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 Laheij, R. J. F.
Right arrow Articles by Verbeek, A. L. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Laheij, R. J. F.
Right arrow Articles by Verbeek, A. L. M.

Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, October 1998, p. 2803-2809, Vol. 36, No. 10
0095-1137/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

MINIREVIEW

Evaluation of Commercially Available Helicobacter pylori Serology Kits: a Review

R. J. F. Laheij,1,* H. Straatman,2 J. B. M. J. Jansen,1 and A. L. M. Verbeek2

Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Nijmegen,1 and Department of Epidemiology, University of Nijmegen,2 Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    INTRODUCTION
Top
Introduction
Appendix
References

Several methods can be used to diagnose Helicobacter pylori infection. Most of them require upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for retrieval of a gastric biopsy specimen. For serology, no upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is required, but blood must be obtained to detect H. pylori antibodies. H. pylori serology is attractive in comparison with other diagnostic methods because it is simple, inexpensive, and less of a burden for the patient. Several kits for the detection of H. pylori by serology have become commercially available since the discovery of H. pylori by Warren (87) in 1983. Most of these H. pylori serology kits are based on various antibody preparations and different techniques.

The introduction of commercially available H. pylori kits has led to an increase in the number of studies that have evaluated kit characteristics. Recently, a systematic review comparing the accuracies of commonly used commercial serology kits for the detection of H. pylori infection has been conducted (48). To account for the different reference standards and designs used by various investigators, only studies that evaluated pairs of serology kits and that compared the kits only within those studies were included. A more appropriate method of comparing different diagnostic tests and the performance of different interpreters of one test is to calculate the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AURC) for each test (83). To correct for dependence between AURCs within the same study population, we used a random-effect model. By reviewing the literature, we also tried to determine whether H. pylori serology can accurately diagnose H. pylori infection. However, in contrast to the study by Loy et al. (48), we reviewed all the studies that evaluated commercially available H. pylori serology kits.

    DATA COLLECTION AND EXTRACTION

Identification and eligibility of publications. A computerized and manual literature search was performed in early 1998. Relevant publications were identified in MEDLINE (1983 to 1997) with the medical subject heading terms Helicobacter or pylori, Sero*, Sera*, Seru*, Sensitivity, and Human in checktags. Furthermore, additional publications were retrieved by reviewing references in publications found by MEDLINE. The criteria used to select publications were as follows: H. pylori infection was established before treatment; the H. pylori serology kit was commercially available; the number of patients, prevalence of infection, and the sensitivity and specificity of the H. pylori serology kit were described or could be calculated; and the studies were published in Dutch, English, French, or German.

Data analysis. New diagnostic tests are mainly evaluated by determining the sensitivity and specificity of the test. For evaluative purposes, the sensitivity and specificity are less useful (83). On the basis of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, we calculated the AURC, which is a measure for the diagnostic performance of a test (42). It is independent of cutoff points and reasonably immune to selection bias. Depending on the serology kit result, one should use different methods to calculate the AURC. We used a method to estimate the AURC for kits with a quantitative test result by using one combination of a true-positive rate and a false-positive rate on the basis of the assumption that the data for the H. pylori-infected and noninfected persons were logistically distributed and had equal variances (84). On the other hand, for serology kits with a qualitative test result, we used the trapezium method to calculate the AURC (36). However, comparison of the H. pylori serology kits revealed that the diagnostic performance differed substantially depending on how the AURC was calculated. Therefore, we decided to estimate the AURCs by the trapezium method, irrespective of the distribution of the test result. Use of the trapezium method to estimate the AURC of a serology kit with a quantitative test result possibly underestimates its diagnostic performance (36).

The AURC was used to explore possible differences between clinical features of study populations and methodological aspects of the serology kits. The tests were stratified into the following: report type (abstract, letter, or article), publication year (1991 to 1997), whether the study population was a consecutive series or a selection of a relevant study population, whether or not the patients had dyspeptic symptoms, the nationality of the study population, the reference standard used, the serology kit used, kit scale (quantitative, qualitative), the type of immunoglobulin (immunoglobulin A [IgA], IgG, and IgM simultaneously, IgA alone, or IgG alone) used to detect serum antibodies, the analysis technique of the serology kits (agglutination, enzyme immunoassay [EIA], enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA], fixation, or immunochemical analysis), and whether whole blood or serum was used. We could not examine whether the generation of the test influenced performance because few studies mentioned this.

Statistical methods. We first tried to model the heterogeneity between the studies by means of an ordinary least-squares regression equation, in which all the clinical features and methodological aspects were simultanously included. Unfortunately, this was not possible because of convergence problems. A best subset analysis was also not possible for the same reasons. Therefore, we decided to perform a separate regression analysis for each clinical feature. It is very likely that the AURCs for different serology kits are correlated when they are used with the same study population. By introducing a random effect for study population, we could model dependency between kits within the same study population (24) (see the Appendix). Moreover, the imprecision of the AURCs varied per study. In order to correct for the heterogeneity in the precision of the AURCs caused by different study sizes, we also performed a weighted regression analysis with weights proportional to 1/SE2, where SE is the standard error (see the Appendix). Whenever AURC is equal to 1 or 0, SE will be 0. If this occurred, the study was excluded from the analysis.

For each regression model an overall F(NDF,DDF) test, where NDF is the degree of freedom in the numerator and DDF is the degree of freedom in the denominator of the F test, was used to examine whether the hypothesis beta 1 = 0, beta 2 = 0, . . ., beta k = 0 (no fixed effect) should be rejected. Akaike's information criterion (AIC) is given to choose between the ordinary least-squares model, the random-effects model, and the weighted-random-effects model for each feature. The higher the AIC, the better the model fit. We also performed a weighted-random-effect regression analysis, using the significant features from the previous model simultaneously, in order to correct for possible confounding. These analyses were performed with SAS software (70). For multiple comparisons the Bonferroni correction was used to keep the overall alpha  level at 0.05.

    DATA SYNTHESIS

We found a total of 83 publications (1-23, 25-35, 37-41, 43-47, 49-69, 71-82, 85, 86, 88-91) with the MEDLINE search and by reviewing the references in the articles from the original search. Most publications had to be excluded because the H. pylori serology kit used was not commercially available. In those that could be included a total of 177 tests with 36 different commercially available H. pylori serology kits had been performed with 26,812 patients (Table 1). The medians (25 and 75% quantiles) of the sensitivity and specificity for H. pylori serology were 92% (85 and 96%) and 83% (73 and 92%), respectively. However, the sensitivities and specificities of the H. pylori serology kits ranged considerably between tests (Fig. 1).

                              
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 1.   H. pylori serology kits


View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 1.   Percent true-positive rates (TPR) and false-positive rates (FPR) for 177 tests.

Results for two tests were excluded from the regression analysis. Owing to their perfect diagnostic performance (the AURCs were 1) we could not calculate the SE of the AURC. According to the standard regression models, several clinical features and methodological aspects caused differences in diagnostic performance (Table 2). However, after correcting for the dependence between AURCs within the same study and the heterogeneity in the precision of the AURCs caused by different study sizes, only two aspects remained statistically significantly different. First, a major clinical feature of the study population that led to heterogeneity was the way in which the study population had been selected (Table 3). Second, because the investigated H. pylori serology kits were based on various antibody preparations, the diagnostic performances differed substantially. In the final weighted-random-effects regression model in which the features "consecutive yes/no" and "type of antibodies measured" were included, the estimated AURC for a nonconsecutive patient series was 0.053 (P = 0.01) higher than that for a consecutive patient series. The estimated AURC for kits that measured "IgA antibodies only" was 0.063 (P = 0.01) lower than that for kits that measured "IgG antibodies only," while for kits that measured "IgA, IgG, and IgM simultaneously" it was 0.22 lower (P = <0.001). The P values for the overall F test in the multivariate weighted-random-effect regression analysis for the categories consecutive patients and antibodies were <0.001 and 0.013, respectively. The AURC for the serology kits that measured "IgA, IgG, and IgM antibodies" was 0.16 (P = 0.001) higher than that for the kits that measured "IgA antibodies alone." After correcting for the way that the study population had been selected, an evaluation of only the serology kits that measured IgG antibodies with more than five test kits revealed that the diagnostic performance of the Helico-G serology kit was significantly lower (P = <0.001) than that of the Anti-Hp serology kit (Table 4). The overall F-test value for the serology kits with NDF equal to 8 and DDF equal to 47 was 4.07 (P = 0.001), and the overall F-test value for the consecutive category with NDF equal to 1 and DDF equal to 47 was 2.21 (P = 0.14).

                              
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 2.   Clinical features and methodological aspects of the selected studies associated with differences in test performance across studies

                              
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 3.   Multivariate weighted-random-effect regression analysis for the statistically significant sources of heterogeneitya

                              
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 4.   Difference in estimated AURCs in at least six studies that used serology kits measuring IgG antibodies, using weighted-regression analysis with random effects for study population, corrected for the way that the patient population was selecteda

    IMPLEMENTATION OF DIAGNOSTIC TESTS

Before implementing new diagnostic tests in clinical practice, careful evaluations must be done. Three topics are of importance (83). First, the test must have been evaluated with the indicated study population, i.e., the population of patients suspected of having the disease in question. The relevant population in this case consisted of a consecutive series of patients with dyspeptic complaints referred for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. However, most studies analyzed a highly selected sample of patients with dyspepsia referred for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. For a highly selected sample, H. pylori serology has excellent diagnostic performance. If a population of consecutive patients is tested, the diagnostic performance decreases.

The second topic of importance is determination of the diagnostic performance. For diagnostic tests, sensitivity and specificity are the most commonly used measures of test performance. Sensitivity and specificity are important parameters for diagnostic purposes but not for evaluative purposes. First, the use of different cutoff points for test positivity leads to various sensitivities and specificities. Second, the distribution of the test results for H. pylori-positive and -negative patients can vary considerably among studies because of selection. To overcome these problems, the presentation of the entire range of sensitivities and specificities at various cutoff points by a ROC curve results in better comparability of diagnostic tests. However, ROC curves and/or test result distributions were very sparsely presented in the publications. Fortunately, it is possible to make a fairly accurate estimation of the underlying ROC curve if one sensitivity and one specificity are mentioned (42). We think that this method is more appropriate for evaluation of the diagnostic performance of tests than the summary ROC technique used by Loy et al. (48). First, by analyzing the AURCs, the different cutoff points used for the same kit with different study populations were of no importance. Second, to compare pairs of serology kits, Loy et al. (48) needed more studies that had used two kits. By our method we could compare kits without any restrictions. A statistical test could be used to evaluate whether one was better than another. If the hypothesis of "no kit effect" is rejected, a multiple-comparison method can be used to compare pairs of tests. By introducing a random effect for study population as an alternative for the paired t test used by Loy et al. (48), we allowed for dependence between kits in the same study. Third, the weighted-regression method took the various study population sizes into account and corrected for them. Small studies with low AURCs will have smaller weights than large studies with high AURCs. The summary ROC analysis used equal weights for the studies involved, while it ignored the different study sizes and AURCs. Fourth, it seems to us that our method is likely to be more efficient for the testing of kits and other covariables because it incorporated studies and all kits in one analysis.

One problem remains: we do not know whether the random-effect model assumptions are correct. It is not clear whether the correlation between two kits and the correlation between two other kits within the same study population are equal. Maybe different correlations between different pairs of kits are better descriptions of reality. Unfortunately, most kits were used in only a few studies, and the number of kits used within one study was too small to thoroughly test the model assumptions. We used the MIXED procedure from the SAS software for the analysis. This procedure did not converge when all clinical features were included in the models because of too few observations. An automatic subsets analysis is not part of this SAS procedure. Therefore, we had to perform a univariate analysis. We could only perform a multivariate weighted-regression analysis with correction for random effects, in which the statistically significant clinical features from the univariate analysis were simultaneously evaluated in order to correct for possible confounding. A necessary condition for confounding is that the confounding variable is related to the feature under study and to the outcome (AURC). If a clinical feature or methodological aspect is not significant in a univariate model, then it is very unlikely to be significant in a model in which more features are included. However, the differences found by our method were confirmed in the analysis of kits and studies that fulfilled the requirements of Loy et al. (48). In agreement with Loy et al. (48), the Anti-Hp serology kit performed better than the Helico-G serology kit. Furthermore, the Malakit serology kit also displayed a higher although not statistically significant AURC than the Helico-G serology kit.

Finally, the relation between a new test and current diagnostic tests needs to be established. Many methods for the diagnosis of H. pylori infection are available. Because there is no consensus about a reference standard, several methods were used to identify H. pylori infection. The definition of the reference standard used in the publications ranged from only one diagnostic method (histology, culture, or rapid urease testing) having to be positive to more methods having to be positive (culture, rapid urease testing, and the urea breath test). The selection of a test as a reference reflects the personal preference of the investigator, which might lead to bias. Furthermore, the sensitivity and specificity of biopsy specimen-based methods vary and are frequently about 90%. Therefore, it is inappropriate to use other imperfect diagnostic tests as reference methods to measure diagnostic performance. However, the diagnostic performance of H. pylori serology was not influenced by any of the 15 different reference standards used.

    RECOMMENDATION

In contrast to the conclusion drawn by Loy et al. (48) the diagnostic performances of various serology kits differed substantially because commercially available serology kits were based on various antibody preparations and were used with different study populations. Our results showed that serology kits that measured IgA, IgG, and IgM simultaneously (Pyloriset latex, CFT H. pylori) or IgA alone (Pyloriset, GAP) for the detection of H. pylori antibodies in serum did not perform as well as those that measured only IgG antibodies. The overall performance of commercially available serology kits that measure IgG antibodies for the diagnosis of H. pylori infection showed that serology is an accurate means of diagnosing H. pylori infection in patients. Owing to the small differences in diagnostic performance between serology kits that measure IgG antibodies, other aspects, such as the price, ease of handling, or number of equivocal results, are becoming increasingly important when choosing a serology kit.

    APPENDIX
Top
Introduction
Appendix
References

The regression equation used to model the heterogeneity between the studies by means of an ordinary least-squares regression analyses was as follows:
<UP>AURC = &agr; + </UP><LIM><OP>∑</OP><LL>j</LL></LIM>&bgr;<SUB>j</SUB>X<SUB>j</SUB> + ϵ
In this equation alpha  is the intercept, beta j, j = 1,...,k, is the regression coefficient, and Xj, j = 1,...,k, is the dummy variable indicating the category of the clinical feature. The term varepsilon  is the residual which is normally distributed with variance sigma epsilon 2.

It is very likely that the AURCs for different serology kits are correlated when they are used within the same study population. By introducing a random effect for study population we could model dependency between kits within the same study population (24). The regression equation for the random effects model was as follows:
<UP>AURC = &agr; + </UP><LIM><OP>∑</OP><LL>j</LL></LIM>&bgr;<SUB>j</SUB>X<SUB>j</SUB> + <LIM><OP>∑</OP><LL>l</LL></LIM>b<SUB>l</SUB>S<SUB>l</SUB> + ϵ
In this equation alpha , Xj, j = 1,...,k, and varepsilon  are as described above; beta j, j = 1,...,k, is now called the fixed effect; and bl, l = 1,...,m, is the random effect which is independent and normally distributed with common variance sigma b2. Sl, l = 1,...,m, is the dummy variable indicating the study population.

In order to correct for the heterogeneity in the precision of the AURCs caused by different study sizes, we also performed a weighted-regression analysis with weights proportional to 1/SE2. The SE was computed according to the expression given by Hanley and McNeil (36):
<UP>SE = </UP><RAD><RCD><FR><NU><UP>AURC</UP>(<UP>1 − AURC</UP>)<UP> + </UP>(n<SUB>A</SUB> − <UP>1</UP>)(Q<SUB><UP>1</UP></SUB><UP> − AURC</UP><SUP><UP>2</UP></SUP>)<UP> + </UP>(n<SUB>N</SUB><UP> − 1</UP>)(Q<SUB>2</SUB><UP> − AURC</UP><SUP><UP>2</UP></SUP>)</NU><DE>n<SUB>A</SUB>n<SUB>N</SUB></DE></FR></RCD></RAD>
where nA is the number of abnormal individuals (H. pylori infected), and nN is the number of healthy individuals (H. pylori noninfected). The expression for Ql is given by Ql = AURC/(2 - AURC), and that for Q2 is given by Q2 = (2 × AURC2)/(1 + AURC). This formula was derived under the assumption that the ratings are on a scale that is sufficiently continuous not to produce "ties". Although in our case we used dichotomous tests, we believed that the formula for SE would nevertheless be useful. We used the SE only for the weighting procedure and expected to obtain the same answer when the unknown "true" SE was proportional to the SE that we used.

    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank J. L. Severens and E. H. van de Lisdonk for comments that improved an earlier version of this paper.

    FOOTNOTES

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: MIES (152), P.O. Box 9101, NL 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Phone: 31-243614295. Fax: 31-243613505. E-mail: R.Laheij{at}mie.kun.nl.

    REFERENCES
Top
Introduction
Appendix
References

1. Alemohammad, M. M., T. J. Foley, and H. Cohen. 1993. Detection of immunoglobin G antibodies to Helicobacter pylori in urine by an enzyme immunoassay method. J. Clin. Microbiol. 31:2174-2177[Abstract/Free Full Text].
2. Allerberger, F., G. Oberhuber, F. Wrba, A. Puspok, C. Dejaco, and M. P. Dierich. 1996. Detection of Helicobacter pylori infection using single serum specimens: comparison of five commercial serological tests. Hepato-Gastroenterol. 43:1656-1659.
3. Andersen, L. P., A. V. Wewer, K. M. Christiansen, M. Tvede, J. P. Hansen, F. W. Henriksen, and P. A. Krasnilikoff. 1994. The humoral immune response to Helicobacter pylori infection in children with recurrent abdominal pain. APMIS 102:457-464[Medline].
4. Anderson, J. C., E. Cheng, M. Roeske, P. Marchildon, J. Peacock, and R. S. Shaw. 1997. Detection of serum antibodies to H. pylori by an immunochromatographic method. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 92:1335-1339[Medline].
5. Antoine, C., A. Lozniewski, J. D. de Korwin, M. C. Conroy, L. Feldman, A. Duprez, and M. Weber. 1995. Etude comparative de quatre méthodes serologiques commercialisées pour le diagnostic de l'infection gastrique à Helicobacter pylori. Gastroenterol. Clin. Biol. 19:182-188[Medline].
6. Best, L. M., S. J. O. Veldhuyzen van Zanten, G. S. Bezanson, D. J. M. Haldane, and D. A. Malatjalian. 1992. Serological detection of Helicobacter pylori by a flow microsphere immunofluorescence assay. J. Clin. Microbiol. 30:2311-2317[Abstract/Free Full Text].
7. Best, L. M., S. J. O. Veldhuyzen van Zanten, P. M. Sherman, and G. S. Bezanson. 1994. Serological detection of Helicobacter pylori antibodies in children and their parents. J. Clin. Microbiol. 32:1193-1196[Abstract/Free Full Text].
8. Biemond, I., R. A. Veenendaal, and C. B. H. W. Lamers. 1997. Rapid diagnostic test for antibodies to Helicobacter pylori in comparison with the ELISA technique, abstr. 409. In United European Gastronenterology Week abstracts on disk. Excerpta Medica Medical Communications BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
9. Blecker, U., S. Lanciers, B. Hauser, and Y. Vandenplas. 1993. Diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori in adults and children by using the Malakit Helicobacter pylori, a commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. J. Clin. Microbiol. 31:1770-1773[Abstract/Free Full Text].
10. Bodhidatta, L., C. W. Hoge, S. Churnratanakul, W. Nirdnoy, P. Sampathanukiel, C. Tungtaem, S. Raktham, C. D. Smith, and P. Echeverrià. 1993. Diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in a developing country: comparison of two ELISAs and a seroprevalence study. J. Infect. Dis. 168:1549-1553[Medline].
11. Borody, T. J., P. Andrews, and N. P. Shortis. 1996. Evaluation of whole blood antibody kit to detect active Helicobacter pylori infection. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 91:2509-2512[Medline].
12. Breslin, P., S. Flynn, E. Balbirnie, and C. O'Morain. 1996. Validation of an "office" serological test for Helicobacter pylori. In Digestive Disease Week abstracts on disk. Marathon Multimedia, Northfield, Minn.
13. Cammarota, G., G. Fedeli, M. Montalto, et al. 1994. The use of Helicobacter pylori serology in diagnosis and treatment monitoring. In Proceedings of the EHPSG VIIth International Conference.
14. Chen, T. S., F. Y. Chang, and S. D. Lee. 1997. Serodiagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection: comparison and correlation between enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and rapid serological test results. J. Clin. Microbiol. 35:184-186[Abstract].
15. Chey, W. D., U. K. Murthy, W. G. Linscheer, et al. 1996. A comparison between 4 different commercially available serology tests for Helicobacter pylori. In Digestive Disease Week abstracts on disk. Marathon Multimedia, Northfield, Minn.
16. Chey, W. D., U. Murthy, C. Barish, et al. 1997. The Chemtrak Accumeter whole blood serology test for the detection of Helicobacter pylori infection. In Digestive Disease Week abstracts on disk. Marathon Multimedia, Northfield, Minn.
17. Ching, C. K., S. Thompson, C. Buxton, C. Holgate, and G. K. T. Holmes. 1993. Evaluation of a commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit for serological diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in a group of non-ulcer dyspepsia sufferers. Postgrad. Med. J. 69:456-460[Abstract/Free Full Text].
18. Cognein, P., A. Costa, and A. Giacosa. 1994. Serodiagnosis of Helicobacter pylori: evaluation of a rapid miniaturized immunochromatographic test. Eur. J. Cancer Prev. 3:457-463[Medline].
19. Crabtree, J. E., T. M. Shallcross, R. V. Heatley, and J. L. Wyatt. 1991. Evaluation of a commercial ELISA for serodiagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. J. Clin. Pathol. 44:326-328[Abstract/Free Full Text].
20. Cutler, A. F., and M. Perry. 1997. Comparison of commercial antibody tests to replace discontinued PyloriStat kit. In Digestive Disease Week abstracts on disk. Marathon Multimedia, Northfield, Minn.
21. Debongnie, J. C., M. Delmee, S. Pauwels, and P. Mainguet. 1989. Campylobacter pylori gastritis: review of diagnostic methods. Acta Gastroenterol. Belg. 52:311-319[Medline].
22. de Boni, M., M. De Bona, A. Bellumat, and R. Barbazza. 1995. Evaluation of a new rapid immunodiagnostic assay for H. pylori antibody detection: serological and histopathological correlations, abstr. 2112. In United European Gastronenterology Week abstracts on disk. Excerpta Medica Medical Communications BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
23. Denis, P., E. de Koster, H. Goossens, et al. 1993. An evaluation of four kits for Helicobacter pylori serology. Gastroenterology 104:A70.
24. Diggle, P. J., K. Y. Liang, and S. L. Zeger. 1996. Analysis of longitudinal data. Oxford Science Publications, Oxford, United Kingdom.
25. Edwards, C. N., C. P. Douglin, P. R. Prussia, S. A. Garriques, and P. N. Levett. 1997. Epidemiology of Helicobacter pylori infection in Barbados. West Indian Med. 46:3-7.
26. Enroth, H., R. Rigo, K. Hulten, and L. Engstrand. 1997. Diagnostic accuracy of a rapid whole-blood test for detection of Helicobacter pylori. J. Clin. Microbiol. 35:2695-2697[Abstract].
27. Fabris, P., L. Bozzola, P. Benedetti, M. Scagnelli, R. Nicolin, V. Manfrin, C. Scarparo, and F. De Lalla. 1997. H. pylori infection in HIV-positive patients. A serohistological study. Dig. Dis. Sci. 42:289-292[Medline].
28. Fallone, C. A., M. Elizov, P. Cleland, et al. 1996. Detection of Helicobacter pylori infection by saliva IgG testing. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 91:1145-1149[Medline].
29. Fedder, A., C. Bartolone, S. Harvey, M. L. Mihalov, R. Anderson, and J. L. Goldstein. 1996. Flexsure Hp Fingerstick whole blood and serum qualitative testing for H. pylori antibodies are equally efficacious. In Digestive Disease Week abstracts on disk. Marathon Multimedia, Northfield, Minn.
30. Figura, N., G. Odera, and S. Verdiani. 1994. Evaluation of a commercial ELISA kit for the serological diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. Microbiologica 17:319-325[Medline].
31. Fraser, A., M. R. Ali, N. J. Yeates, and A. Haystead. 1996. Diagnostic tests for Helicobacter pylori-can they help select patients for endoscopy. N. Z. Med. J. 109:95-98[Medline].
32. Goossens, H., Y. Glupczynski, A. Burette, C. Van den Borre, and J. Butzler. 1992. Evaluation of a commercially available second-generation immunoglobin G enzyme immunoassay for detection of Helicobacter pylori infection. J. Clin. Microbiol. 30:176-180[Abstract/Free Full Text].
33. Goossens, H., Y. Glupczynski, A. Burette, C. Van den Borre, C. DePrez, J. Bodenmann, A. Keller, and J. P. Butzler. 1992. Evaluation of commercially available complement fixation test for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection and for follow-up after antimicrobial therapy. J. Clin. Microbiol. 30:3230-3233[Abstract/Free Full Text].
34. Gosciniak, G., T. Matysiak-Budnik, and A. Przondo-Mordarska. 1993. Evaluation of three serological tests for the detection of Helicobacter pylori-associated infection. Arch. Immunol. 41:315-319.
35. Granberg, C., A. Mansikka, O.-P. Lehtonen, H. Kujari, R. Grönfors, H. Nurmi, J. Räihä, M. J. Ståhlberg, and R. Lein. 1993. Diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection by using Pyloriset EIA-G and EIA-A for detection of serum immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgA antibodies. J. Clin. Microbiol. 31:1450-1453[Abstract/Free Full Text].
36. Hanley, J. A., and B. J. McNeil. 1982. The meaning and use of the AUC. Radiology 143:29-36[Abstract/Free Full Text].
37. Harries, A. D., M. Stewart, K. M. Deegan, G. K. Mughogho, J. J. Wirima, M. Hommel, and C. A. Hart. 1992. H. pylori in Malawi, Central Africa. J. Infect. 24:269-276[Medline].
38. Hoek, F. J., L. A. Noach, E. A. J. Rauws, and G. N. J. Tytgat. 1992. Evaluation of the performance of commercial test kits for detection of Helicobacter pylori antibodies in serum. J. Clin. Microbiol. 30:1525-1528[Abstract/Free Full Text].
39. Italian Helicobacter pylori Study Group. 1995. 2579 Italian dyspeptic referred to 1st upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a national multicenter study. In Proceedings of the EHPSG VIIIth International Conference.
40. Jensen, A. K. V., L. P. Andersen, K. Gaarslev, and C. H. Wachmann. 1993. Comparison of four second generation kits for detection of IgG antibodies against Helicobacter pylori in adults. Zentbl. Bakteriol. Parasitenkd. Infektionskr. Hyg. Abt. 1 Orig. 280:221-226.
41. Jensen, A. K. V., L. P. Andersen, and C. H. Wachmann. 1993. Evaluation of eight commercial kits for Helicobacter pylori IgG antibody detection. APMIS 101:795-801[Medline].
42. Laheij, R. J. F., E. M. Witteman, P. Bloemberg, R. W. de Koning, J. B. M. J. Jansen, and A. L. M. Verbeek. 1998. Short-term follow-up by serology of patients given antibiotic treatment for H. pylori infection. J. Clin. Microbiol. 36:1193-1196[Abstract/Free Full Text].
43. Li, C., T. Ha, D. A. Ferguson, Jr., D. S. Chi, R. Zhao, N. R. Patel, G. Krishaswamy, and E. Thomas. 1996. A newly developed PCR assay of H. pylori in gastric biopsy, salvia, and feces. Evidence of high prevalence of H. pylori in saliva supports oral transmission. Dig. Dis. Sci. 41:2142-2149[Medline].
44. Lin, S. K., J. R. Lambert, M. Schembri, et al. 1992. A comparison of diagnostic test to determine Helicobacter pylori infection. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 7:203-209[Medline].
45. Loffeld, R. J. L. F., W. T. J. Vriese, and E. E. Stobberingh. 1993. Usefulness of several commercial enzyme-linked immunoassays for detection of Helicobacter pylori infection in clinical medicine. Eur. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 5:333-337.
46. Lopez-Brea, M., M. J. Martinez, T. Alarcon, and J. C. Sanz. 1994. Evaluation of a rapid dry latex aggutination test for serological diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in children. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 89:1341. (Abstract.)
47. Lopez-Brea, M., M. J. Martinez, T. Alarcon, and J. C. Sanz. 1994. Combined serological detection of specific IgG and IgA for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in children. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 89:1341. (Absract.)
48. Loy, C. T., L. M. Irwig, P. H. Katelaris, and N. J. Talley. 1996. Do commercial serology kits for Helicobacter pylori infection differ in accuracy? A meta-analysis. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 91:1138-1144[Medline].
49. Lozniewski, A., J. D. de Korwin, M. C. Conroy, F. Plenat, and M. Weber. 1996. Evaluation of Pyloriset dry, a new rapid agglutination test for Helicobacter pylori antibody detection. J. Clin. Microbiol. 34:1773-1775[Abstract].
50. Luzza, F., M. Imeneo, M. Maletta, et al. 1997. Saliva IgG testing for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection by means of a serological commercial kit, abstr. 414. In United European Gastroenterology Week abstracts on disk. Excerpta Medica Medical Communications BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
51. Madico, G., and M. Verastegui. 1995. Serodiagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection by enzyme-linked immunoelectrotransfer blot. J. Diarrhoeal Dis. Res. 2:122-126.
52. Martin de Argila, C., D. Boixeda, N. Mir, S. Valdezate, J. P. Gisbert, L. de Rafael, and R. Canton. 1996. Diagnostic value of a commercial IgA enzyme linked immunosorbent assay kit for H. pylori infection diagnosis. In United European Gastroenterology Week abstracts on disk. Excerpta Medica Medical Communications BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
53. Meijer, B. C., J. C. Thijs, J. H. Kleibeuker, A. A. van Zwet, and R. J. P. Berrelkamp. 1997. Evaluation of eight immunoassays for detection of immunoglobulin G against Helicobacter pylori. J. Clin. Microbiol. 35:292-294[Abstract].
54. Mendall, M. A., P. M. Goggin, J. M. Marrero, et al. 1992. Role of Helicobacter pylori serology in screening prior to endoscopy. Eur. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 4:713-717.
55. Meyer-Wyss, B., C. Beglinger, and L. Baselgia. 1991. Helicobacter pylori in healthy people. Gut 32:1429[Free Full Text].
56. Midolo, P. D., J. R. Lambert, E. G. Russell, and S. K. Lin. 1995. A practical single sample latex dry agglutination test for Helicobacter pylori antibody detection. J. Clin. Pathol. 48:969-971[Abstract/Free Full Text].
57. Miller, S., T. K. Shama, and A. F. Cutler. 1996. Prospective evaluation of test characteristics of a new method for detection of serum antibodies to Helicobacter pylori. In Digestive Disease Week abstracts on disk. Marathon Multimedia, Northfield, Minn.
58. Moayyedi, P., A. M. Carter, R. M. Heppell, A. J. Catto, P. Grant, and A. T. R. Axon. 1995. Validation of a rapid whole blood test for the diagnosis of Helicobacter. Gut 36(Suppl. 1):A51.
59. Moayyedi, P., A. Catto, A. M. Carter, et al. 1996. Is Helicobacter pylori serology on plasma accurate. In United European Gastroenterology Week abstracts on disk. Excerpta Medica Medical Communications BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
60. Nair, P., B. E. Watson, C. A. M. McNulty, J. S. Uff, and R. Valori. 1995. A comparison of five commercial serological tests for Helicobacter pylori detection, abstr. 1370. In United European Gastroenterology Week abstracts on disk. Excerpta Medica Medical Communications BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
61. Nardone, G., P. Coscione, F. P. D'Armiento, M. Del Pezzo, M. Pontillo, G. Mossetti, C. Lamberti, and G. Budillon. 1996. Cirrhosis negatively affects the efficiency of serologic diagnosis of H. pylori infection. Ital. J. Gastroenterol. 28:332-336[Medline].
62. Nilsson, I., A. Ljungh, P. Aleljung, and T. Wadstrom. 1997. Immunoblot assay for serodiagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infections. J. Clin. Microbiol. 35:427-432[Abstract].
63. Peitz, U., J. Labenz, B. Tillenburg, M. Bauman, and G. Borsch. 1995. Validity of a new rapid whole blood test for Helicobacter pylori infection, abstr. 988. In United European Gastroenterology Week abstracts on disk. Excerpta Medica Medical Communications BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
64. Peitz, U., J. Labenz, B. Tillenburg, M. Bauman, and G. Borsch. 1996. Insufficient validity of a new rapid whole blood test for Helicobacter pylori infection. In Digestive Disease Week abstracts on disk. Marathon Multimedia, Northfield, Minn.
65. Persico, M., R. Suozzo, M. De Seta, F. Montella, R. Torella, and S. Gentile. 1996. Non-ulcer dyspepsia and H. pylori in type 2 diabetic patients: association with autonomic neuropathy. Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. 31:87-92[Medline].
66. Plebani, M., D. Basso, M. Cassaro, L. Brigato, M. Scrigner, A. Toma, F. Di Mario, and M. Rugge. 1996. Helicobacter pylori serology in patients with chronic gastritis. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 91:954-958[Medline].
67. Pronovost, A. D., S. L. Rose, J. W. Pawlak, H. Robin, and R. Scheider. 1994. Evaluation of a new immunodiagnostic assay for Helicobacter pylori antibody detection: correlation with histopathological and microbiological results. J. Clin. Microbiol. 32:46-50[Abstract/Free Full Text].
68. Raymond, J., N. Kalach, M. Bergeret, J. P. Barbet, P. H. Benhamou, D. Gendrel, and C. Dupont. 1996. Evaluation of a serological test for diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in children. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 15:415-417[Medline].
69. Sadowski, D., H. Cohen, L. Laine, et al. 1996. Evaluation of the flexsure Hp Fingerstick blood test for the detection of H. pylori infection. In Digestive Disease Week abstracts on disk. Marathon Multimedia, Northfield, Minn.
70. SAS. 1996. SAS software, version 6.12. SAS Institute, Cary, N.C.
71. Schembri, M. A., S. K. Lin, and J. R. Lambert. 1993. Comparison of commercial diagnostic tests for Helicobacter pylori antibodies. J. Clin. Microbiol. 31:2621-2624[Abstract/Free Full Text].
72. Sharma, T. K., E. L. Young, S. Miller, and A. F. Cutler. 1997. Evaluation of a rapid, new method for detecting serum IgG antibodies to H. pylori. Clin. Chem. 43:832-836[Abstract/Free Full Text].
73. Sim, J. G., E. C. Kim, and J. K. Seo. 1995. The role of serology in the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in children. Clin. Pediatr. 34:458-462.
74. Sternberg, A., D. Coscas, Y. Wagner, L. Ausland, M. Kaufstein, and Z. Fireman. 1997. Comparison of various Helicobacter pylori detection methods: serology, histology and bacteriology. Isr. J. Med. Sci. 33:160-163[Medline].
75. Taha, A. S., J. Reid, P. Boothmann, C. G. Gemmell, F. D. Lee, R. D. Sturrock, and R. I. Russell. 1993. Serological diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori---evaluation of four tests in the presence or absence of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Gut 34:461-465[Abstract/Free Full Text].
76. Talley, N. J., L. Kost, A. Haddad, and A. R. Zinsmeister. 1992. Comparison of commercial tests for detection of Helicobacter pylori antibodies. J. Clin. Microbiol. 30:3146-3150[Abstract/Free Full Text].
77. Tham, T. C., N. McLaughlin, D. F. Hughes, M. Ferguson, J. J. Crosbie, M. Madden, S. Namnyak, and F. A. O'Connor. 1994. Possible role of Helicobacter pylori serology in reducing endoscopy workload. Postgrad. Med. J. 70:809-812[Abstract/Free Full Text].
78. Trautmann, M., M. Moldrzyk, K. Vogt, J. Korber, T. Held, and R. Marre. 1994. Use of a receiver operating characteristic in the evaluation of two commercial enzyme immunoassays for detection of Helicobacter pylori. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 13:812-819[Medline].
79. Tucci, A., M. Donati, C. Mazzoni, R. Cevenini, V. Sambri, O. Varoli, P. Bocus, A. Ferrari, G. F. Paparo, and G. Caletti. 1996. Value of serology (ELISA) for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection: evaluation in patients attending endoscopy and in those with fundic atrophic gastritis. Ital. J. Gastroenterol. 28:371-376[Medline].
80. Uyub, A. M., A. Khairul, and S. Aiyar. 1994. Reliability of two commercial serological kits for serodiagnosing Helicobacter pylori infection. South Asian J. Trop. Med. 25:316-320.
81. van den Oever, H. L. A., R. J. L. F. Loffeld, and E. E. Stobberingh. 1991. Usefulness of a new serological test (Bio-Rad) to diagnose Helicobacter pylori-associated gastritis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 29:283-286[Abstract/Free Full Text].
82. Vandenplas, Y., U. Blecker, T. Devreker, E. Keppens, J. Nijs, S. Cadranel, M. Pipeleers-Marichal, A. Goosens, and S. Lauwers. 1992. Contribution of the 13C-urea breath test to the detection of Helicobacter pylori gastritis in children. Pediatrics 90:608-611[Abstract/Free Full Text].
83. van der Schouw, Y. T., A. L. M. Verbeek, and S. H. J. Ruijs. 1995. Guidelines for assessment of new diagnostic tests. Invest Radiol. 30:334-340[Medline].
84. van der Schouw, Y. T., H. Straatman, and A. L. M. Verbeek. 1994. ROC curves and the areas under them for dichotomized tests: emperical findings for logistically and normally distributed diagnostic test results. Med. Decis. Making 14:374-81.
85. van de Wouw, B. A. M., W. A. de Boer, A. J. Jansz, R. T. J. M. Roymans, and A. P. G. Staals. 1996. Comparison of three commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays and biopsy-dependent diagnosis for detecting Helicobacter pylori infection. J. Clin. Microbiol. 34:94-97[Abstract].
86. van de Wouw, B. A. M., W. A. de Boer, A. R. Jansz, A. P. G. Staals, and R. T. J. M. Roymans. 1995. Serodiagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection: an evaluation of a commercially available ELISA-IgG. Neth. J. Med. 47:272-277[Medline].
87. Warren, J. R. 1983. Unidentified curved bacilli on gastric epithelium in active chronic gastritis. Lancet i:1273-1275.
88. Weiss, J., J. Mecca, E. da Silva, and D. Gassner. 1994. Comparison of PCR and other diagnostic techniques for detection of Helicobacter pylori infection in dyspeptic patients. J. Clin. Microbiol. 32:1663-1668[Abstract/Free Full Text].
89. Westblom, T. U., E. Madan, S. Gudipati, B. R. Midkiff, and S. Czinn. 1992. Diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in adult and pediatric patients by using Pyloriset, a rapid latex agglutination test. J. Clin. Microbiol. 30:96-98[Abstract/Free Full Text].
90. Westblom, T. U., L. M. Lagging, B. R. Midkiff, and S. J. Czinn. 1993. Evaluation of Quickvue, a rapid enzyme immunoassay test for the detection of serum antibodies to Helicobacter pylori. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 16:317-320[Medline].
91. Wilcox, M. H., T. H. S. Dent, J. O. Hunter, et al. 1996. Accuracy of serology for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection a comparison of eight kits. J. Clin. Pathol. 49:373-376[Abstract/Free Full Text].

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, October 1998, p. 2803-2809, Vol. 36, No. 10
0095-1137/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.


This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Tschopp, A, Joller, H, Jeggli, S, Widmeier, S, Steffen, R, Hilfiker, S, Hotz, P (2009). Hepatitis E, Helicobacter pylori and peptic ulcers in workers exposed to sewage: a prospective cohort study. Occup. Environ. Med. 66: 45-50 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Malfertheiner, P, Megraud, F, O'Morain, C, Bazzoli, F, El-Omar, E, Graham, D, Hunt, R, Rokkas, T, Vakil, N, Kuipers, E J, The European Helicobacter Study Group (EHSG), (2007). Current concepts in the management of Helicobacter pylori infection: the Maastricht III Consensus Report. Gut 56: 772-781 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Smellie, W S A, Wilson, D, McNulty, C A M, Galloway, M J, Spickett, G A, Finnigan, D I, Bareford, D A, Greig, M A, Richards, J (2005). Best practice in primary care pathology: review 1. J. Clin. Pathol. 58: 1016-1024 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Whary, M. T., Sundina, N., Bravo, L. E., Correa, P., Quinones, F., Caro, F., Fox, J. G. (2005). Intestinal Helminthiasis in Colombian Children Promotes a Th2 Response to Helicobacter pylori: Possible Implications for Gastric Carcinogenesis. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 14: 1464-1469 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • McNulty, C., Teare, L., Owen, R., Tompkins, D., Hawtin, P., McColl, K. (2005). Test and treat for dyspepsia--but which test?. BMJ 330: 105-106 [Full Text]  
  • Salomaa-Rasanen, A., Kosunen, T. U., Mattila, J., Sarna, S., Rautelin, H. (2004). Age-Dependent Accuracy of Helicobacter pylori Antibody Assays for Adults, with Special Emphasis on Atrophic Gastritis. CVI 11: 1185-1188 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Laheij, R., Hermsen, J., Jansen, J., Horrevorts, A., Rongen, R., van Rossum, L., Witteman, E, de Koning, R. (2004). Empirical treatment followed by a test-and-treat strategy is more cost-effective in comparison with prompt endoscopy or radiography in patients with dyspeptic symptoms: a randomized trial in a primary care setting. Fam Pract 21: 238-243 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Brenner, H., Arndt, V., Stegmaier, C., Ziegler, H., Rothenbacher, D. (2004). Is Helicobacter pylori Infection a Necessary Condition for Noncardia Gastric Cancer?. Am J Epidemiol 159: 252-258 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Bode, G., Piechotowski, I., Rothenbacher, D., Brenner, H. (2002). Helicobacter pylori-Specific Immune Responses of Children: Implications for Future Vaccination Strategy. CVI 9: 1126-1128 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Everhart, J. E., Kruszon-Moran, D., Perez-Perez, G. (2002). Reliability of Helicobacter pylori and CagA Serological Assays. CVI 9: 412-416 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Laheij, R. J. F., Theodoropoulos, D. S., Theodoropoulos, G. A., Pecoraro, D. L., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Contopoulos-Ioannidis, D. G., Lau, J. (2001). Using Meta-analysis to Answer Clinical Questions. JAMA 286: 2669-2670 [Full Text]  
  • Rüssmann, H., Kempf, V. A. J., Koletzko, S., Heesemann, J., Autenrieth, I. B. (2001). Comparison of Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization and Conventional Culturing for Detection of Helicobacter pylori in Gastric Biopsy Specimens. J. Clin. Microbiol. 39: 304-308 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • van der Ende, A., van der Hulst, R. W. M., Roorda, P., Tytgat, G. N. J., Dankert, J. (1999). Evaluation of Three Commercial Serological Tests with Different Methodologies To Assess Helicobacter pylori Infection. J. Clin. Microbiol. 37: 4150-4152 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Dowsett, S. A., Archila, L., Segreto, V. A., Gonzalez, C. R., Silva, A., Vastola, K. A., Bartizek, R. D., Kowolik, M. J. (1999). Helicobacter pylori Infection in Indigenous Families of Central America: Serostatus and Oral and Fingernail Carriage. J. Clin. Microbiol. 37: 2456-2460 [Abstract] [Full Text]  

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 Laheij, R. J. F.
Right arrow Articles by Verbeek, A. L. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Laheij, R. J. F.
Right arrow Articles by Verbeek, A. L. M.

Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»