ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2002
Comparison of eleven commercial tests for Chlamydia pneumoniae-specific immunoglobulin G in asymptomatic healthy individuals.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- Challenges in Chlamydial Serology: Insights from a Belgian and a Dutch Population Cohort.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Genetic and infectious profiles influence cerebrospinal fluid IgG abnormality in Japanese multiple sclerosis patients.PloS one · 2014Article
- High seroprevalence of Mycoplasma pneumoniae IgM in acute Q fever by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).PloS one · 2013Article
- Detection of parvovirus B19 and Chlamydophila pneumoniae in a patient with atypical sarcoidosis.Infection · 2009Article
- Article
- Evaluation and optimization of a commercial enzyme linked immunosorbent assay for detection of Chlamydophila pneumoniae IgA antibodies.BMC infectious diseases · 2008Article
- Prevalence and persistence of Chlamydia pneumoniae antibodies in healthy laboratory personnel in Finland.Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology · 2005Article
- Impact of serological methodology on assessment of the link between Chlamydia pneumoniae and vascular diseases.Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology · 2004Article
- Comparison of quantitative and semiquantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for immunoglobulin G against Chlamydophila pneumoniae to a microimmunofluorescence test for use with patients with respiratory tract infections.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2004Article
- Importance of methodology in determination of Chlamydia pneumoniae seropositivity in healthy subjects and in patients with coronary atherosclerosis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2003Article
- Detection of Chlamydia pneumoniae-specific antibodies binding to the VD2 and VD3 regions of the major outer membrane protein.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2003Article
- Characterization of the humoral immune response to Chlamydia outer membrane protein 2 in chlamydial infection.Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology · 2003Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The seroprevalence of anti-Chlamydia pneumoniae-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies is high in the adult population. Experience is required to perform a microimmunofluorescence test (MIF), the current "gold standard" for serological diagnosis, and the assay still lacks standardization. Partially automated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and enzyme immunoassays (EIAs), which are more standardized and for which the reading of results is less subjective, have been developed. The different commercially available serological tests differ in their sensitivities and specificities, depending primarily on the antigen used. Therefore, we evaluated 11 different tests (10 were species specific, 1 was genus specific) for IgG antibodies using serum samples of 80 apparently healthy volunteers. The interpretation of the results was based on the results of the gold standard, MIF: a sample was judged positive if it was positive by at least three of the four different MIFs. Based on this internal standard, we found that 71% of the samples were positive, while 8% were false positive by some tests. The correlations between the results of the different MIFs ranged from 83 to 99%, and the correlations between the results of the MIFs and the different ELISAs and EIAs ranged from 78 to 98%. Comparison of the IgG titers measured by MIF showed good agreement (r = 0.76 to 0.91). This analysis revealed that some ELISAs and EIAs fail to detect low IgG titers. The specificities of the species-specific tests varied from 95 to 100%, and the sensitivities varied from 58 to 100%. These results indicate that serological assays for the detection of anti-C. pneumoniae-specific IgG vary greatly in their sensitivities and specificities. MIF must still be considered the best method for the detection of IgG in apparently healthy subjects, but the sensitivities and specificities of new ELISAs approximate those of MIFs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.