Maturation of immunoglobulin G avidity after rubella vaccination studied by an enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (Avidity-ELISA) and by haemolysis typing

Two tests were introduced recently for assessment of the avidity of rubella immunoglobulin antibodies. In the quantitative test—avidity—enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)—IgG antibodies obtained from individuals shortly after primary infection with rubella virus are distinguished from those with past immunity by their antigen-elution characteristics. This method uses agents that disrupt hydrophobic bonds in proteins [Kamoun PP (1988): Denaturation of globular proteins by urea: Breakdown of hydrophobic bonds? Trends in Biological Sciences 13:424–425.]. In the semiquantitative, presumptive test—haemolysis typing—the lowavidity rubella-IgG antibodies are distinguished from the high-avidity antibodies by the quality of their haemolytic zones in a radial haemolysis test. In the present study, both tests were applied to sera taken before and after vaccination with two different strains (Cendehill or RA 27/3) of live attenuated rubella virus. It was found that after vaccination of previously nonimmune subjects, IgG synthesized during the first 2 months had a very low avidity; IgG avidity increased dramatically during the subsequent 4 months and less markedly between 6 and 12 months after vaccination. On the contrary, the initially high IgG avidity of previous immune vaccinees remained at an elevated level postvaccination. These results provide a basis for identification of recent primary rubella virus infections, or vaccination reactions, by the avidity of specific IgG and also for their separation from rubella reinfections.     

Persistent rubella-specific IgM reactivity in the absence of recent primary rubella and rubella reinfection.

Between two and seven sera from cases of persistent detection of rubella-specific IgM for periods in excess of 2.5 months, but in the absence of recent primary rubella or rubella reinfection, were examined for rheumatoid factor, heterophile antibody, and IgM reactivity against toxoplasma and a number of viruses. The relative avidity of the rubella-specific IgG1 has been assessed in all the sera by two methods. None of the sera contained rheumatoid factor or heterophile antibody, nor did any contain detectable concentrations of IgM specific for any of the panel of antigens apart from five sera which contained low concentrations of IgM specific for some coxsackieviruses B. No sera were positive for low avidity specific IgG1 although three did give equivocal results with one avidity test and one gave equivocal results with the second avidity test.     

Altered hemolysis in single radial hemolysis from a single serum sample as an indicator of recent primary rubella virus infection

The quality of hemolysis in the single radial hemolysis (SRH) test was observed to be altered in a small proportion (5.7%) of Sera (N = 9628) studied for rubella antibodies. Three different types of altered hemolysis were identified. Two of these types, the “soft margin” (SM) or the “soft zone” (SZ), occurred singly or in combination in 97% of paired sera (N = 321) taken 3–30 days after primary rubella infection (diagnostic seroconversion). For comparison, diagnostic inercases of rubella antibodies (N = 77), including both primary and reinfections, contained these types of altered hemolysis in 80% of the cases. Of the remaining 20% of the samples (N = 15) rubella antibodies of IgM class were looked for in seven cases but not found. After primary rubella, SZ was always present in the first serum sample and disappeared rapidly within 20 days while SM persisted longer. The predictive value of the different types of hemolysis was estimated from 96 primary sera, which had altered hemolysis. In this material, SZ was followed by a diagnostic increase of antibodies in 87% of the cases; the prognostic value of the SM was significant but lower. These data show that the appearance of SM or SZ in a single serum sample is a useful marker of recent primary rubella. On the other hand, a normal hemolysis in SRH can be used to exclude recent primary rubella, but not reinfection, with a high degree of probability.     

Recent rubella virus infection indicated by a low avidity of specific IgG

Rubella-specific IgG in acute-phase sera produces a characteristically altered zone termed soft hemolysis in the radial hemolysis test. Here, the soft hemolysis was shown to be a product of the purified IgG₁ subclass isolated from acute-phase sera. In contrast, ordinary hemolysis was produced by IgG₁ isolated from sera of previous rubella immunity, indicating that the subclass composition of IgG was not involved in the mechanism of soft hemolysis. A novel type of solid-phase immunoassay was developed for the avidity of virus-specific IgG. Acute-phase IgG (with soft hemolysis) was dissociated from rubella antigen in an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) test by hydrogen-bond disrupting agents under conditions where IgG of previous immunity (showing ordinary hemolysis) remained mostly bound. These data suggest that the mechanism of soft hemolysis is the avidity of rubella-specific IgG. The new quantitative avidity EIA was tested with sera taken from 169 subjects. Recent infection could be shown from sera taken weeks or months after primary rubella.     

Diagnosis of recent primary rubella virus infections: significance of glycoprotein-based IgM serology, IgG avidity and immunoblot analysis

Reliable serodiagnosis of rubella virus (RV) infections requires discrimination of specific IgM induced by primary rubella from persistent, reactivated or non-specific IgM reactivity. Sera from 130 pregnant women with recent or past RV infection/vaccination, persistent IgM or negative rubella serology, 26 patients with other acute infections and 5 patients with rheumatoid factor-positivity were analyzed for RV-specific IgM by ELISA coated with whole-virus lysate or native glycoprotein, followed by determination of IgG avidity and E2-specific IgG using lysate-coated ELISA and non-reducing immunoblot. Compared to a reference μ-capture IgM ELISA, the sensitivity for diagnosing recent rubella infection/vaccination was 90.0% and 100% for the lysate-based and glycoprotein-based IgM ELISA, respectively. With respect to women with past RV infections or negative histories of RV infection/vaccination, both assays were 97.5-100% specific, whereas for patients with other acute infections the glycoprotein substrate provided a specificity of 92.3% compared to only 80.8% using whole-virus antigen. Analyzing anti-RV IgG avidity and anti-E2 IgG reactivity allowed the time point of primary infection to be determined unambiguously in >86% of samples. In conclusion, using RV glycoprotein antigen improves the specificity of indirect IgM ELISA. In cases of RV-specific IgM reactivity, recent primary rubella infection can be confirmed or excluded efficiently by specific IgG avidity and immunoblot analysis.     

Hemagglutination inhibition,single radial hemolysis,and ELISA tests for the detection of IgG and IgM to rubella virus

Hemagglutination inhibition (HI), single radial hemolysis (SRH) and enzyme-linked immuno sorbent assay (ELISA), performed with commercial antigen and reagents are described and were compared in the three distinct situations that require rubella antibody detection. Determination of immunity status was carried out on 156 sera. A degree of correlation > 0.9 was found when comparing the three methods. Analysis of a further 74 sera, from 31 primary infections and three congenital syndromes, was performed to compare the occurrence of the various classes of antibodies in the three tests: HI test and IgM-ELISA become positive the day after the rash, whereas SRH test is not positive before the sixth day. From our limited study bearing on a total of 230 sera, each test has a precise assignment. For the determination of immunity status, SRH is simpler, faster, and inexpensive; absence or evidence of past infection can be unequivocally obtained especially in cases of low (1:10, 1:20) residual immunity. In the seriodiagnosis of a rubella rash, SRH alone, due to the delayed rise in antibody titers, will demonstrate a complete seroconversion with a first serum collected up to the fifth day of the eruption. In case of absence of an early serum, of primary infection in a pregnant woman, of a newborn with suspicion of congenital syndrome, the measurement of rubella specific IgM is best obtained with ELISA, a procedure less time-consuming than HI following centrifugal, chromatographic, or electrophoretic separation. And “light” (8 S) RF with SRH test is discussed. Interference of IgM Rheumatoid Factor (RF) with IgM ELISA and IgG RF with SRH test is discussed.     

Rubella-specific IgG1 avidity: a comparison of methods

Two methods of determining the avidity of specific IgG1 were compared with sera from different categories of rubella infection. Both methods were based on an antiglobulin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. In one method the absorbances were compared with and without diethylamine (DEA) in the serum diluent over a range of serum dilutions and the difference between the dilution curves measured (DEA-shift). In the other, the absorbances at a single serum dilution were compared with and without urea in the wash fluid used after the antigen/serum incubation (avidity index). Various concentrations of DEA were also assessed in the avidity-index method, as this method is simpler to perform. The DEA-shift method was shown to be more sensitive for diagnosing recent primary rubella or immunization by demonstrating specific IgG1 of low avidity. The avidity-index method, however, was more specific when sera from cases of reinfection or non-specific rubella IgM reactivity were tested. 35 mM DEA was found to be the optimal concentration of DEA when DEA was substituted for urea in the avidity index method.     

Assessment of IgM enzyme immunoassay and IgG avidity assay for distinguishing between primary and secondary immune response to rubella vaccine

The primary test for the laboratory confirmation of rubella is IgM serology. It is important to distinguish IgM reactivity caused by primary infection from that caused by reinfection or persistence, especially in pregnant women; as termination of pregnancy is considered when primary rubella is diagnosed during the first trimester.

In this study, the performance of rubella IgM enzyme immunoassay (IgM-EIA) and rubella IgG avidity assay were compared using well-defined panels of sera from persons vaccinated against rubella and commercial rubella IgM and IgG enzyme immunoassay kits (Dade Behring, Marburg, Germany).

The sensitivity and specificity of rubella IgM-EIA were found to be 77.4 and 97.9%, respectively, while the results for rubella IgG avidity assay were 100 and 100%. IgG avidity assay showed higher positive and negative predictive values than the IgM-EIA (100 and 100% compare to 96.9 and 82.9%).

In conclusion, the rubella IgG avidity assay is more sensitive and specific than IgM-EIA for differential detection of primary rubella infection from rubella reinfection.     

Clinical validation of an antibody-capture anti-rubella IgM-ELISA

An antibody-capture IgM-ELISA using monoclonal antibodies for conjugate was subjected to clinical validation with respect to sensitivity and specificity. In 103 serum specimens, known to contain anti-rubella IgM by a sucrose density gradient method, IgM was found by the ELISA in 99 sera. In a second study, 16 out of 17 acute rubella infections were detected by the IgM-ELISA. In 17 out of 17 vaccinees, a specific IgM response could be demonstrated.

Specificity of the antibody-capture ELISA was found to be high; no interference was seen in 60 rheumatoid-factor positive sera, in 100 highly positive IgG sera or 10 sera with anti-CMV IgM, Only one out of 100 sera with heterophile antibodies showed a positive response.

In acute rubella infections, IgM was shown to be detectable from 1 to 4 days after onset of illness up to about 12 wk, with peak values at about 1 wk after onset.     

Evaluation of commercial methods of enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for the measurement of rubella-specific IgM

Four commercial EIA methods for measuring rubella-specific IgM (three indirect tests and one anti-mu capture test) were evaluated, using sucrose gradient centrifugation and hemagglutination inhibition as the reference method. Evaluation was conducted with the aid of four serum panels, including 53 primary rubella cases, 30 healthy pregnant women, 21 sera positive for rheumatoid factor(s) (RF) and 35 sera from 29 cases of heterophil-positive infectious mononucleosis with EBV-specific IgM detected by immunofluorescence. All EIA methods were more sensitive than the reference method when applied to very early samples (1-5 days post-exanthema) and no differences in sensitivity were found between them. On the other hand, we observed a significant incidence of false-positive results if an indirect EIA method is applied to RF-positive samples. False positivity is significantly reduced, but not totally eliminated, when samples are preabsorbed with anti-human IgG serum and, in all cases, the absorbance values obtained were low. In contrast, there were no false-positive results using an anti-mu capture method, even in sera from cases of infectious mononucleosis. The basis for choosing between an indirect method and an anti-mu capture method for the diagnosis of congenital and post-natal rubella virus infection is discussed.     

Evaluation of a simplified sucrose gradient method for the detection of rubella-specific IgM in routine diagnostic practice

Rubella-specific IgM was measured in a single fraction of serum from a sucrose density gradient. Haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) tests were performed on paired aliquots of the fraction untreated and after treatment with 2- mercaptoethanol, dilutions of the aliquots being incubated over night with rubella antigen before the addition of red cells. Of 822 sera tested, specific IgM was found in 249, but not in 492. When first tested, the remaining 81 sera gave unsatisfactory results because of contamination of the IgM fraction with IgG (6.0%), probable aggregation of IgG (3.5%), or the persistence of chick red cell agglutinins (0.4%). Tests were performed on 134 patients with rubella confirmed by a rise of HAI antibodies. Rubella-specific IgM was found at a titre of more than eight in the sera taken from 62 of 64 patients between 10 and 29 days after the onset of the rash but in only one of the sera taken between 80 and 119 days, and in none taken later. However, specific IgM was still to be found at lower titre in the sera of 13 patients collected between 80 and 162 days after the onset of the illness. In routine diagnostic tests over three years on the serum from 479 patients with suspected acquired rubella, specific IgM was found at a titre of more than eight in 51 patients and in only 10 instances (2.1%) did a lower level pose a problem in interpretation.     

Significance of avidity and immunoblot analysis for rubella IgM-positive serum samples in pregnant women

A total of 512 IgM-positive serum samples from 449 pregnant women referred by microbiologists and medical laboratories for additional testing and final interpretation were collected over a 3-year period. Employment of an IgM capture enzyme immunoassay (EIA) confirmed only 31% of the initial EIA-IgM-positive samples. In order to discriminate acute rubella virus infections, which are associated with increased risk of fetal infection and embryopathy, from persistent or non-specific IgM, IgG avidity index and the presence of IgG with specificity to rubella virus E2 glycoprotein was determined by Western immunoblot. In only six patients (1.3%), a primary infection with rubella virus was diagnosed on the basis of IgM positivity, low avidity IgG, absence of E2-specific IgG in immunoblot concordant with clinical findings as well as consistent changes in follow-up samples. The serological results were not compatible with rubella re-infection. The infection status in 14 patients (3.1%) remained inconclusive even when both avidity assay and immunoblot were used, while restriction to either test did not allow a conclusive interpretation in 11.6% of patients. The use of both assays is clearly better, and therefore, recommended in IgM-positive samples.     

Validation of an in-house assay for cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin G (CMV IgG) avidity and relationship of avidity to CMV IgM levels

Measurement of cytomegalovirus (CMV)-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) avidity has proven to be a powerful tool for distinguishing primary from nonprimary CMV infection. An in-house enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for measuring CMV IgG avidity was validated using 84 sera from pregnant women who had recently seroconverted following primary CMV infection and 74 sera from individuals with past CMV infection (IgG-positive and IgM-negative profile). Of the 84 sera from pregnant women, 73 sera were collected within 120 days of the last IgG-negative sample, and 72 of these 73 sera (99%) exhibited an avidity index (AI) of <50%. In contrast, 71 of 74 (96%) sera from individuals with past CMV infection exhibited CMV AI values of > 60%. Thus, low avidity in the in-house ELISA was defined as an AI of < or = 50%, whereas high avidity was defined as an AI of > or = 60%. In additional studies, the relationship between CMV IgG avidity and CMV IgM levels was examined using 64 CMV IgG-positive sera (time since seroconversion unknown) exhibiting equivocal or positive results in a CMV IgM capture ELISA (Diamedix). Of these 64 sera, 29 exhibited IgM index values of > or = 3.0, and 27 of these 29 (93%) exhibited low IgG avidity. A similar trend was observed when a subset of these 64 sera (n = 48) was tested in another CMV IgM capture ELISA (Trinity); of 18 sera with IgM index values of > or = 3.0, 17 (94%) exhibited low IgG avidity. These findings demonstrate the validity of an in-house ELISA for CMV IgG avidity and further show that strong reactivity of CMV IgG-positive sera in either of two CMV IgM capture assays is a reliable indicator of low CMV IgG avidity, and thus, recent CMV infection.     

Improvement of cytomegalovirus avidity testing by adjusting the concentration of CMV-specific IgG in test samples.

BACKGROUND: Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most common cause of viral intrauterine infection. Primary CMV infection in early pregnancy bears a high risk of fetal damage. Accurate measurement of CMV-specific IgG avidity may help to improve the serodiagnosis of CMV-infected women by determining the time of infection and fetal outcome. OBJECTIVES: To study the performance of the CMV avidity assay with the fully automated Vidas analyzer (bioMérieux) as a function of the concentration of CMV-specific IgG present in the serum sample. STUDY DESIGN: Eighty-two serum samples were investigated from 3 clinical scenarios: 18 individuals with sera negative for CMV-specific IgG and IgM (control group), 20 pregnant women (44 samples) containing CMV-specific IgG- and IgM-antibodies suggesting acute or recent primary infection and 20 patients with evidence of past infection (CMV-IgG positive and CMV-IgM negative). RESULTS: In the group with presumed acute or recent primary infection 12 of 44 sera had CMV-specific IgG values above 100 arbitrary units (AU, bioMérieux)/ml and in these cases an increase in AI was measurable upon dilution of the serum sample. In two cases, AI's were shifted towards or above the cut-off value of AI>or=0.8, indicative of past infection. Dilution of sera which were CMV-specific IgM positive and had specific IgG concentrations of 相似文献   

Subclass distribution of IgG and IgA responses to rubella virus in man

Monoclonal anti-subclass antibodies were used in a micro-ELISA method to determine rubella-specific IgG subclass antibodies in serum from 22 subjects who had acute rubella or had been vaccinated, from 10 infants with congenital rubella, and in serum and synovial fluid samples from 21 patients with chronic arthritis. In nearly all samples IgG1 was the only type of IgG antibody detected. In acute infections it was present within 10 days of the onset of the rash. IgG4 antibody was detected in sera from two immune individuals. Rubella-specific IgA1 subclass antibody was detected by the same technique in sera from 6 of 12 subjects with acute rubella as early as 3 days but not later than 28 days after the appearance of the rash.     

Persistence of specific IgM and low avidity specific IgG1 following primary rubella.

Persistence of specific IgM in sera following primary rubella infection was compared with the maturation of the specific IgG1 response. 206 sera, from 171 patients with primary rubella, taken 1 day to 2.5 years after onset of illness, were tested. Rubella-specific IgM was detected by M-antibody capture radioimmunoassay in 100% of sera taken 15-28 days after onset, but in only 9% taken 3-4 months after onset. However, using the diethylamine (DEA) shift value (DSV) method, low avidity specific IgG1 was detected in 91% sera taken at 3-4 months and at 5-7 months 21% of sera remained positive. Using an avidity index method, with urea in the wash buffer, none of the sera were positive for low avidity specific IgG1 beyond 3 months after onset. With DEA in the wash buffer, the number of sera positive rose to 38% at 3-4 months. Thus, the DSV method for detecting low avidity specific IgG1 is a useful additional test for confirming or refuting a diagnosis of primary rubella and is of particular value for assessing pregnant patients.     

Comparison of various serological methods and diagnostic kits for the detection of acute, recent, and previous rubella infection, vaccination, and congenital infections

The antibody development after natural rubella infection and rubella vaccination has been followed in 802 sera from 493 patients and 71 sera from 22 vaccinees. Also examined were 67 sera from 28 infants with rubella embryopathy and sera from 50 children with presumed prenatal infection. In addition, 777 sera from 641 patients tested for routine rubella diagnosis were studied. Anamnestic information was available from all these patients. These sera were assayed for IgM antibody detection by sucrose density gradient (SDG), the commercial ELISAs (Enzygnost IgM and Rubazyme M), and the non-commercial anti-my-hemadsorption immunosorbent technique (HIT). For the determination of IgG antibodies the hemagglutination inhibition test (HAI), the commercial ELISAs (Enzygnost IgG, Rubazyme), and a single radial hemolysis test (SRH) were used. The SDG and HIT were less sensitive for IgM antibody detection than the two ELISAs, particularly when IgM concentrations were low. In total 26.5% of the IgM results with the newer tests were discordant with SDG, but only 0.5-1.3% of these results were not explicable when the clinical data was considered. Problems were encountered with all IgM assay systems used. For the detection of rubella antibodies after acute infection and vaccination the ELISA Enzygnost IgG was as sensitive as the HAI whereas the ELISA Rubazyme and SRH detected antibodies with some delay. Corresponding results with all tests were found more than 25 days after acute infection and more than 50 days after vaccination. All methods can be used for detection of antibodies in infants with rubella embryopathy. The results of this study suggest that certain combinations of tests can be used for the reliable detection of rubella infection.     

A new approach to differentiate recent vs chronic Toxoplasma infection: avidity ELISA in Toxoplasma serology

The diagnosis of toxoplamosis during pregnancy is based on maternal serology, due to the asymptomatic nature of the disease. Detection of specific IgM although is the method used all over the world to detect acute infection, persistence of IgM for long periods poses problems in distinguishing acute from chronic infection, which is of crucial importance in pregnancy. Avidity ELISA is a method recently developed to distinguish IgG antibodies developed at an early stage of infection from those that reflect past immunity. The avidity assay uses protein-denaturing agents and is a modification of an ELISA. The usefulness of this technique was tested on sera of 113 pregnant women screened for Toxoplasma specific IgG/IgM antibodies. Nine of the sixteen sera positive for IgM/IgG antibodies and three sera positive for IgG alone were subjected to avidity ELISA. Only three sera were positive for low avidity IgG indicative of recent infection. All the three sera positive for IgG alone showed high avidity.     

Simultaneous IgM reactivity by EIA against more than one virus in measles, parvovirus B19 and rubella infection.

BACKGROUND: A clinical diagnosis of rash-causing infections is not always possible and reliance has to be placed on serological evidence of infection, especially on the presence of specific immunoglobulin (Ig)M. However, despite the use of modern serological methods and validated commercial kits, reports appear in the literature of simultaneous IgM reactivity against more than one virus in cases of Epstein Barr virus, rubella, cytomegalovirus, human parvovirus B19 (HPV B19) and measles infections, all with implications for the pregnant woman. OBJECTIVES: We decided to evaluate the extent of the problem in rubella, measles and HPV B19 infections in a routine diagnostic laboratory. STUDY DESIGN: We tested sera from cases with initial clinical and serological evidence of infection with measles, HPV B19 or rubella for evidence of simultaneous IgM reactivity against more than one virus. We confirmed primary infections with specific-IgG antibody avidity tests, and subjected sera with IgM reactivity against more than one virus to avidity tests to identify which, if any, of the three viruses was the cause of the primary infection. Groups of monoreactive IgM sera were randomly selected from the presented sera to demonstrate that the avidity of the IgG specific for the other two viruses would be of high avidity compared with the low avidity of the IgG specific for the virus against which specific IgM had been detected. RESULTS: Our results confirm that simultaneous IgM reactivity against more than one virus does occur in these three infections, and that this is unlikely to be caused by the presence of rheumatoid factor. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of seroconversion, reliance on specific IgM results alone for diagnosis of these infections should be avoided and tests such as specific IgG antibody avidity should also be employed. The simultaneous occurrence of IgM reactivity against more than one virus is also important for epidemiological and surveillance reasons as the widespread use of the mumps, measles and rubella vaccine makes its impact on the population. Falsely diagnosed cases of apparent measles or rubella could throw into question the efficacy of the vaccine.     

Development of a rapid and convenient method for determination of rubella virus-specific immunoglobulin G avidity

We describe here a rapid and semiautomated method for the determination of rubella virus immunoglobulin G (IgG) avidity with the VIDAS instrument. A total of 153 serum samples from persons with naturally acquired rubella virus infections (n = 98), from vaccinated persons (n = 44), and from patients with autoantibodies (n = 11) were included in this study. The rubella virus-specific IgG avidity assay we developed for the VIDAS instrument was evaluated by comparison with an in-house method. Results obtained with the VIDAS instrument allow considering this method valuable to help confirm or exclude acute primary infection or recent vaccination.