Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 2004, p. 5133-5138, Vol. 42, No. 11
0095-1137/04/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.11.5133-5138.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Informatics Laboratory,1 Division of Bacteriology, National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, Potters Bar, Hertfordshire,2 Toxoplasma Reference Laboratory, National Public Health Service for Wales, Swansea, United Kingdom3
Received 14 April 2004/ Returned for modification 13 June 2004/ Accepted 26 July 2004
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
An international collaborative study was carried out to assess the suitability of this candidate preparation both in calibrating IgG assays and as a replacement for TOXM. The aims of the study were (i) to assess the suitability of the candidate as a reference standard for complement-mediated cell-killing assays and to calibrate the candidate in terms of the current IS TOXM by dye test, (ii) to confirm the continuity of unitage of the candidate with the second IS TOXS, (iii) to assess the reactivity of the candidate and the third IS TOXM in various assays currently in use, and (iv) to assess the performance of the candidate and high- and low-titer sera in these assays.
|
|
|---|
Samples. Each participant received two sets comprising nine coded ampoules and an ampoule each of TOXM and TOXS. The study codes, National Institute for Biological Standards and Control (NIBSC) codes, the assigned unitage, and a brief characterization of the samples are given in Table 1. The samples tested negative for antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus types 1 and 2, hepatitis C virus, and hepatitis B virus surface antigen. Duplicates of three samples were included in the sample set to provide an independent measure of intra-assay variability. All samples were distributed as lyophilized preparations at room temperature by courier. The progress of delivery was tracked online via the courier's home page on the worldwide web.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. Samples used in the collaborative study
|
Characterization of proposed IS preparation 01/600. Informed consent was obtained from 23 individuals to retain serum. Fifteen samples were collected at Swansea Hospital (Swansea, United Kingdom), and eight samples were collected and supplied by the Blood Transfusion Service (Birmingham, United Kingdom). The average volume was 198 ± 68 ml per sample. Anti-Toxoplasma IgM titers were determined by immunosorbent agglutination assay (ISAGA; BioMerièux). All samples were positive by the dye test but found to be negative for IgM. Samples were stored at 20°C. At NIBSC, samples were pooled (4.6 liters) and dispensed in 1-ml aliquots into glass vials coded 01/600. The mean fill weight for 42 vials was 1.0063 g, with a coefficient of variation of 0.06%. On the same day, freeze-drying under vacuum conditions started, and the process was completed after 4 days. Vials were backfilled with pure N2 (moisture content, <10 ppm). Residual moisture was measured by the Karl-Fischer method in 6 vials and ranged from 0.1838 to 0.1924%. Eighty-two vials were rejected during the production process, 150 vials were held for accelerated degradation studies, and 3,979 vials were stored at 20°C. These are available for distribution by NIBSC.
Diagnostic assays. The assays used in this study are summarized in Table 2. Two types of assay were distinguished. Titration methods yield an end point titer, and participants who used this type of assay were requested to report four titers in total for each sample. Enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) produce a numerical value such as an absorbance or a fluorescence value. Participants who used an EIA were requested to report four sequential dilutions (e.g., 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, and 1/16) for each sample, and thus, 16 data points were obtained for each sample. Participants using in-house tests followed standard procedures, and participants who used commercially available tests followed procedures described by the manufacturer. A brief description of the procedures accompanied the raw data, which were returned to NIBSC for analysis.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. Assays used in laboratories that participated in this study
|
|
|
|---|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 3. Summary of results by titration method
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 4. Summary of results by EIA methods
|
Presence of specific IgM and IgA in study samples. Laboratories 1 and 24 calculated the IgM content of samples by VIDAS (bioMerièux). The IgA content was determined by laboratory 1 by using Platelia Toxo IgA (Bio-Rad). All coded samples (A to I) were reported to be negative for IgM and IgA, whereas TOXM and TOXS were reported positive. The calculated ratio of IgM content per ampoule for TOXM relative to TOXS was found to be 1.30 by laboratory 1 and 1.13 by laboratory 24. These show good agreement with the value of 1.5 reported previously (2). For IgA, laboratory 1 found the ratio to exceed 1.0, but responses to TOXM were outside the measurable range in this assay. Nevertheless, this is consistent with the previously reported value of 2.5 (2).
Dye test results. The results from 10 laboratories performing the dye test are expressed in international units per milliliter and are summarized in Table 3. The mean potency of 1,078.5 IU ml1 (95% confidence limit, 908.6 to 1,280.2) calculated for TOXM relative to TOXS is consistent with the 1,000-IU-per-ampoule unitage previously assigned to TOXM for total anti-Toxoplasma antibodies (2). This confirms continuity of unitage with the second IS TOXS.
The candidate standard 01/600 has been compared with both TOXM and TOXS (Table 3 and Fig. 1 and 2). Potency estimates for the candidate standard relative to TOXM ranged from 5.2 to 48.9 IU ml1 (n = 10 laboratories), with a mean potency of 18.0 IU ml1 (95% confidence limit, 10.9 to 29.8). The geometric coefficient of variation between laboratories was 101%, larger than the value of 69% calculated for the coded duplicate ratios, indicating additional sources of variability between laboratories. When calculated relative to TOXS, the mean potency for the candidate standard was 19.5 IU ml1 (95% confidence limit, 11.3 to 33.6). A potency of 20 IU per ampoule was consistent with these estimates, and it was proposed that 01/600 be assigned this unitage for total anti-Toxoplasma antibodies.
![]() View larger version (12K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Mean potencies of 01/600 relative to TOXM obtained by laboratories performing titration assays. Dye test, ; immunofluorescence assay,
|
![]() View larger version (12K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Mean potencies of 01/600 relative to TOXS obtained by laboratories performing titration assays. Dye test, ; immunofluorescence assay,
|
Results from other assays. The results from other assays are summarized in Tables 3 and 4. All assays, excluding the complement fixation assay used by laboratory 12, detected positive IgG activities in all samples. The ratio of IgG content per ampoule for TOXM relative to TOXS was 0.48 by indirect immunofluorescence assay, which is in agreement with the value of 0.5 reported previously (2). For the agglutination assays, VIDAS, Platelia Toxo IgG, and in-house EIAs, these ratios were 0.23, 0.24, 0.23, and 0.18, respectively, approximately 50% of the value reported previously (2). Hence, for these methods, the potency estimates given for the coded samples are approximately 50% lower when calculated against TOXS. For the candidate standard 01/600, these results are illustrated in Fig. 1 to 4. Nevertheless, whichever of the standards is selected, the mean potency estimates calculated by the agglutination assays, VIDAS, and Platelia Toxo IgG show good agreement with each other in general.
![]() View larger version (13K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. Mean potencies of 01/600 relative to TOXS obtained by laboratories performing EIAs. VIDAS, ; Platelia,
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 5. Calculated potency of study samples relative to 01/600 (assumed to contain 20 IU ml1)
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 6. Stability of anti-Toxoplasma IgG in sample 01/600 after 16 months of storage at various temperatures, measured by dye test
|
|
|
|---|
Three of the participating laboratories raised concerns about the establishment of the candidate preparation as a single IS with a low IgG concentration, all suggesting that additional standard preparations are needed to cover the range of requirements of reference laboratories and manufacturers. One suggested that, although the candidate preparation was suitable as a low standard, there were also requirements for mid and high standards and that a preparation containing only 20 IU should not be considered the sole world standard. One participant requested that TOXM or another high standard remain available so that manufacturers can continue to develop kits that can express results in IU for high levels of specific IgG. One further comment from a single laboratory was that a panel of at least five different IgG serum samples is needed. They also did not think it acceptable to define the unitage primarily on the basis of the dye test results, as they believe this test to be less sensitive than any EIA for the detection of slight IgG changes in samples with low IgG concentrations.
The candidate preparation had been designed specifically in response to widespread concerns that the previous IS contained relatively high levels of IgM as well as IgG. This resulted in difficulties in standardization between assays detecting IgG only or IgG and IgM. Higher levels of IgG, like those in the previous IS, are found only in acute (IgM positive) infections. Thus, either the standard would be required to contain IgM or IgM would have to be removed chemically, a process that may affect properties of the IgG. Neither of these options was considered desirable when taking into account the views of both laboratories and manufacturers. The proposed standard had been chosen specifically to provide a value within the linear range of most commercial and in-house assays and was not intended as a means of determining high-end accuracy of assays. The ECBS recognized these concerns of the participants and recommended that the development of a replacement for TOXM be considered.
We are in agreement with the need for a high-IgG standard as well as an IgM-positive standard. An additional IS should be established that will contain both anti-Toxoplasma IgM and IgG. This additional standard should address criticisms of the previous IS and should be calibrated both in terms of IgG and IgM levels. The first IS for human anti-Toxoplasma IgG will be crucial in determining levels of IgG in the candidate anti-Toxoplasma IgM and IgG standard preparation. With a combination of these two standards, laboratories and manufacturers would have access to an IS containing IgG only and to an IS that would contain the higher levels of IgG required for high-end assay calibration.
![]() View larger version (13K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. Mean potencies of 01/600 relative to TOXM obtained by laboratories performing EIAs. VIDAS, ; Platelia,
|
We also thank all of the participants for their helpful contributions to the study: G. Street and A. Jenkins, Queensland Medical Laboratory, Westend, Australia; W. Apt and L. Sandoval, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile; E. Petersen, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark; M. Lappalainen, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland; M. Dardé, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Dupuytren, Limoges, France; H. Pelloux, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble, Grenoble, France; P. Thulliez, Institut de Puériculture, Paris, France; U. Gross, University Hospital of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany; I. Reiter-Owona, Institute für Medizinische Parasitologie der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany; Z. Szénási, Johan Béla National Center for Epidemiology, Budapest, Hungary; F. Irwin, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; I. Riklis, National Public Health Laboratory, Tel Aviv, Israel; L. Kortbeek, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands; M. Paul, University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland; B. Evengård, Huddinge University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; Y. Sukthana, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand; A. Y. Gürüz and M. Korkmaz, Ege University, Bornova-Izmir, Turkey; O. Markov and I. Markov, Children Clinic for Immunodeficiency Vitacell, Kiev, Ukraine; E. Guy and J. Francis, Singleton Hospital, Swansea, United Kingdom; D. Ho-Yen and J. Chatterton, Raigmore Hospital, Inverness, United Kingdom; M. Golightly, State University of New York, Stony Brook; H. Kapoor and W. Crafts, Michigan Department of Community Health, Lansing; J. Remington and C. Press, Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute, Palo Alto, Calif.; M. Wilson, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga.
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»