JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Neumann, P W
Right arrow Articles by O'Shaughnessy, M V
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Neumann, P W
Right arrow Articles by O'Shaughnessy, M V

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

J Clin Microbiol. 1985 August; 22(2): 296-298

Comparison of measles antihemolysin test, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and hemagglutination inhibition test with neutralization test for determination of immune status.

P W Neumann, J M Weber, A G Jessamine and M V O'Shaughnessy

ABSTRACT

Sera were collected from 238 high-school students in Prince Edward Island for the determination of immune status before an anticipated measles outbreak. In addition, history of vaccination status and measles infection was obtained. In the subsequent outbreak, 28 students did contract measles. Specificity for hemagglutination inhibition (HI), antihemolysin (AH), and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was 100%, compared with the neutralization test. Corresponding sensitivity values for the tests were 66.0% (HI), 99.5% (AH), and 99.0% (ELISA). Predictive values for susceptibility were 26.9% (HI), 77.8% (AH), 75.7% (ELISA), 80% (neutralization), and 41.4% as determined by history of infection or vaccination. The predictive value for immunity as determined by history of previous infection or vaccination was 91.8%, compared with 100% for the four serological tests. No false-positive results were seen with any of these tests. Compared with the neutralization test, the HI test had 69 false-negative results, the AH had 1, and the ELISA test had 2. The AH and ELISA tests provided sensitive and specific alternatives to the commonly used HI test for immune status determination.

J Clin Microbiol. 1985 August; 22(2): 296-298




This article has been cited by other articles:



Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 1985 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.