Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23697575›Full record

ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2013

Evaluation of the BioPlex 2200 syphilis system as a first-line method of reverse-sequence screening for syphilis diagnosis.

Antonella Marangoni, Paola Nardini, Claudio Foschi, Alessandra Moroni, Antonietta D'Antuono, Letizia Bacchi Reggiani, Roberto Cevenini

Open access · diamondAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Clinical Evaluation of Fully Automated ElecsysJournal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2016
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Automation in Blood Centre: Its impact on Blood Safety.Asian journal of transfusion science · 2015
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Current trends in donor testing to detect syphilis infection.Current infectious disease reports · 2014
    Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Antonella MarangoniMicrobiology, DIMES, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. antonella.marangoni@unibo.it
Paola Nardini
Claudio Foschi
Alessandra Moroni
Antonietta D'Antuono
Letizia Bacchi Reggiani
Roberto Cevenini
University of Bologna · ITPoliclinico S.Orsola-Malpighi · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite recent technological advances, the diagnosis of syphilis remains a challenging enterprise. Actually, most high-volume laboratories have adopted the "reverse algorithm" due several factors, including the potential to automate testing. Recently, immunoassays processed on random-access systems have been proposed as screening tests. The purpose of this study was to evaluate diagnostic performances of BioPlex 2200 Syphilis IgG and BioPlex 2200 Syphilis IgM, tests based on Multiplex Flow technology, in comparison with the performance of Architect Syphilis TP, a chemiluminescent immunoassay for the detection of IgG and/or IgM anti-Treponema pallidum antibodies. A retrospective study was performed with a panel of 100 blood donor sera, a panel of 350 clinical and laboratory-characterized syphilitic sera, and 170 samples obtained from subjects with potentially interfering conditions. Moreover, 200 unselected samples submitted to the Microbiology Laboratory of St. Orsola Hospital in Bologna for routine screening for syphilis were evaluated. As confirmatory tests, T. pallidum hemagglutination and Western blot assays were used. Considering the IgG Western blot (WB) assay to be the gold standard method, BioPlex 2200 Syphilis IgG specificity was far higher than Architect Syphilis TP specificity (89.7% versus 78.4%, respectively), whereas the sensitivity was 100% for both automated methods. Compared to the IgM WB assay, BioPlex 2200 Syphilis IgM performed with a specificity of 94.9%, whereas the sensitivity was 84.8%. Considering the excellent ease of use and automation, the high sample throughput and its valuable analytical performances, BioPlex Syphilis 2200 IgG could represent a suitable choice for high-volume laboratories. BioPlex Syphilis 2200 IgM could be considered a good addition to IgG testing for uncovering active infections.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAntibodies, BacterialAutomation, LaboratoryClinical Laboratory TechniquesFemaleHumansImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin MMaleMass ScreeningPregnancyRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificitySyphilisTreponema pallidumAntibodies, BacterialImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin M

Identifiers

PMID23697575
PMCPMC3697445
OpenAlexW2133072479

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.