Cargando…

Comparison of Three Cellular Assays to Predict the Course of CMV Infection in Liver Transplant Recipients

To estimate protection from cytomegalovirus (CMV) replication after solid organ transplantation, CMV serology has been considered insufficient and thus CMV immunity is increasingly assessed by cellular in vitro methods. We compared two commercially available IFN-γ ELISpot assays (T-Track CMV and T-S...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gliga, Smaranda, Fiedler, Melanie, Dornieden, Theresa, Achterfeld, Anne, Paul, Andreas, Horn, Peter A., Herzer, Kerstin, Lindemann, Monika
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7911226/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33504093
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9020088
_version_ 1783656291601743872
author Gliga, Smaranda
Fiedler, Melanie
Dornieden, Theresa
Achterfeld, Anne
Paul, Andreas
Horn, Peter A.
Herzer, Kerstin
Lindemann, Monika
author_facet Gliga, Smaranda
Fiedler, Melanie
Dornieden, Theresa
Achterfeld, Anne
Paul, Andreas
Horn, Peter A.
Herzer, Kerstin
Lindemann, Monika
author_sort Gliga, Smaranda
collection PubMed
description To estimate protection from cytomegalovirus (CMV) replication after solid organ transplantation, CMV serology has been considered insufficient and thus CMV immunity is increasingly assessed by cellular in vitro methods. We compared two commercially available IFN-γ ELISpot assays (T-Track CMV and T-SPOT.CMV) and an IFN-γ ELISA (QuantiFERON-CMV). Currently, there is no study comparing these three assays. The assays were performed in 56 liver transplant recipients at the end of antiviral prophylaxis and one month thereafter. In CMV high- or intermediate-risk patients the two ELISpot assays showed significant correlation (p < 0.0001, r > 0.6) but the correlation of the ELISpot assays with QuantiFERON-CMV was weaker. Results of both ELISpot assays were similarly predictive of protection from CMV-DNAemia ≥500 copies/mL [CMV pp65 T-SPOT.CMV at the end of prophylaxis: area under curve (AUC) = 0.744, cut-off 142 spot forming units (SFU), sensitivity set to 100%, specificity 46%; CMV IE-1 T-Track CMV at month 1: AUC = 0.762, cut-off 3.5 SFU, sensitivity set to 100%, specificity 59%]. The QuantiFERON-CMV assay was inferior, reaching a specificity of 23% when setting the sensitivity to 100%. In conclusion, both CMV-specific ELISpot assays appear suitable to assess protection from CMV infection/reactivation in liver transplant recipients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7911226
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79112262021-02-28 Comparison of Three Cellular Assays to Predict the Course of CMV Infection in Liver Transplant Recipients Gliga, Smaranda Fiedler, Melanie Dornieden, Theresa Achterfeld, Anne Paul, Andreas Horn, Peter A. Herzer, Kerstin Lindemann, Monika Vaccines (Basel) Article To estimate protection from cytomegalovirus (CMV) replication after solid organ transplantation, CMV serology has been considered insufficient and thus CMV immunity is increasingly assessed by cellular in vitro methods. We compared two commercially available IFN-γ ELISpot assays (T-Track CMV and T-SPOT.CMV) and an IFN-γ ELISA (QuantiFERON-CMV). Currently, there is no study comparing these three assays. The assays were performed in 56 liver transplant recipients at the end of antiviral prophylaxis and one month thereafter. In CMV high- or intermediate-risk patients the two ELISpot assays showed significant correlation (p < 0.0001, r > 0.6) but the correlation of the ELISpot assays with QuantiFERON-CMV was weaker. Results of both ELISpot assays were similarly predictive of protection from CMV-DNAemia ≥500 copies/mL [CMV pp65 T-SPOT.CMV at the end of prophylaxis: area under curve (AUC) = 0.744, cut-off 142 spot forming units (SFU), sensitivity set to 100%, specificity 46%; CMV IE-1 T-Track CMV at month 1: AUC = 0.762, cut-off 3.5 SFU, sensitivity set to 100%, specificity 59%]. The QuantiFERON-CMV assay was inferior, reaching a specificity of 23% when setting the sensitivity to 100%. In conclusion, both CMV-specific ELISpot assays appear suitable to assess protection from CMV infection/reactivation in liver transplant recipients. MDPI 2021-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7911226/ /pubmed/33504093 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9020088 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Gliga, Smaranda
Fiedler, Melanie
Dornieden, Theresa
Achterfeld, Anne
Paul, Andreas
Horn, Peter A.
Herzer, Kerstin
Lindemann, Monika
Comparison of Three Cellular Assays to Predict the Course of CMV Infection in Liver Transplant Recipients
title Comparison of Three Cellular Assays to Predict the Course of CMV Infection in Liver Transplant Recipients
title_full Comparison of Three Cellular Assays to Predict the Course of CMV Infection in Liver Transplant Recipients
title_fullStr Comparison of Three Cellular Assays to Predict the Course of CMV Infection in Liver Transplant Recipients
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Three Cellular Assays to Predict the Course of CMV Infection in Liver Transplant Recipients
title_short Comparison of Three Cellular Assays to Predict the Course of CMV Infection in Liver Transplant Recipients
title_sort comparison of three cellular assays to predict the course of cmv infection in liver transplant recipients
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7911226/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33504093
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9020088
work_keys_str_mv AT gligasmaranda comparisonofthreecellularassaystopredictthecourseofcmvinfectioninlivertransplantrecipients
AT fiedlermelanie comparisonofthreecellularassaystopredictthecourseofcmvinfectioninlivertransplantrecipients
AT dorniedentheresa comparisonofthreecellularassaystopredictthecourseofcmvinfectioninlivertransplantrecipients
AT achterfeldanne comparisonofthreecellularassaystopredictthecourseofcmvinfectioninlivertransplantrecipients
AT paulandreas comparisonofthreecellularassaystopredictthecourseofcmvinfectioninlivertransplantrecipients
AT hornpetera comparisonofthreecellularassaystopredictthecourseofcmvinfectioninlivertransplantrecipients
AT herzerkerstin comparisonofthreecellularassaystopredictthecourseofcmvinfectioninlivertransplantrecipients
AT lindemannmonika comparisonofthreecellularassaystopredictthecourseofcmvinfectioninlivertransplantrecipients