ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2011
Evaluation of four commercial systems for the diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus primary infections.
Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Elecsys and Liaison immunoassays to determine Epstein-Barr virus serological status using further diagnostic approaches to clarify discrepant results.Journal of medical virology · 2023Article
- Survey of Anti-Pathogen Antibody Levels in Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.Proteomes · 2022Article
- Acute Cytomegalovirus Illness in an Immunocompetent Adult Causing Intravascular Hemolysis and Suspected Hemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis.Case reports in infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Preliminary evaluation of a candidate international reference for Epstein-Barr virus capsid antigen immunoglobulin A in China.Infectious agents and cancer · 2020Article
- Efficacy of Chemiluminescence Immunoassays on VCA-IgA and EBNA1-IgA Antibodies of Epstein-Barr Virus in Diagnosing Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.Journal of Cancer · 2020Article
- Diagnostic Performance and Comparative Evaluation of the Architect, Liaison, and Platelia Epstein-Barr Virus Antibody Assays.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2018Article
- Epstein-Barr Virus Epidemiology, Serology, and Genetic Variability of LMP-1 Oncogene Among Healthy Population: An Update.Frontiers in oncology · 2018Review
- Prevalence and molecular profiling of Epstein Barr virus (EBV) among healthy blood donors from different nationalities in Qatar.PloS one · 2017Article
- Application of a commercial immunoblot to define EBV IgG seroprofiles.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2015Article
- Performance of the architect EBV antibody panel for determination of Epstein-Barr virus infection stage in immunocompetent adolescents and young adults with clinical suspicion of infectious mononucleosis.Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI · 2014Article
- Evaluation of the Architect Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) viral capsid antigen (VCA) IgG, VCA IgM, and EBV nuclear antigen 1 IgG chemiluminescent immunoassays for detection of EBV antibodies and categorization of EBV infection status using immunofluorescence assays as the reference method.Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI · 2014Article
- Diverse IgG serum response to novel glycopeptide epitopes detected within immunodominant stretches of Epstein-Barr virus glycoprotein 350/220: diagnostic potential of O-glycopeptide microarrays.Glycoconjugate journal · 2013Article
- Performance of two commercially available automated immunoassays for the determination of Epstein-Barr virus serological status.Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI · 2012Article
- Serological diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus infection: Problems and solutions.World journal of virology · 2012Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare the performance of four diagnostic commercial systems for Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) serology (for IgM and IgG virus capsid antigen [VCA] and EBV nuclear antigen [EBNA] antibodies), a collection of 125 samples from clinically suspected infectious mononucleosis cases was studied. Indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) for VCA IgM and IgG antibodies and anticomplement immunofluorescence for EBNA antibodies (Meridian Bioscience Inc.) were used as reference methods. By these methods, the cases were classified EBV primary infection (presence of IgM to VCA or IgG to VCA in the absence of EBNA antibodies; n = 82), EBV past infection (presence of VCA IgG and EBNA antibodies in the absence of VCA IgM; n = 26), or no infection (negative for the three markers; n = 17). The following systems were tested: two chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs; the Liason [CLIA-L; DiaSorin] and the Immulite 2000 [CLIA-I; Siemens]), immunofiltration (IF; All.Diag), and an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA; DiaSorin). In the IgM assays, sensitivities ranged from 67.1% (ELISA) to 92.2% (CLIA-L) and specificities ranged from 93.8% (CLIA-L) to 100% (IF). In the VCA IgG assays, sensitivities varied from 79.4% (IF) to 94.4% (CLIA-I) and specificities varied from 94.4% (IF and CLIA-L) to 100% (CLIA-I and ELISA). In EBNA assays, sensitivities ranged from 78.1% (IF) to 93.8% (CLIA-I) and specificities ranged from 32.3% (CLIA-L) to 91.4% (IF). In relation to EBV profiles, the corresponding figures for sensitivity (in detecting primary infection) for IF, CLIA-L, CLIA-I, and ELISA were 92.7%, 93.8%, 89%, and 89.6%, respectively, and those for specificity (to exclude primary recent infection) were 90.7%, 94.6%, 97.7%, and 95.2%, respectively. Although there were limitations in some individual markers, especially CLIA-L for EBNA IgG, the systems evaluated appear to be useful for diagnosis of EBV infection.
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.