Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, April 2000, p. 1385-1389, Vol. 38, No. 4
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Rapid Enzyme Immunoassay for Determination of
Toxigenicity among Clinical Isolates of Corynebacteria
Kathryn H.
Engler* and
Androulla
Efstratiou
Respiratory and Systemic Infection
Laboratory, Central Public Health Laboratory, London NW9 5HT,
United Kingdom
Received 11 August 1999/Returned for modification 3 November
1999/Accepted 17 January 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
A rapid enzyme immunoassay (EIA) was developed for the phenotypic
detection of diphtheria toxin among clinical isolates of corynebacteria. The assay uses equine polyclonal antitoxin as the
capture antibody and an alkaline phosphatase-labeled monoclonal antibody, specific for fragment A of the toxin molecule, as the detecting antibody. The assay is rapid, sensitive, and specific: a
final result is available within 3 h of colony selection, and the
limits of detection are 0.1 ng of pure diphtheria toxin/ml. Toxigenicity could be detected with isolates grown on a diverse range
of culture media, including selective agars. Toxin detection using the
EIA was compared to that with the Elek test and PCR detection of
fragment A of the diphtheria toxin (tox) gene, using 245 isolates of corynebacteria. The results for the EIA were in complete
concordance with those of the Elek test: 87 toxigenic and 158 nontoxigenic isolates. Ten of the phenotypically nontoxigenic strains
were found to contain fragment A of the tox gene but did not express the toxin protein. These isolates were found to be nontoxigenic in the Vero cell tissue culture cytotoxicity assay and
were therefore nontoxigenic for diagnostic purposes. The EIA is a
simple rapid phenotypic test which provides a definitive result on
toxigenicity within one working day.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The reemergence of epidemic
diphtheria in Russia and the Newly Independent States of the former
Soviet Union during the 1990s has highlighted the fact that whenever
there is a decrease in immunization coverage rates, epidemic diphtheria
can reemerge (12). Within western Europe clinical diphtheria
is rare; however, sporadic cases still occur, the majority of which are
in travelers from areas of endemicity or epidemicity, such as the
former USSR, the Indian subcontinent, Southeast Asia, and South America
(5, 28). There has also been a significant increase in the
isolation of nontoxigenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae in the
United Kingdom and other countries of western Europe (5, 9,
11). These isolates are predominantly associated with sore
throat, but cases associated with endocarditis and other systemic
diseases have also been reported (18, 29, 31). Reliable,
specific, and accurate methods for the detection of diphtheria toxin
are therefore essential to differentiate sporadic toxigenic isolates
from circulating nontoxigenic isolates.
The ideal test for the detection of toxigenicity should be simple,
rapid, reliable, and sensitive and should correlate well with the
biological activity of diphtheria toxin. The disadvantages of current
methodologies have been documented (7). Many of the
phenotypic methods currently available are technically demanding or
lacking in sensitivity (7, 10, 30). Although genotypic PCR-based methods for the detection of the toxin gene (21, 22, 24) offer some advantages over phenotypic tests, they do not provide information on the ability of the organism to express biologically active diphtheria toxin and therefore cannot provide a
definitive result on toxigenicity (7, 25). Enzyme
immunoassays (EIAs) are widely used for the detection of microbial
antigens and markers (13, 23, 27). The sensitivity of
two-site immunometric EIAs can be improved by the incorporation of
signal amplification technology (2, 20). We have therefore
developed, standardized, and evaluated an amplified EIA for the rapid
phenotypic detection of diphtheria toxin.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Preparation of microtiter plates and monoclonal antibody
conjugate.
Protein G-purified equine polyclonal antitoxin (2.0 µg/ml; Pasteur Mérieux, Lyon, France) was used to coat Nunc
Maxisorp microtiter plates (DAKO Ltd., Ely, United Kingdom). Monoclonal antibody, specific to fragment A of the diphtheria toxin molecule, was
prepared as described previously (13). Protein G-purified monoclonal antibody was conjugated to alkaline phosphatase
(16) and used in the assay at a final concentration of 2 µg/ml. The conjugate buffer formulation was optimized to reduce
nonspecific binding and was composed of triethanolamine buffer (pH 8.0)
containing ionic detergent (0.1% [vol/vol]), bovine serum albumin
(2% [wt/vol]), porcine immunoglobulin G (5.0% [vol/vol]), zinc
chloride (0.1 mM), and magnesium chloride (1.0 mM) (DAKO Ltd.).
Bacterial strains.
Corynebacteria were selected from
clinical isolates referred to the Streptococcus and Diphtheria
Reference Unit, Central Public Health Laboratory, Colindale, London,
United Kingdom, between 1988 and 1998. Three control strains were used
for the toxigenicity tests: NCTC 10648 (C. diphtheriae
biotype gravis; a strong toxin producer), NCTC 3984 (C. diphtheriae biotype gravis; a weak toxin producer), and NCTC 10356 (C. diphtheriae biotype belfanti; nontoxigenic). Ten
isolates of C. diphtheriae and Corynebacterium
ulcerans were used for the standardization of the EIA. These
included six isolates of C. diphtheriae, which produced
various amounts of diphtheria toxin in the Vero cell bioassay
(7), and four isolates of C. ulcerans, which
produced very weak precipitin lines in the Elek immunoprecipitation
test. The strains, previously stored at
20°C in 16% (vol/vol)
glycerol broth, were inoculated onto Columbia agar (Oxoid, Basingstoke,
United Kingdom) supplemented with 5% (vol/vol) horse blood (CBA) and
incubated at 37°C in air for 16 to 20 h. Isolates were also
cultivated on Hoyle's tellurite agar (Oxoid), Tinsdale agar (Becton
Dickinson, Oxford, United Kingdom), or Loeffler's medium (Oxoid)
instead of CBA prior to testing in the standardized EIA to determine
any effects of diagnostic culture media on the assay.
EIA for the detection of diphtheria toxin. (i) Standardization of
inoculum density and incubation time for the preparation of bacterial
culture supernatants.
A single colony of each isolate grown on CBA
was suspended in 10 ml of brain heart infusion broth (Oxoid)
supplemented with 0.4% (vol/vol) yeast extract and 0.2% (vol/vol)
Tween 80 and incubated at 37°C in air for 18 h. The overnight
suspension was diluted 10-fold (10
1 to 10
7)
in 0.5 ml of Elek broth (3) (Elek medium without the
addition of agar) supplemented with 16.6% (vol/vol) newborn bovine
serum (ICN Biomedicals, Thame, United Kingdom). A standard plate count was used to determine the final cell density. The cultures were incubated at 37°C in air for between 1 and 24 h, after which the bacterial cells were removed by filtration through a
0.22-µm-pore-size membrane (Ultrapure 0.22 µm; Millipore, Watford,
United Kingdom). The culture supernatants were stored at
20 or 4°C
prior to analysis in the EIA.
(ii) Methodology for the standardized EIA.
Colonies on CBA
were suspended in 0.5 ml of Elek broth at a cell density corresponding
to McFarland standard no. 1 (108 CFU/ml) and were incubated
for 1 h at 37°C in air. The bacterial cells were removed by
filtration through a 0.22-µm-pore-size membrane (Ultrapure 0.22 µm), and the culture supernatants were stored at
20 or 4°C until
they were analyzed. Two hundred microliters of filtered culture
supernatant was added to the wells of a microtiter plate followed by 50 µl of alkaline-phosphatase-labeled monoclonal antitoxin (10 µg/ml).
The plates were sealed with a plate sealer (ICN Pharmaceuticals Ltd.)
and incubated aerobically at 37°C for 1 h. The plates were
washed, and AmpliQ reagent (K6245; DAKO Ltd.) was used for the
detection of alkaline phosphatase, in accordance with the
manufacturer's instructions. Following a 30-min incubation at 37°C,
the reaction was stopped by the addition of 100 µl of 1 M phosphoric
acid, and the optical density at 490 nm was measured using an MRX1.2
microtiter plate reader [Dynex Technologies (U.K.) Ltd.,
Billingshurst, United Kingdom].
Elek immunoprecipitation test.
All isolates were tested for
the production of diphtheria toxin by using the modified Elek
immunoprecipitation test as described previously (10).
PCR for the detection of the diphtheria toxin gene.
Detection of fragment A of the diphtheria toxin gene (248 bp) was
performed on all isolates as described previously (24). An
artificial template was added to each reaction as an internal control.
The control template contained an internal 58-bp deletion, which
allowed it to be distinguished from the natural product by
electrophoretic mobility. The presence of the 190-bp amplicon in the
negative reaction showed that the PCR had been successful and prevented
false negatives. Primers and the internal control oligonucleotide were
obtained from Novocastra Laboratories, Newcastle, United Kingdom.
Tissue culture cytotoxicity assay.
The Vero cell
cytotoxicity assay for the detection of diphtheria toxin was performed
as described previously (7); cell death was determined by
visual examination of the cultures using an inverted microscope. The
specificity of the cytotoxic effect was confirmed by positive
inhibition with equine diphtheria antitoxin (50 µl at 2.5 × 10
3 IU/ml; 66/153, Third British Standard, NIBSC).
 |
RESULTS |
Sensitivity of the EIA.
Purified diphtheria toxin
[Calbiochem-Novobiochem (U.K.) Ltd., Nottingham, United
Kingdom] was used to determine the sensitivity of the EIA.
A titration curve is shown in Fig.
1; the limits of detection were found to
be 0.1 ng/ml. Microtiter plates containing the culture supernatant and
alkaline phosphatase labeled monoclonal antibody could be incubated at
either room temperature (approximately 20°C) or 37°C, and either
statically or with shaking, without a loss in sensitivity of detection
of diphtheria toxin (data not shown). The plates were, therefore,
routinely incubated statically at 37°C in air. Detection of alkaline
phosphatase activity was always performed statically at 37°C in air.

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Titration curve for the detection of pure diphtheria
toxin using the EIA. Each point is the average (± standard deviation)
of three replicate wells.
|
|
Effects of inoculum density and incubation time on the detection of
toxigenicity.
The effects of inoculum density and incubation time
on the detection of toxigenicity in the EIA were initially determined using two strains of C. diphtheriae, NCTC 10648 and NCTC
3954. Tenfold serial dilutions (10
1 to 10
7)
of an overnight suspension were made in Elek broth and incubated for 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, and 24 h at 37°C prior to testing in the
EIA. Using both a 1- and a 2-h incubation period, the minimum
number of cells required for the detection of toxigenicity in the EIA was approximately 106 CFU/ml. An increase in the
incubation time permitted detection of toxigenicity at lower inoculum
densities. Using a 4- and an 8-h incubation, toxigenicity could be
detected with approximately 105 and 103 CFU/ml,
respectively, and for incubations of 16 and 24 h, toxigenicity could be detected from the lowest inoculum density examined (1 to 10 CFU/ml).
For the EIA to be a potential routine test for toxigenicity, it was
desirable that the results be available within one working
day.
Therefore, the effect of inoculum density on the detection
of
toxigenicity with a 1-h incubation in Elek broth prior to testing
in
the EIA was determined using a panel of 10 isolates known to
produce
various amounts of diphtheria toxin. The results are shown
in Fig.
2. The minimum inoculum density which
enabled toxigenicity
to be detected for all 10 isolates was found
to vary (1 × 10
6 to 1.2 × 10
7
CFU/ml) according to the isolate being tested. To prevent the
occurrence of false negatives due to an insufficient inoculum
and to
simplify inoculum preparation, an inoculum density corresponding
to McFarland standard no. 1 (approximately 10
8 CFU/ml) was
used in the standardized EIA.

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Effect of variations in inoculum density on the
detection of toxigenicity using a 1-h incubation for the preparation of
culture supernatants from six isolates of C. diphtheriae
( , , , , , and ) that produced various amounts of
toxin and four isolates of C. ulcerans (×, *, +, and )
that produced very low levels of toxin.
|
|
Effects of culture media on the detection of toxigenicity.
The
effects of culture media commonly used in the laboratory diagnosis of
diphtheria on the detection of toxigenicity using the EIA was
determined with 10 isolates of C. diphtheriae and C. ulcerans. The isolates were grown on Hoyle's Tellurite
agar, Tinsdale agar, or Loeffler's agar prior to testing in the
EIA under the standardized conditions described above (inoculum density corresponding to McFarland standard no. 1 and 1 h of incubation in
Elek broth). A positive reaction occurred for all toxigenic isolates
tested, irrespective of the medium on which they were grown prior to
inoculation into Elek broth (data not shown).
Evaluation of the EIA.
The optimized EIA was evaluated using a
selection of 245 isolates of corynebacteria referred to the
Streptococcus and Diphtheria Reference Unit (SDRU) between 1988 and
1998. The species and biotypes of the isolates are shown in Table
1 and included representatives of the
potentially toxigenic species (C. diphtheriae, C. ulcerans, and Corynebacterium pseudotuberculosis) as
well as representatives of other Corynebacterium spp. which
are most commonly referred to the SDRU for identification and
toxigenicity testing. The results of the determination of toxigenicity
using the EIA are shown in Fig. 3. An
optical density of 0.05 was used as the cutoff value for the
determination of toxigenicity; using this cutoff value, 87 isolates
were found to be toxigenic and 158 isolates were found to be
nontoxigenic. Interestingly, isolates of C. ulcerans
appeared to be the weakest toxin producers, and many of these isolates produced less diphtheria toxin (lower absorbance values) than NCTC
3984, the weakly toxigenic control strain for the Elek test. This
finding confirms our previous, unpublished observations that C. ulcerans isolates often produce very weak precipitin lines in both
modified and conventional Elek tests for the detection of toxigenicity.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 1.
Comparison of detection of toxigenicity using EIA,
modified Elek test, and PCR detection of fragment A of diphtheria
toxin gene
|
|

View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Determination of toxigenicity among 245 isolates of
corynebacteria by using the EIA. , toxigenic isolates; ×,
nontoxigenic isolates; gravis, C. diphtheriae
biotype gravis; mitis, C. diphtheriae biotype
mitis; bel, C. diphtheriae biotype belfanti;
int, C. diphtheriae biotype intermedius;
pse, C. pseudotuberculosis; ulc,
C. ulcerans; other, other corynebacteria
(Corynebacterium argentoratense, Corynebacterium
imitans, Corynebacterium pseudodiphtheriticum,
Corynebacterium amycolatum, and Corynebacterium
striatum).
|
|
The detection of toxigenicity using the EIA was compared to that with
two other methods frequently used for the detection
of diphtheria
toxin

the Elek immunoprecipitation test (
10) and
PCR for
the detection of fragment A of the toxin gene (
24).
The
results are shown in Table
1. The EIA showed 100% correlation
with the
modified Elek test but provided a result within 3 h of
colony
selection in comparison to 24 h for the modified Elek test
and
48 h for the conventional Elek test. In addition to its speed,
the
EIA was more sensitive than the Elek test, and interpretation
of the
results was simpler. Isolates that produced very weak precipitin
lines
in the Elek test produced a strong color reaction in the
EIA and could
easily be distinguished from nontoxigenic isolates
on the basis of both
microtiter plate readings and visual interpretation.
Ten of 245 isolates (5%) were negative in the EIA and Elek test
but gave a
positive result for the PCR detection of the toxin
gene. These strains
were also tested in the Vero cell cytotoxicity
assay and were found to
be
nontoxigenic.
The sensitivity of the EIA was determined using 55 of the 245 isolates
that previously had been tested in the Vero cell cytotoxicity
assay and
the subcutaneous virulence test in guinea pigs (
7).
The
results for the EIA showed 100% correlation with both assays
that
detected the biological activity of diphtheria toxin. Twenty-six
isolates were identified as toxigenic, and 29 isolates were identified
as nontoxigenic. The sensitivity of the EIA was 100% (95% confidence
interval, 83.2 to 100%).
 |
DISCUSSION |
The detection of toxigenicity is the most important test in the
laboratory diagnosis of diphtheria and should be initiated without
delay following the isolation of any suspicious colonies. The
phenotypic tests currently available for the detection of toxigenicity
tend to be technically demanding or lacking in sensitivity (7) or have limited evaluations (30). In general,
these methods require at least 16 to 24 h from selection of
colonies to a final result. The delay between isolation of a suspicious
organism and the results of toxigenicity testing can provoke great
anxiety among laboratory staff, clinicians, and public health officials.
PCR detection of the diphtheria toxin gene is the most rapid method for
the detection of toxigenicity; using pure cultures, a result is
available within 4 to 5 h of colony selection, and detection of
the toxin gene directly from clinical specimens has also been described
(22). Although some studies have shown good correlation
between genotypic (PCR) and phenotypic methods for the detection of
toxigenicity (1, 14, 21, 22), other studies have identified
isolates which possess the toxin gene but do not express a biologically
and/or immunologically active form of the toxin molecule (7,
25). In this study, 10 of 245 isolates (5%) were negative in the
phenotypic and biological assays used (EIA, Elek test, and tissue
culture cytotoxicity assay) but gave a positive result for PCR
detection of the toxin gene. These strains included six isolates from
outbreaks of pharyngitis in the northern United States and Canada,
described previously (7), and a further four isolates from
the recent diphtheria epidemic in the former USSR. Such isolates appear
to be relatively rare and have previously been reported from specific
geographic locations; however, as the diphtheria epidemic diminishes in
the former USSR, these isolates are being isolated in increasing
numbers in many countries within eastern Europe (8). Current
recommendations are that PCR should be used only in conjunction with a
phenotypic test (6, 8). Although an accurate negative PCR
result may be useful in the rapid exclusion of toxigenicity, a positive
PCR result will require confirmation with a phenotypic test, which will
consequently lead to a delay in the final result.
The EIA described is a rapid, sensitive, and simple method for the
detection of diphtheria toxin. The limits of detection are 0.1 ng/ml,
and a result is available within 3 h of colony selection.
Toxigenicity can be determined from isolates grown on a variety of
media, including selective agars, such as Hoyle's Tellurite agar and
Tinsdale agar, used for the isolation and screening of potentially
toxigenic corynebacteria. Standardization of inoculum density and
incubation time in Elek broth was essential to ensure the accurate
detection of toxigenicity, particularly among weak toxin-producing
isolates. These two factors affected the amount of diphtheria toxin
released into the culture supernatant. We found that a short, 1-h
incubation in Elek broth could be used, provided an inoculum density of
greater than approximately 107 CFU/ml was used. A slightly
higher inoculum density of 108 CFU/ml (McFarland standard
no. 1) was used in the standardized EIA to eliminate false negatives
due to the use of a low inoculum of a toxigenic strain. The inoculum
density of 108 CFU/ml was easily achieved from both agar
plate and slope cultures.
For inoculum densities of less than 107 CFU/ml, longer
incubation times in Elek broth were required to ensure the production of adequate toxin for detection in the EIA. Using a 16-h incubation, toxigenicity could be detected from the lowest inoculum density tested,
which corresponded to approximately 1 to 10 CFU/ml. This indicated that
the EIA could be used for the detection of toxigenicity directly from
clinical specimens. However, the effect of inhibitors and of the
presence of other organisms in the clinical specimen should be fully
evaluated before the assay undergoes a field evaluation in an area of
endemicity or epidemicity.
EIAs for the detection of diphtheria toxin have been previously
documented (13, 23, 27). The majority of these assays used
similar designs (horse polyclonal antitoxin as the capture antibody and
a mouse monoclonal antibody as the detecting antibody), with the
exception of that of Hallas et al. (13), who used two monoclonal antibodies specific to fragment A as both the detecting and
capture antibodies. The capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
method described by Nielsen et al. (23) and the sandwich dot
immunobinding method of Peitrzak et al. (27) both reported limits of detection of approximately 10 ng/ml, and incubation times of
18 and 24 h, respectively, were required to ensure no false
negatives. The assay described by Hallas et al. (13) showed good sensitivity, with limits of detection of 88 pg/ml; however, the
final result was not available until 2 days after the selection of
colonies and false-positive results were obtained for 4 of the 78 isolates tested. The amplified EIA we have described offers a number of
advantages in comparison with these methods: the limits of detection
are 0.1 ng/ml, a final result is available within 3 h of colony
selection, and no false positives or negatives were detected among the
245 isolates tested. The incorporation of the DAKO signal amplification
technology offered increased assay sensitivity compared to conventional
EIAs. Amplified immunoassays of this format have demonstrated good
clinical sensitivity (4, 15), providing sensitivity
equivalent to that of molecular amplification methods (26).
The amplified EIA developed in this study is a rapid, simple, and
specific method with which a definitive toxigenicity result can be
determined within one working day. As such, the EIA should contribute
significantly to the laboratory diagnosis of diphtheria on a global
basis. The assay can be used for the rapid testing of sporadic isolates
or for batch testing a larger number of isolates within areas of the
world where diphtheria is endemic or epidemic.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
This work was supported by a Research Grant from the U.K. Home Office.
We thank Robert C. George for his support and encouragement throughout
this study and critical review of the manuscript. We are also grateful
to Andrei Malik and Mark Dunn for their assistance, in particular in
the provision of coated plates, conjugates, and amplification reagents
and critical review of the manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: WHO
Collaborating Centre for Diphtheria and Streptococcal Infections,
Respiratory and Systemic Infection Laboratory, Central Public Health
Laboratory, 61 Colindale Ave., London NW9 5HT, United Kingdom. Phone:
44 181 200 4400. Fax: 44 181 205 6528. E-mail:
kengler{at}phls.nhs.uk.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Aravena-Roman, M.,
R. Bowman, and G. O'Neill.
1995.
Polymerase chain reaction for the detection of toxigenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae.
Pathology
27:71-73[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Bates, D. L.
1995.
Enzyme amplification: the quest for the zeptomole.
Int. Labmate
20:11-13.
|
| 3.
|
Colman, G.,
E. Weaver, and A. Efstratiou.
1992.
Screening tests for pathogenic corynebacteria.
J. Clin. Pathol.
45:46-48[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 4.
|
Crowley, T.,
D. Milne,
J. T. Arumainayagam,
I. D. Paul, and E. O. Caul.
1992.
The laboratory diagnosis of male Chlamydia trachomatis infections a time for change?
J. Infect.
25:69-75.
|
| 5.
|
Efstratiou, A., and R. C. George.
1996.
Microbiology and epidemiology of diphtheria.
Rev. Med. Microbiol.
7:31-42.
|
| 6.
|
Efstratiou, A., and R. C. George.
1999.
Laboratory guidelines for the diagnosis of infections caused by Corynebacterium diphtheriae and C. ulcerans.
Commun. Dis. Public Health
2:250-257[Medline].
|
| 7.
|
Efstratiou, A.,
K. H. Engler,
C. S. Dawes, and D. Sesardic.
1998.
Comparison of phenotypic and genotypic methods for the detection of diphtheria toxin among isolates of pathogenic corynebacteria.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
36:3173-3177[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Efstratiou, A.,
K. H. Engler,
I. K. Mazurova,
T. Glushkevich,
J. Vuopio-Varkila, and T. Popovic.
2000.
Current approaches to the laboratory diagnosis of diphtheria.
J. Infect. Dis.
181(Suppl. 1):S138-S145.
|
| 9.
|
Efstratiou, A.,
R. G. George, and N. T. Begg.
1993.
Non-toxigenic C. diphtheriae in England.
Lancet
341:1592-1593[Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Engler, K. H.,
T. Glushkevich,
I. K. Mazurova,
R. C. George, and A. Efstratiou.
1997.
A modified Elek test for the detection of toxigenic corynebacteria.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
35:495-498[Abstract].
|
| 11.
|
Funke, G.,
M. Altwegg,
L. Frommelt, and A. von Gravenitz.
1999.
Emergence of related nontoxigenic C. diphtheriae biotype mitis strains in Western Europe.
Emerg. Infect. Dis.
5:477-480[Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Galazka, A. M.,
S. E. Robertson, and G. P. Oblapenko.
1995.
Resurgence of diphtheria.
J. Epidemiol.
11:95-105.
|
| 13.
|
Hallas, G.,
T. G. Harrison,
D. Samuel, and G. Colman.
1990.
Detection of diphtheria toxin in culture supernates of Corynebacterium diphtheriae and C. ulcerans by immunoassay with monoclonal antibody.
J. Med. Microbiol.
32:247-253[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Hauser, D.,
M. R. Popoff,
M. Kiredjian,
P. Boquet, and F. Bimet.
1993.
Polymerase chain reaction assay for diagnosis of potentially toxinogenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae strains: correlation with ADP-ribosylation activity assay.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
31:2720-2723[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
|
Hay, P. E.,
B. J. Thomas,
E. Gilchrist,
H. M. Palmer,
C. B. Gilroy, and D. Taylor-Robinson.
1991.
The value of urine samples from men with non-gonococcal urethritis for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis.
Genitourin. Med.
67:124-128[Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Ishikawa, E.,
M. Imagawa,
S. Hashida,
S. Yoshitake,
Y. Hamaguchi, and T. Ueno.
1983.
Enzyme-labeling of antibodies and their fragments for enzyme immunoassay and immunohistochemical staining.
J. Immunoassay
4:209-327[Medline].
|
| 17.
|
Jalgaonkar, S. V., and A. M. Saoji.
1993.
Coagglutination for rapid testing of toxin producing Corynebacterium diphtheriae.
Indian J. Med. Res.
97:35-36[Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Lortholary, O.,
A. Buu-Hoe,
L. Gutman, and J. Acar.
1995.
Corynebacterium diphtheriae endocarditis in France.
Clin. Infect. Dis.
31:63-65.
|
| 19.
|
Lucchini, G. M.,
E. Gruner, and M. Altwegg.
1992.
Rapid detection of diphtheria toxin by the polymerase chain reaction.
Med. Microbiol. Lett.
1:276-283.
|
| 20.
|
Markham, R.,
L. Young, and I. S. Fraser.
1996.
Enzyme amplification of ELISA.
Aust. J. Med. Sci.
17:37-40.
|
| 21.
|
Mikhailovich, V. M.,
V. G. Melnikov,
I. K. Mazurova,
I. K. Wachsmuth,
J. D. Wenger,
M. Wharton,
H. Nakao, and T. Popovic.
1995.
Application of PCR for detection of toxigenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae strains isolated during the Russian diphtheria epidemic, 1990 through 1994.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
33:3061-3063[Abstract].
|
| 22.
|
Nakao, H., and T. Popovic.
1997.
Development of a direct PCR for detection of the diphtheria toxin gene.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
7:1651-1655.
|
| 23.
|
Nielsen, P. B.,
C. Koch,
H. Friss,
I. Heron,
J. Prag, and J. Schmidt.
1987.
Double-sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for rapid detection of toxin-producing Corynebacterium diphtheriae.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
25:1280-1284[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Pallen, M. J.
1991.
Rapid screening for toxigenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae by the polymerase chain reaction.
J. Clin. Pathol.
44:1025-1026[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Pallen, M. J.,
A. J. Hay,
L. H. Puckey, and A. Efstratiou.
1994.
Polymerase chain reaction for screening clinical isolates of corynebacteria for the production of diphtheria toxin.
J. Clin. Pathol.
47:353-356[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
Paul, I. D.
1996.
Chlamydia trachomatis: a review of its laboratory diagnosis and a preliminary evaluation of a new DNA based assay.
Public Health Lab. Serv. Microbiol. Dig.
13:223-226.
|
| 27.
|
Pietrzak, J.,
S. Muehlestein, and M. Gasser.
1990.
Sandwich-dot immunobinding assay (sandwich-DIA), a new immunological method for the detection of diphtheria toxin.
Zentbl. Bakteriol.
274:61-69.
|
| 28.
|
Public Health Laboratory Service.
1997.
Diphtheria acquired during a cruise in the Baltic Sea.
Commun. Dis. Rep. CDR Weekly
7:207.
|
| 29.
|
Tiley, S. M.,
K. R. Kokiuba,
L. G. Heron, and R. Munro.
1993.
Infective endocarditis due to non-toxigenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae: report of seven cases and review.
Clin. Infect. Dis.
16:271-275[Medline].
|
| 30.
|
Toma, C.,
L. Sisvath, and M. Iwanaga.
1997.
Reversed passive latex agglutination assay for detection of toxigenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
35:3147-3149[Abstract].
|
| 31.
|
Zuber, P. L. F.,
E. Gruner,
M. Altwegg, and A. von Graevenitz.
1992.
Invasive infection with non-toxigenic C. diphtheriae among drug users.
Lancet
339:1359[Medline].
|
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, April 2000, p. 1385-1389, Vol. 38, No. 4
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Bachran, C., Sutherland, M., Bachran, D., Fuchs, H.
(2007). Quantification of Diphtheria Toxin Mediated ADP-Ribosylation in a Solid-Phase Assay. Clin. Chem.
53: 1676-1683
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Engler, K. H., Efstratiou, A., Norn, D., Kozlov, R. S., Selga, I., Glushkevich, T. G., Tam, M., Melnikov, V. G., Mazurova, I. K., Kim, V. E., Tseneva, G. Y., Titov, L. P., George, R. C.
(2002). Immunochromatographic Strip Test for Rapid Detection of Diphtheria Toxin: Description and Multicenter Evaluation in Areas of Low and High Prevalence of Diphtheria. J. Clin. Microbiol.
40: 80-83
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
ENGLER, K. H., KOZLOV, R. S., COPPING, S. J., DIPHTHERIA, M. O. T. E. L. W. G. O., EFSTRATIOU, A.
(2001). International external quality assessment scheme for the laboratory diagnosis of diphtheria. J Med Microbiol
50: 1006-1012
[Abstract]
[Full Text]