JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Van Dyck, E.
Right arrow Articles by Hayes, R. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Van Dyck, E.
Right arrow Articles by Hayes, R. J.
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, July 2004, p. 2961-2965, Vol. 42, No. 7
0095-1137/04/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.7.2961-2965.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Performance of Commercially Available Enzyme Immunoassays for Detection of Antibodies against Herpes Simplex Virus Type 2 in African Populations

Eddy Van Dyck,1* Anne Buvé,1 Helen A. Weiss,2 Judith R. Glynn,2 David W. G. Brown,3 Bénédicte De Deken,1 John Parry,3 and Richard J. Hayes2

Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium,1 London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine,2 Central Public Health Laboratory, London, United Kingdom3

Received 11 August 2003/ Returned for modification 19 January 2004/ Accepted 27 March 2004

Data are accumulating on the performance of enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) for the detection of herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) infection in North America and Europe, but little is known about their performance in other populations. Nine test kits were evaluated with 330 serum samples from sub-Saharan Africa. The tests were first compared to the monoclonal antibody (MAb) EIA (Central Public Health Laboratory, London, United Kingdom). Samples that gave discordant results in the MAb EIA and in the three tests that performed best compared to the MAb EIA were tested by Western blotting (University of Washington, Seattle). A random sample of concordant samples was also tested, and the sensitivities and specificities of the different tests were calculated, taking into account this sampling strategy. The sensitivities of the tests ranged from 86 to 100%; the specificities ranged from 47 to 99%. The tests that performed best were the Gull Premier EIA (sensitivity, 86.3%; specificity, 97.6%) and the Kalon Biological (sensitivity, 92.3%; specificity, 97.7%) and Biokit (sensitivity, 86.7%; specificity, 92.6%) tests. It cannot be assumed that enzyme immunoassays for the detection of HSV-2 infection that perform well in industrialized countries will perform equally well in other populations.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nationalestraat 155, B-2000 Antwerp, Belgium. Phone: 32-3-247-65-33. Fax: 32-3-247-65-32. E-mail: abuve{at}itg.be.

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, July 2004, p. 2961-2965, Vol. 42, No. 7
0095-1137/04/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.7.2961-2965.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.



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 © 2004 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.