liaison (L) immunoassays for Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) serology. The detection of the viral capsid antigen (VCA) IgM, the VCA/early antigen (VCA/EA) IgG, and the Epstein-Barr nuclear antigen (EBNA) IgG was assessed on 526 sera collected for routine EBV testing in immunocompetent subjects. The determination of expected EBV status (186 EBV primary infections, 183 past EBV infections, and 157 EBV-seronegative individuals) was based on results of routine laboratory enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) together with clinical data. The sensitivity and specificity of each individual marker were determined in comparison to the expected EBV status. The agreement between the V and L profiles and the expected EBV status was established through the interpretation of combinations of the different EBV markers. Statistically significant differences between the two tests were found for the specificity of the VCA IgM marker (96.2% for V versus 93.2% for L), the sensitivity of the VCA/EA IgG marker (89% for V versus 94% for L), and the specificity of the EBNA IgG marker (96.5% for V versus 74.2% for L). The results determined for the two assays with respect to overall agreement with the established expected EBV status were not significantly different (89.7% for V versus 88.2% for L), with discrepancies mainly observed in sera referenced as primary infections. These findings demonstrated the similar performances of the Vidas and the Liaison assays for the establishment of an EBV serological status using the VCA, EA, and EBNA markers.

Diagnostic performance of a new automated heterophile antibody test in adults and children

Epstein-Barr virus serologic profiles were obtained from 618 patients using an automated platform, including the new BioPlex heterophile assay. When compared with 2 IgM viral capsid antigen (VCA) assays and a predicate heterophile assay, the BioPlex heterophile assay was more likely to be associated with serologic patterns of acute infection.

A systematic study of Epstein-Barr virus serologic assays following acute infection

We determined the presence of IgG and IgM antibody to viral capsid antigen (VCA-IgG, VCA-IgM) and IgG antibody to the Epstein-Barr virus nuclear antigen (EBNA) by indirect immunofluorescence assay (IFA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) during the acute illness and at 1, 2, 6, and 48 months in a prospective population-based case series of 95 persons with an acute illness serologically confirmed as Epstein-Barr virus infection. The acute illness was characterized by the presence of VCA-IgG and VCA-IgM (by ELISA) and by the absence of EBNA in most, but not all, patients. During follow-up, VCA-IgG antibodies remained detectable in all patients, while the proportion with VCA-IgM declined and the number with detectable EBNA antibodies steadily increased. The primary differences between the 2 serologic test methods were the increased persistence of VCA-IgM during follow-up by ELISA and the earlier detection of EBNA by IFA. Clinicians should consider the illness stage and the laboratory technique to appropriately interpret serologic test results in suspected cases of mononucleosis caused by the Epstein-Barr virus.

Application of virus-specific immunoglobulin M (IgM), IgG, and IgA antibody detection with a polyantigenic enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus infections in childhood

The Enzygnost anti-Epstein-Barr virus enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) system, which is based on a defined antigen mixture and on detection of antibodies of the immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgM, and IgA classes, was evaluated for its reliability in diagnosing Epstein-Barr virus infections in childhood. With samples from 66 children, the Epstein-Barr virus status and the infection phase were defined by indirect immunofluorescence and anticomplement fluorescence assays: 11 children were seronegative, 8 had a primary infection, 20 had a recent primary or past infection, and in 27 a reactivated Epstein-Barr virus infection was diagnosed. When applying the Enzygnost ELISAs, 15 serum samples (22.7%) were not interpretable due to indeterminate results in at least one of the assays used and were therefore excluded from further evaluation. The respective sensitivities and specificities for the diagnosis of seronegativity were 100 and 100%, those for the diagnosis of primary infection were 100 and 97%, those for the diagnosis of recent primary or past infection were 100 and 52%, and those for the diagnosis of reactivated infection were 10 and 100%. This poor performance of the Enzygnost system with reactivated infections is due to the prerequisite of an IgG antibody value of >650 IU/ml for the diagnosis of viral activity, which was fulfilled in only two of the children. Despite the high rate of indeterminate results, the Enzygnost system is useful in diagnosing acute and past Epstein-Barr virus infection in childhood. For serological diagnosis of viral activity in childhood, a supplementary assay is necessary.