Cargando…

A performance comparison between fluorescent immunoassay and immunochromatography for rapid dengue detection in clinical specimens

Dengue virus (DENV 1–4) infection has been a global health threat where no specific treatment is currently available. Therefore, a rapid and accurate diagnosis is critical for an appropriate management as it could reduce the burden of severe clinical manifestation. Currently, dengue immunochromatogr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ruchusatsawat, Kriangsak, Benjamungkalarak, Tanawat, Phunikom, Naruphong, Vateh, Husneeyah, Kowitdamrong, Ekasit, Wongpiyabovorn, Jongkonnee, Boonyasuppayakorn, Siwaporn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9568653/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36241653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21581-x
_version_ 1784809682911625216
author Ruchusatsawat, Kriangsak
Benjamungkalarak, Tanawat
Phunikom, Naruphong
Vateh, Husneeyah
Kowitdamrong, Ekasit
Wongpiyabovorn, Jongkonnee
Boonyasuppayakorn, Siwaporn
author_facet Ruchusatsawat, Kriangsak
Benjamungkalarak, Tanawat
Phunikom, Naruphong
Vateh, Husneeyah
Kowitdamrong, Ekasit
Wongpiyabovorn, Jongkonnee
Boonyasuppayakorn, Siwaporn
author_sort Ruchusatsawat, Kriangsak
collection PubMed
description Dengue virus (DENV 1–4) infection has been a global health threat where no specific treatment is currently available. Therefore, a rapid and accurate diagnosis is critical for an appropriate management as it could reduce the burden of severe clinical manifestation. Currently, dengue immunochromatography (IC) is commonly used to primarily differentiate acute febrile illnesses. Fluorescent immunoassay (FIA) utilized a highly sensitive detection system and claimed 70–100% sensitivity and 83.5–91.7% specificity for dengue infection in a preliminary report. This report recruited samples with acute febrile illnesses sent for dengue screening and tested IC and FIA in parallel. The performance of both tests was verified by a definitive diagnosis retrieved from combinatorial reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for IgM and IgG confirmation tests. Results showed that the viral nonstructural protein (NS1) performance of FIA was slightly higher than IC with the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, agreement, kappa, and its standard error at 79.11, 92.28, 86.81, 87.31, 352 (87.13%), 0.725 ± 0.035, respectively; whereas those of the IC were at 76.58, 92.28, 86.43, 85.98, 348 (86.14%), 0.703 ± 0.037, respectively. Moreover, the IgM and IgG performance of FIA had higher specificity, PPV, and agreement than the IgM IC performance, suggesting that the FIA was more specific but less sensitive for antibody detection. No correlation was observed in IgM and IgG levels of ELISA and FIA assays. In conclusion, the FIA and IC were highly sensitive, specific, and substantially agreed in NS1 detection but moderately agreed in IgM and IgG detection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9568653
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95686532022-10-16 A performance comparison between fluorescent immunoassay and immunochromatography for rapid dengue detection in clinical specimens Ruchusatsawat, Kriangsak Benjamungkalarak, Tanawat Phunikom, Naruphong Vateh, Husneeyah Kowitdamrong, Ekasit Wongpiyabovorn, Jongkonnee Boonyasuppayakorn, Siwaporn Sci Rep Article Dengue virus (DENV 1–4) infection has been a global health threat where no specific treatment is currently available. Therefore, a rapid and accurate diagnosis is critical for an appropriate management as it could reduce the burden of severe clinical manifestation. Currently, dengue immunochromatography (IC) is commonly used to primarily differentiate acute febrile illnesses. Fluorescent immunoassay (FIA) utilized a highly sensitive detection system and claimed 70–100% sensitivity and 83.5–91.7% specificity for dengue infection in a preliminary report. This report recruited samples with acute febrile illnesses sent for dengue screening and tested IC and FIA in parallel. The performance of both tests was verified by a definitive diagnosis retrieved from combinatorial reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for IgM and IgG confirmation tests. Results showed that the viral nonstructural protein (NS1) performance of FIA was slightly higher than IC with the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, agreement, kappa, and its standard error at 79.11, 92.28, 86.81, 87.31, 352 (87.13%), 0.725 ± 0.035, respectively; whereas those of the IC were at 76.58, 92.28, 86.43, 85.98, 348 (86.14%), 0.703 ± 0.037, respectively. Moreover, the IgM and IgG performance of FIA had higher specificity, PPV, and agreement than the IgM IC performance, suggesting that the FIA was more specific but less sensitive for antibody detection. No correlation was observed in IgM and IgG levels of ELISA and FIA assays. In conclusion, the FIA and IC were highly sensitive, specific, and substantially agreed in NS1 detection but moderately agreed in IgM and IgG detection. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9568653/ /pubmed/36241653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21581-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Ruchusatsawat, Kriangsak
Benjamungkalarak, Tanawat
Phunikom, Naruphong
Vateh, Husneeyah
Kowitdamrong, Ekasit
Wongpiyabovorn, Jongkonnee
Boonyasuppayakorn, Siwaporn
A performance comparison between fluorescent immunoassay and immunochromatography for rapid dengue detection in clinical specimens
title A performance comparison between fluorescent immunoassay and immunochromatography for rapid dengue detection in clinical specimens
title_full A performance comparison between fluorescent immunoassay and immunochromatography for rapid dengue detection in clinical specimens
title_fullStr A performance comparison between fluorescent immunoassay and immunochromatography for rapid dengue detection in clinical specimens
title_full_unstemmed A performance comparison between fluorescent immunoassay and immunochromatography for rapid dengue detection in clinical specimens
title_short A performance comparison between fluorescent immunoassay and immunochromatography for rapid dengue detection in clinical specimens
title_sort performance comparison between fluorescent immunoassay and immunochromatography for rapid dengue detection in clinical specimens
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9568653/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36241653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21581-x
work_keys_str_mv AT ruchusatsawatkriangsak aperformancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT benjamungkalaraktanawat aperformancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT phunikomnaruphong aperformancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT vatehhusneeyah aperformancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT kowitdamrongekasit aperformancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT wongpiyabovornjongkonnee aperformancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT boonyasuppayakornsiwaporn aperformancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT ruchusatsawatkriangsak performancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT benjamungkalaraktanawat performancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT phunikomnaruphong performancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT vatehhusneeyah performancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT kowitdamrongekasit performancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT wongpiyabovornjongkonnee performancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens
AT boonyasuppayakornsiwaporn performancecomparisonbetweenfluorescentimmunoassayandimmunochromatographyforrapiddenguedetectioninclinicalspecimens