|
|
|
|
LEADER |
03708nam a2200757Ia 4500 |
001 |
10.1002-jcla.23749 |
008 |
220427s2021 CNT 000 0 und d |
020 |
|
|
|a 08878013 (ISSN)
|
245 |
1 |
0 |
|a Contribution of the Toxoplasma ICT IgG IgM® test in determining the immune status of pregnant women against toxoplasmosis
|
260 |
|
0 |
|b John Wiley and Sons Inc
|c 2021
|
856 |
|
|
|z View Fulltext in Publisher
|u https://doi.org/10.1002/jcla.23749
|
520 |
3 |
|
|a Background: An immunochromatography technology (ICT) rapid diagnostic test, the Toxoplasma ICT IgG-IgM®, was recently developed. Our aim was to study its contribution to establish accurately the Toxoplasma immune status in Tunisian pregnant women using Western blot (WB) Toxo II IgG® as a reference technique. Methods: Thirty-nine sera were selected for the study from among 2,615 which were already tested by IgG and IgM ELISA. They displayed equivocal IgG titres (4.4–9 IU/ml) in absence of IgM (19 sera) or IgM anti-Toxoplasma antibodies in absence of IgG (titre <4.4 IU/ml) (20 sera). All these sera were additionally tested by WB Toxo II IgG®. Results: Immunochromatography technology Sensitivity in the detection either of low IgG titres in absence of IgM or of specific anti-Toxoplasma IgM was 100%. Only one serum with equivocal IgG titre by ELISA and negative with Toxo II IgG® test revealed positive in ICT. However, this serum showed a P30 band in WB analysis. On the other hand, three sera positive in ELISA IgM and negative in ELISA IgG revealed positive in ICT and negative in WB Toxo II IgG®, the reference test. Conclusion: Results confirm the high sensitivity of Toxoplasma ICT IgG-IgM® in detecting both specific anti-Toxoplasma IgG and IgM, and highlight the usefulness of this rapid test as a first or second-line Toxoplasma serological test in pregnant women. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a affinity chromatography
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a antibody titer
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Article
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a blood
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Chromatography, Affinity
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a clinical article
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a controlled study
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a diagnostic accuracy
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a diagnostic test accuracy study
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a enzyme linked immunosorbent assay
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a female
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Female
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a follow up
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Follow-Up Studies
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a human
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Humans
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a immunoaffinity chromatography
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a immunoglobulin G
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Immunoglobulin G
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a immunoglobulin G antibody
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a immunoglobulin M
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Immunoglobulin M
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a immunoglobulin M antibody
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a immunology
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a intermethod comparison
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a parasite immunity
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a predictive value
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Predictive Value of Tests
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a pregnancy
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a pregnancy
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Pregnancy
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a pregnant women
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a procedures
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a sensitivity and specificity
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Toxoplasma
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Toxoplasma
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Toxoplasma ICT IgG-IgM®
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a toxoplasmosis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a toxoplasmosis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a toxoplasmosis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Toxoplasmosis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Tunisia
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Tunisian
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a western blot Toxo II IgG®
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Western blotting
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Aïda, B.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Hedia, B.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Karim, A.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Nesrine, I.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Olfa, S.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Rania, M.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Rym, B.-A.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Yasmine, K.
|e author
|
773 |
|
|
|t Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis
|