Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12574276›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2003

Evaluation of neuraminidase enzyme assays using different substrates to measure susceptibility of influenza virus clinical isolates to neuraminidase inhibitors: report of the neuraminidase inhibitor susceptibility network.

N T Wetherall, T Trivedi, J Zeller, C Hodges-Savola, J L McKimm-Breschkin, M Zambon, F G Hayden

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing papers in PubMed
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

85 citing papers in PubMed, 205 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

N T WetherallViroMed Laboratories, Inc, Minnetonka, Minnesota, USA.
T Trivedi
J Zeller
C Hodges-Savola
J L McKimm-Breschkin
M Zambon
F G Hayden
GlaxoSmithKline (India) · INHealth Sciences and Nutrition · AUUniversity of Virginia · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increasing use of influenza virus neuraminidase (NA) inhibitors (NIs) necessitates the development of reliable methods for assessing the NI susceptibility of clinical isolates. We evaluated three NA inhibition assays against a panel of five clinical isolates each of influenza virus A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B strains and four viruses with a defined resistance genotype (R292K, H274Y, R152K, and E119V). For fluorometric enzyme assay (FA) 1 (FA-1), 2'-(4-methylumbelliferyl)-alpha-D-N-acetylneuraminic acid (MUNANA) at 100 microM was used as the substrate, with pretitration of the virus input. For FA-2, MUNANA at 200 microM was used as the substrate, with a fixed 1:10 dilution of input virus. For the chemiluminescence (CL) assay, the 1,2-dioxetane derivative of sialic acid at 100 microM was used as the substrate, with pretitration of the virus. Four different operators repeated the assays several times in a blinded fashion with both zanamivir and oseltamivir carboxylate (GS4071) to determine intra- and interassay variations. Mean 50% inhibitory concentration (IC(50)) values were lower and generally less variable with the CL assay. FA-1 displayed greater variation than the CL assay or FA-2 and the highest IC(50) values with zanamivir; FA-2 showed the highest values with oseltamivir, particularly for influenza virus B, and was more variable with zanamivir than was the CL assay. All three assays detected 40-fold or greater changes in IC(50) values for the resistant viruses with at least one drug. Mixing experiments, whereby increasing fractions (0, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100%) of NA from a known NI-resistant virus were mixed with the corresponding NI-sensitive parental NA, indicated that the resolution of IC(50) values was clearer with the CL assay than with FA-2 for two of the resistant variants (R152K and E119V). The FA and CL methods were reliable for the detection of NI resistance, but all assays have certain limitations. Based on reproducibility, ease of automation, time required for the assay, and greater sensitivity, the CL assay was selected for future susceptibility testing of influenza virus isolates circulating globally.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, ViralEnzyme InhibitorsHumansInhibitory Concentration 50Microbial Sensitivity TestsNeuraminidaseOrthomyxoviridaeSubstrate SpecificityEnzyme InhibitorsNeuraminidase

Identifiers

PMID12574276
PMCPMC149673
OpenAlexW2138111668

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.