ArticleClinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology2002
Performance of three microimmunofluorescence assays for detection of Chlamydia pneumoniae immunoglobulin M, G, and A antibodies.
Article in Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Randomised placebo controlled multicentre trial to assess short term clarithromycin for patients with stable coronary heart disease: CLARICOR trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2006Trial
- Serodiagnosis of Chlamydia pneumoniae infection using three inclusion membrane proteins.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2010Article
- Evaluation and optimization of a commercial enzyme linked immunosorbent assay for detection of Chlamydophila pneumoniae IgA antibodies.BMC infectious diseases · 2008Article
- 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
- Interlaboratory reliability of microimmunofluorescence test for measurement of Chlamydia pneumoniae-specific immunoglobulin A and G antibody titers.Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology · 2004Article
- Measurement of Chlamydia pneumoniae-specific immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies by the microimmunofluorescence (MIF) method: comparison of seven fluorescein-labeled anti-human IgA conjugates in an in-house MIF test using one commercial MIF and one enzyme immunoassay kit.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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The microimmunofluorescence (MIF) test is considered the "gold standard" for laboratory diagnosis of acute and chronic Chlamydia pneumoniae infection. The performance of a MIF test based on C. pneumoniae antigen from Washington Research Foundation (WRF) was compared with those of assays from Labsystems (LAB) and MRL Diagnostics (MRL) by investigation of sera from three groups of patients: group I, 83 sera from 28 patients with atypical pneumonia; group II, 37 sera from 16 patients with acute C. pneumoniae or Chlamydia psittaci respiratory tract infection confirmed by PCR or culture; group III, 100 sera from 100 persons enrolled in the Copenhagen City Heart Study. The accordance among the results of the WRF assay and the two commercial assays was excellent for the immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibody detection rate (98%). The accordance in detection rates for IgG and IgA antibodies in sera from patients with acute infections was acceptable (87 and 88%), and in sera from group III, it was excellent (95 and 97%). The determinations of endpoint titers were reproducible with <1 dilution step difference for all three methods, except that the mean IgM antibody titer found by the LAB assay was almost 2 dilution steps higher than that found by the other two methods. Although the three assays use different C. pneumoniae strains as antigens, the detection rates and IgG and IgA endpoint titers were similar. The difference in endpoint titers of IgM antibodies is of no major concern, as the diagnosis of acute C. pneumoniae infection rests on the presence of IgM antibodies, not on their level.
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.