1
|
Development of a bead-based multiplex immunoassay for simultaneous quantitative detection of IgG serum antibodies against seven vaccine-preventable diseases. J Immunol Methods 2023; 512:113408. [PMID: 36565812 DOI: 10.1016/j.jim.2022.113408] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2022] [Revised: 12/13/2022] [Accepted: 12/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Serosurveillance and seroprevalence studies should be carried out to monitor vaccine-preventable diseases. Multiplex immunoassay (MIA) systems are useful tools for this purpose, allowing the simultaneous quantitative detection of antibodies in one small serum sample, which presents an advantage over conventional methods, such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs). Therefore, we developed a multiplex immunoassay for the measurement of antibodies against seven vaccine-preventable infections (measles, rubella, mumps, tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis and Haemophilus influenza type b (Hib) infection). In our multiplex system, heterologous inhibition generally did not exceed 10%, while homologous inhibition varied between 90 and 98%. The intra- and inter-assay variability was ≤11%. The results of in-house MIA showed satisfactory correlation with commercial ELISAs, with Spearman correlation coefficients from 0.90 to 0.98. At the cut-off values defined for our MIA the serostatus can be determined with high sensitivity (89-100%) and specificity (92-98%). Thus, the developed in-house MIA represents a feasible alternative to conventional ELISAs and could be used for large-scale serosurveillance/seroprevalence studies of vaccine-preventable diseases.
Collapse
|
2
|
Häring J, Hassenstein MJ, Becker M, Ortmann J, Junker D, Karch A, Berger K, Tchitchagua T, Leschnik O, Harries M, Gornyk D, Hernández P, Lange B, Castell S, Krause G, Dulovic A, Strengert M, Schneiderhan-Marra N. Borrelia multiplex: a bead-based multiplex assay for the simultaneous detection of Borrelia specific IgG/IgM class antibodies. BMC Infect Dis 2022; 22:859. [PMID: 36396985 PMCID: PMC9670078 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-022-07863-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2022] [Accepted: 11/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Lyme borreliosis (LB) is the most common tick-borne infectious disease in the northern hemisphere. The diagnosis of LB is usually made by clinical symptoms and subsequently supported by serology. In Europe, a two-step testing consisting of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and an immunoblot is recommended. However, due to the low sensitivity of the currently available tests, antibody detection is sometimes inaccurate, especially in the early phase of infection, leading to underdiagnoses. Methods To improve upon Borrelia diagnostics, we developed a multiplex Borrelia immunoassay (Borrelia multiplex), which utilizes the new INTELLIFLEX platform, enabling the simultaneous dual detection of IgG and IgM antibodies, saving further time and reducing the biosample material requirement. In order to enable correct classification, the Borrelia multiplex contains eight antigens from the five human pathogenic Borrelia species known in Europe. Six antigens are known to mainly induce an IgG response and two antigens are predominant for an IgM response. Results To validate the assay, we compared the Borrelia multiplex to a commercial bead-based immunoassay resulting in an overall assay sensitivity of 93.7% (95% CI 84.8–97.5%) and a specificity of 96.5% (95%CI 93.5–98.1%). To confirm the calculated sensitivity and specificity, a comparison with a conventional 2-step diagnostics was performed. With this comparison, we obtained a sensitivity of 95.2% (95% CI 84.2–99.2%) and a specificity of 93.0% (95% CI 90.6–94.7%). Conclusion Borrelia multiplex is a highly reproducible cost- and time-effective assay that enables the profiling of antibodies against several individual antigens simultaneously. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07863-9.
Collapse
|
3
|
Mazhari R, Ruybal-Pesántez S, Angrisano F, Kiernan-Walker N, Hyslop S, Longley RJ, Bourke C, Chen C, Williamson DA, Robinson LJ, Mueller I, Eriksson EM. SARS-CoV-2 Multi-Antigen Serology Assay. Methods Protoc 2021; 4:mps4040072. [PMID: 34698238 PMCID: PMC8544427 DOI: 10.3390/mps4040072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2021] [Revised: 09/27/2021] [Accepted: 09/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Serology tests are extremely useful for assessing whether a person has been infected with a pathogen. Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, measurement of anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies has been considered an essential tool in identifying seropositive individuals and thereby understanding the extent of transmission in communities. The Luminex system is a bead-based technology that has the capacity to assess multiple antigens simultaneously using very low sample volumes and is ideal for high-throughput studies. We have adapted this technology to develop a COVID-19 multi-antigen serological assay. This protocol described here carefully outlines recommended steps to optimize and establish this method for COVID-19-specific antibody measurement in plasma and in saliva. However, the protocol can easily be customized and thus the assay is broadly applicable to measure antibodies to other pathogens.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ramin Mazhari
- Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (R.M.); (S.R.-P.); (N.K.-W.); (S.H.); (R.J.L.); (C.B.); (C.C.); (L.J.R.); (I.M.)
- Department of Medical Biology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Shazia Ruybal-Pesántez
- Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (R.M.); (S.R.-P.); (N.K.-W.); (S.H.); (R.J.L.); (C.B.); (C.C.); (L.J.R.); (I.M.)
- Department of Medical Biology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
- Vector-Borne Diseases and Tropical Public Health, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia;
| | - Fiona Angrisano
- Vector-Borne Diseases and Tropical Public Health, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia;
| | - Nicholas Kiernan-Walker
- Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (R.M.); (S.R.-P.); (N.K.-W.); (S.H.); (R.J.L.); (C.B.); (C.C.); (L.J.R.); (I.M.)
- Department of Medical Biology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Stephanie Hyslop
- Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (R.M.); (S.R.-P.); (N.K.-W.); (S.H.); (R.J.L.); (C.B.); (C.C.); (L.J.R.); (I.M.)
- Department of Medical Biology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Rhea J. Longley
- Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (R.M.); (S.R.-P.); (N.K.-W.); (S.H.); (R.J.L.); (C.B.); (C.C.); (L.J.R.); (I.M.)
- Department of Medical Biology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Caitlin Bourke
- Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (R.M.); (S.R.-P.); (N.K.-W.); (S.H.); (R.J.L.); (C.B.); (C.C.); (L.J.R.); (I.M.)
- Department of Medical Biology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Catherine Chen
- Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (R.M.); (S.R.-P.); (N.K.-W.); (S.H.); (R.J.L.); (C.B.); (C.C.); (L.J.R.); (I.M.)
- Department of Medical Biology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Deborah A. Williamson
- Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia;
- Public Health Laboratory, Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Leanne J. Robinson
- Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (R.M.); (S.R.-P.); (N.K.-W.); (S.H.); (R.J.L.); (C.B.); (C.C.); (L.J.R.); (I.M.)
- Department of Medical Biology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
- Vector-Borne Diseases and Tropical Public Health, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia;
| | - Ivo Mueller
- Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (R.M.); (S.R.-P.); (N.K.-W.); (S.H.); (R.J.L.); (C.B.); (C.C.); (L.J.R.); (I.M.)
- Department of Medical Biology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Emily M. Eriksson
- Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (R.M.); (S.R.-P.); (N.K.-W.); (S.H.); (R.J.L.); (C.B.); (C.C.); (L.J.R.); (I.M.)
- Department of Medical Biology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +61-3-93452870; Fax: +61-3-93470852
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Determining seropositivity-A review of approaches to define population seroprevalence when using multiplex bead assays to assess burden of tropical diseases. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2021; 15:e0009457. [PMID: 34181665 PMCID: PMC8270565 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009457] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2020] [Revised: 07/09/2021] [Accepted: 05/10/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Serological surveys with multiplex bead assays can be used to assess seroprevalence to multiple pathogens simultaneously. However, multiple methods have been used to generate cut-off values for seropositivity and these may lead to inconsistent interpretation of results. A literature review was conducted to describe the methods used to determine cut-off values for data generated by multiplex bead assays. Methodology/Principal findings A search was conducted in PubMed that included articles published from January 2010 to January 2020, and 308 relevant articles were identified that included the terms “serology”, “cut-offs”, and “multiplex bead assays”. After application of exclusion of articles not relevant to neglected tropical diseases (NTD), vaccine preventable diseases (VPD), or malaria, 55 articles were examined based on their relevance to NTD or VPD. The most frequently applied approaches to determine seropositivity included the use of presumed unexposed populations, mixture models, receiver operating curves (ROC), and international standards. Other methods included the use of quantiles, pre-exposed endemic cohorts, and visual inflection points. Conclusions/Significance For disease control programmes, seropositivity is a practical and easily interpretable health metric but determining appropriate cut-offs for positivity can be challenging. Considerations for optimal cut-off approaches should include factors such as methods recommended by previous research, transmission dynamics, and the immunological backgrounds of the population. In the absence of international standards for estimating seropositivity in a population, the use of consistent methods that align with individual disease epidemiological data will improve comparability between settings and enable the assessment of changes over time. Serological surveys can provide information regarding population-level disease exposure by assessing immune responses created during infection. Multiplex bead assays (MBAs) allow for an integrated serological platform to monitor antibody responses to multiple pathogens concurrently. As programs adopt integrated disease control strategies, MBAs are especially advantageous since many of these diseases may be present in the same population and antibodies against all pathogens of interest can be detected simultaneously from a single blood sample. Interpreting serological data in a programmatic context typically involves classifying individuals as seronegative or seropositive using a ‘cut-off’, whereby anyone with a response above the defined threshold is considered to be seropositive. Although studies increasingly test blood samples with MBAs, published studies have applied different methods of determining seropositivity cut-offs, making results difficult to compare across settings and over time. The lack of harmonized methods for defining seropositivity is due to the absence of international standards, pathogen biology, or assay-specific methods that may impact resulting data. This review highlights the need for a standardized approach for which cut-off methods to use per pathogen when applied to integrated disease surveillance using platforms such as MBAs.
Collapse
|
5
|
Klein S, Stern D, Seeber F. Expression of in vivo biotinylated recombinant antigens SAG1 and SAG2A from Toxoplasma gondii for improved seroepidemiological bead-based multiplex assays. BMC Biotechnol 2020; 20:53. [PMID: 33023547 PMCID: PMC7542104 DOI: 10.1186/s12896-020-00646-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2020] [Accepted: 09/15/2020] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Few bead-based multiplex assays have been described that detect antibodies against the protozoan parasite Toxoplasma gondii in large-scale seroepidemiological surveys. Moreover, each multiplex assay has specific variations or limitations, such as the use of truncated or fusion proteins as antigens, potentially masking important epitopes. Consequently, such an assay must be developed by interested groups as none is commercially available. RESULTS We report the bacterial expression and use of N-terminal fusion-free, soluble, in vivo biotinylated recombinant surface antigens SAG1 and SAG2A for the detection of anti-T. gondii IgG antibodies. The expression system relies on three compatible plasmids. An expression construct produces a fusion of maltose-binding protein with SAG1 (or SAG2A), separated by a TEV protease cleavage site, followed by a peptide sequence recognized by E. coli biotin ligase BirA (AviTag), and a terminal six histidine tag for affinity purification. TEV protease and BirA are encoded on a second plasmid, and their expression leads to proteolytic cleavage of the fusion protein and a single biotinylated lysine within the AviTag by BirA. Correct folding of the parasite proteins is dependent on proper disulfide bonding, which is facilitated by a sulfhydryl oxidase and a protein disulfide isomerase, encoded on the third plasmid. The C-terminal biotinylation allowed the oriented, reproducible coupling of the purified surface antigens to magnetic Luminex beads, requiring only minute amounts of protein per determination. We showed that an N-terminal fusion partner such as maltose-binding protein negatively influenced antibody binding, confirming that access to SAG1's N-terminal epitopes is important for antibody recognition. We validated our bead-based multiplex assay with human sera previously tested with commercial diagnostic assays and found concordance of 98-100% regarding both, sensitivity and specificity, even when only biotinylated SAG1 was used as antigen. CONCLUSIONS Our recombinant in vivo-biotinylated T. gondii antigens offer distinct advantages compared to previously described proteins used in multiplex serological assays for T. gondii. They offer a cheap, specific and sensitive alternative to either parasite lysates or eukaryotic-cell expressed SAG1/SAG2A for BBMA and other formats. The described general expression strategy can also be used for other antigens where oriented immobilization is key for sensitive recognition by antibodies and ligands.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Klein
- FG 16 - Mycotic and Parasitic Agents and Mycobacteria, Robert Koch Institute, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | - Daniel Stern
- ZBS 3 - Biological Toxins, Robert Koch Institute, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | - Frank Seeber
- FG 16 - Mycotic and Parasitic Agents and Mycobacteria, Robert Koch Institute, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|